Village of Mamaroneck Zoning Board of Appeals Agenda

Village of Mamaroneck 123 Mamaroneck Ave., Mamaroneck, NY 10543ph: (914) 777-7700

Zoning Board of Appeals Agenda

VILLAGE OF MAMARONECK ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS AGENDAMay 5, 2016 AT 7:30 PM - Court Room @ 169 Mt Pleasant Avenue

NOTICE OF FIRE EXITS AND REQUEST TO TURN OFF ELECTRONIC DEVICES

A. PUBLIC HEARINGS

1. Application # 4A-2016, David & Carla Henderson, 925 Sylvan Lane(Section 9, Block 70, Lot 19) for two area variances for the proposedinstallation of air conditioner compressors which violates Chapter 342-27 ofthe Schedule of Minimum Requirements where the minimum required sideyard setback is 20' and the applicant proposes 13' 6" and the minimumrequired lesser side yard setback is15' and the applicant proposes 8' 6" (R-15District).

2. Application #1I-2016, Jocelyn Donat, regarding 1017 Grove Street, (Section

4, Block 15, Lot 32) for appeal of the issuance of three (3) building permits:Building Permit # 16-0303 for the construction of a new one family dwellingon lot#1, Building Permit # 16-0307 for the construction of a new one familydwelling on lot#2, and Building Permit # 16-0310 for the construction of anew one family dwelling on lot#3 and seeking the revocation of said BuildingPermits (R-5 District).

B. CLOSED APPLICATIONS

1. Adjourned Application #2I-2015, Jocelyn Donat, regarding 1017 GroveStreet, (Section 4, Block 15, Lot 32) for an appeal of the Planning Board finalplat approval for the proposed 3 lot subdivision dated May 27, 2015 and asamended, for an appeal of the Building Inspector’s Memo of Review andZoning Compliance dated February 2, 2016. (R-5 District)

2. Application #1UV-2016, Arlene Keel & Sharon Newman, 1024 Keeler

Avenue, (Section 4, Block 31, Lot 170A) for a use variance to allow a mixeduse (commercial and residential) at the premises. A delicatessen waspreviously operated at the premises. This Application violates Chapter 342-64C. 'Non-conforming use of buildings' in which “any nonconforming use of abuilding ceases for any reason for a continuous period of more than sixmonths or is changed to a conforming use or if the building in or on whichsuch use is conducted or maintained is moved for any distance whatever, forany reason, any future use of such building shall conform and be subject tothe prevailing standards specified by this chapter for the district in which suchbuilding is located” and this business was closed for more than six months. (R-5 District)

C. ADJOURN MEETING

ANY HANDICAPPED PERSON NEEDING SPECIAL ASSISTANCE IN ORDER TO ATTEND THEMEETING SHOULD CALL THE VILLAGE MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 914-777-7703

All Board of Trustee Regular, ZBA, Planning Board, and HCZM Meetings are Broadcast Live on LMC-TV:Verizon FIOS Channels 34, 35 & 36Cablevision Channels: 75, 76 & 77And Streamed on the Web: www.lmc-tv.org

http://www.lmc-tv.org

Village of Mamaroneck, NY

ItemTitle: DAVID & CARLA HENDERSON

ItemSummary:

Application # 4A-2016, David & Carla Henderson, 925 Sylvan Lane (Section 9,Block 70, Lot 19) for two area variances for the proposed installationof air conditioner compressors which violates Chapter 342-27 of the Scheduleof Minimum Requirements where the minimum required side yard setback is 20'and the applicant proposes 13' 6" and the minimum required lesser side yard setbackis15' and the applicant proposes 8' 6" (R-15 District).

FiscalImpact:

ATTACHMENTS:Description Upload Date Type925 Sylvan Lane 2016 Notice of Disapproval 3/22/2016 Backup Material925 SylvanLane 2016 Application 3/22/2016 Backup Material925 SylvanLane 2016 Application Survey 3/22/2016 Backup Material925 SylvanLane 2016 ShortEAF 3/22/2016 Backup Material925 SylvanLane 2016 photos 3/22/2016 Backup Material925 SylvanLane 2016 Compressors L1revised 3/22/2016 Backup Material04 11 2016 925Sylvan Horsman transmittal memo 4/28/2016 Backup Material04 11 2016 925Sylvan Mercurio AC statement 4/28/2016 Backup Material04 13 2016 925Sylvan Neighbors lettersof project support 4/28/2016 Backup Material04 13 2016 925Sylvan site photos 4/28/2016 Backup Materialelevation certificate 4/28/2016 Backup Material

Village of Mamaroneck 169 Mt. Pleasant Ave Mamaroneck, New York 10543 914-777-7731

NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL

APPLICATION NO.: 4A-2016 -------

DISTRICT: R-15 -----

TO: HENDERSON, DAVID AND CARLA

925 SYLVAN LN

MAMARONECK, NY 10543

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT YOUR APPLICATION DATED 3/9/2016

3/22/2016

FOR PERMIT TO: install air conditioner compressors on both sides of the existing residence

ON PREMISES LOCATED AT: 925 SYLVAN LN

SBL: 9-70-19

IS DISAPPROVED ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:

The proposed installation of Air conditioner compressors violates Chapter 342-27 of the Schedule of Minimum Requirements where the minimum required side yard set back is 20' and the applicant proposes 13' 6" and the lesser side yard set back is 15' and the applicant proposes 8' 6"

PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE THAT YOU, THEAPPLICANT, MUST NOTIFY ALL PROPERTY OWNERS LOCATED WITHIN A RADIUS OF 400 FEET OF THE SUB C P ISE OF YOUR APPLICATION AND OF THE PROPOSED HEARING.

HEARING WILL BE HELD ON April?, 2016 AT 7:30PM IN THE MUNICIPAL BUILDING FIRST FLOOR BOARD ROOM AT 169 MT. PLEASANT AVENUE, MAMARONECK, NEW YORK. A RECIEPIENT OF A COPY OF THIS NOTIFICATION IS A PROPERTY OWNER OF RECORD WITHIN A RADIUS OF 400FT. INTERESTED PARTIES MAY REVIEW PLANS ON ANY APPLICATION IN THE BUILDING INSPECTORS OFFICE AT VILLAGE HALL.

Page 1 of 1

Village of Mamaroneck, New York Zoning Board of Appeals

(Effective_,_ 200 1)

RECEIVED

MAR 8 2016

BUILDING DEPT. [ ] [ ] [ ]

16 Copies Completed Application COs or Letter

Application No.:_H..a...:ft+-~:Lo.o.LI\~jo:......___ Agenda No.: _______ _

[ ] Violations, if any SP_--:;;-"-----AV :/'

[ ] Photographs uv _____ _ [ ] Survey F ______ _

[ ] · Certified Drawings s ______ _ [ ] Consent Interpretation. __ _ [ ] Certification/ Affidavit [ ] EAF [ ] Copy of Determination being appealed ( ] Riders if Application is Corp./Business Entity

For Office Use Only ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

VILLAGE OF MAMARONECK ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS

APPLICATION

Date Na. r, 2- '20,_~

TO: ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS- VILLAGE OF MAMARONECK 123 Mamaroneck A venue Mamaroneck, New Yorlc I 0543 ~

1 (We) .J c. r /ff'>. Dav/d -en d-crson / (Name of AppliCMl )

·zs 5l- {vctn ~-ane a v() ~-- - 1 d~f/3

(Insert Location of Pres) ·

Bearing Village ofMamaroneck Tax Map Number: i I 7-fJ I J J (Section) (Block) (Lot)

Page 1 of8


(Effective_ 200"t)

5. If someone else is authorized to act as your representative or to appeal with you on your behalf before the Board, his or her name, address and telephone number must be provided:

Name: ________________________ _

Address:------------------------

Telephone: ______________________ _

6. Has a prior variance, special permit, or interpretation Application ever been submitted for this property?

[~es [ ] No

7. List all permits you must obtain in order to complete the subject project of this Application (include all pennits or approvals necessary from any federal, state, county, or local agency or department): ___ _.;... _____________ _

Page 3 of8


(Effective_ 2007)

8. Is the property subject to any covenants, easement, or other restrictions or encumbrances? If so, list and describe these. (You may be required to ·provide copies of these documents establishing same to the Board.) Please be advised that nothing herein or within board purview will alt:: modify any existing contractual rights with respect to the subject property. !Jj_O ·

9. Check here if there has been any illegal use or violations issued with respect to the property, regardless of whether it has been removed or adjudicated. [ 1

If so, describe and provide the dal<l(s) ;J 7;· including if the violation continues:_

10. The following are the provisions of the Village Code from which either a variance is sought or a permit is requested (you must itemize each variance you seek, since a variance cannot be obtained unless it is expressly requested and is the subject of public notice):

Article ____ _. Section ___ _, Subsection __ _

Article _____ , Section ___ _, Subsection. __ _

Article _____ , Section ____ , Subsection, __ _

Article ____ _, Section ___ __, Subsection. __ _

NOTE; IF THIS IS AN APPLICATION FOR A USE VARIANCE, COMPLETE QUESTION 11, ON PAGE 5. IF TillS IS AN APPLICATION FOR AN AREA VARIANCE, COMPLETE QUESTION 12, ON PAGE 6. IF THIS IS AN APPLICATION FOR ALL OTHER APPICATIONS, INCLUDING A SPECIAL PERMIT, COMPLETE QUESTION 13, ON PAGE 7.

Page4 of8


(Effective_ 2001)

11. A use variance may only be granted if it is determined that zoning regulations and restrictions cause the property owner unnecessary hardship. New York law provides that: "In order to prove such unnecessary hardship, the property owner shall demonstrate to the Board of Appeals that (1) under the applicable zoning regulations, the owner is deprived of a reasonable return for each and every permitted use under the zoning regulations for the particular district where the property is located. This deprivation must be established by competent financial evidence; (2) the alleged hardship relating to the property in question is unique, and does not apply to a substantial portion of the district or neighborhood; (3) the requested use variance, if granted ,will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood; and (4) the alleged hardship has not been self-created."

You must set forth the facts which support your Application request. (Attach additional sheets, schedules, or other information that you want the Board to consider):

Page 5 of8


(Effective_ 2001)

12. Under State law, the Board of Appeals must consider the following factors in making a decision on your request for an area variance: "(1) whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties will be created by the granting of the area variance; (2) whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method feasible for the applicant to pursue other than an area variance; (3) whether the requested area variance is substantial; (4) whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district; and (5) whether the alleged difficulty was self created ... " ·


I

Page 6 of8


(Effective_ 200'7)

13. If this Application is not for an area or use variance, provide information that supports your Application. You must refer to the appropriate sections of the Village Code and to other legal requirements necessary for the board to consider your Application. (Note: If you are requesting an appeal or interpretation, be specific as to both the remedy sought and the Code section(s) relevant to your request and provide to the Board all legal authorities that support your position, by attaching to this pplication.)

Page 7 of8


(Effective_ 2001)

It is the my responsibility as the Applicant to complete this Application completely and carefully, and to provide sixteen (16) copies of this Application, together with all necessary papers, plans, surveys, documents or other required infonnation.

Failure to submit the required documents and infonnation will delay my Application or result in its denial, since the ZBA cannot review or grant relief to incomplete Applications.

It is my responsibility to comply with all related requirements in presenting this Application, and the ZBA reserves the right to request additional documentation and/or drawings, and to condition any requested relief upon the filing of covenants and restrictions.

Although employees of the Village may provide me with assistance, I understand it is my responsibility to be familiar and comply with all applicable laws and to submit all necessary papers, plans, surveys, documents or other required infonnation. I understand that copies of the Village Code are available for my review at the Village Clerks office, and that I may be represented at the ZBA hearing.

I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT .ALL STATEMENTS MADE ON THIS APPLICATION ARE TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE.

Sworn to before me this -~~n_a_....,._ __ day of frvlt c./1..... , 20f.il .. · -r BErrY-ANN SHERER

NOTARY PUBLIC-STATE OF NEW YORK · No. 01 SH6302179

Qualified In Dutchess County ,tJ

--+~~~~::!::::::lr::::...+-~:::.....::-.::I'MI~c:am-mlsslon Expires April 28, 20/5J

Page 8 of8

,·

1. I Ul interested in this application for a variance or special use permit now . pending ~efore the Village op.am]roneck B'frd of App"}:J

2. I reside at Cf L-s-~_VM ~~ 1---(A fttlt'P~CJ:--3. The nature of my application is aa follows:

4. If the Applicant corporation, list the corporation's officers:

President:

Secretary:

5. Do any of the followin9 individuals .have an interest, as defined below, in the owner or Applicant: .

a. Any New York State officers, or b. Any officer or employee of the Village of Mamaroneck, Town of Rye, Town of

Mamaroneck, or Westchester County.~

[ ) Yes [ ~ No

For the purpose of this disclosure, an officer or employee shall be deemed to have an interest in the owner or Applicant when he, hia spouse, or their bothers, sisters, parents, . children, qrandchildr·en, or the spouse of any of them:

a. .is the Applicant or owner, or b. is an officer, director, partnerl or employee of the Applicant or owner,

or c. legally or beneficially owns or controls stock of ·a corporate Applicant or

owner~ or d. ia a party to an agreement with such an Applicant or owner, . express or

implied, whereby he may receive any payment or other benefit, whether or not for services rendered dependent or contingent upon the favorable approval of such application.

A PERSON WHO KNOWINGLY AND INTENTIONALLY rAILS TO MAKE SUCH DISCLSOURE SHALL BE GUILTY OF A MISDEMEANOR AS PROVIDED IN GENERAL MUNICIPAL LAW, SECTION 809

If "Yes," state the name and nature and extent · of the interest of such individual:

(N~ ~ (Residence)

(Extent of interest)

t l):t Sworn to before me this x~~----~~ da~y f ~.?'rtH!HI!RI!rS 20,~

~'C-SI1.TE OF NEW YORK No. 01 SH6302179

· Qualified In Dutchess County My Commission Expires April 28 , 2Qt,S

(Applicant's signature)

~"'-.. 89.30'

Q10in U,) renc:o I

VI

/ • I U)

I "' CD

/ & I

"' ,., I

~ I

P/0 Lot 19 i' I

Port of lot :1.0 I

i I I

Lot 24

I I

.., I Ct I E I ;;;

32.8' I

I d' I ;I I a ~

I

~ I I l.Dt 21

21>171.0 S,. Foot I 0.4781 ......

I I I I ,. ... I I I

I I Split Level I

Stone 4< FI'Qme I Dwelll"9 I I ...... I I

I I

I I I I

I I I I I I

d,;~.fii~~~- I I I t-1:T."O"J:;j(;f{,{. , /f

I I l!~§t~ 't;;· i ''!~:·\·. 1i"'t ·~~:~~ ~~;. I :: : .p .. , . -~ •' I I \\t~~- ~~ - ~~/j I f I -1

-~~G · · 'L~~,.~~~-:; I 0

· ~~-·:·:<'-· I l I "' ~ -~,·r.$ "' I ·· ... ,-_ .. ;~7 I • I !?! ~

o..J~~~~~ Hen-

I I I

I'T\

Fnt Republic Bonk, ISAOA

~=i:llo'": ~r.''l.\i. ~. (.,69,~ •

·1JZ?A~ Survey of Portions of Lots 19 and 20 Rlchord A. Spinelli on, "Subdivision Map for Section Two, 6~0 Hol•teod Avenue Mamaroneck. N. Y. 105~

Whispering Pines. in the Village arid Town (914) 381-2357 of Mamaroneck, Westchester, New York" N. Y.S. Uc. Land Surve)'Qr Filed on January 4. 1955 OS Mop No.9539 No. 49240 Scale , .. _20' July 2. 2015

31/4590 "S~van"

Instructions for Completing

617.20 AppendixB

Short Environmental Assessment Form

Part 1 -Project Information. The applicant or project sponsor is responsible for the completion of Part 1. Responses become part of the ~pplication for approval or funding, are subject to public review, and may be subject to further verification. Complete Part 1 based on infonnation currently available. If additional research or investigation would be needed to fully respond to any item, please answer as thoroughly as possible based on current information.

Complete all items in Part I. You may also provide any additional infonnation which you believe will be needed by or useful to the lead agency; attach additional pages as necessary to supplement any item.

Part 1 -Project and Sponsor Information

Name of Action or Pro

e of Applicant or Sponsor: Telephone: &:,{),--... V E-Mail:

1. Does the proposed action only involve the legislative adoption of a plan, local law, ordi administrative rule, or regulation?

IfYes, attach a narrative description of the intent of the proposed action and the environmental resources that may be affected in the municipality and proceed to Part 2. If no, continue to question 2.

2. Does the proposed action require a permit, approval or funding from any other governmental Agency? If Yes, list agency(s) nam~ermit or approv~: J / _

~, 11n 1:;x,t{__ vt{ b{? /1~· 3.a. Total acreage of the site ofthe proposed action?

b. Total acreage to be physically disturbed? c. Total acreage (project site and any contiguous properties) owned

or controlled by the applicant or project sponsor?

4. Check all land uses that occur on, adjoining and near the proposed action . . / DUrban D Rural (non-agriculture) D Industrial 0 Commercial ~sidential (suburban)

DForest 0Agriculture 0Aquatic OOther (specify): __________ _

0Parkland

Page 1 of 4 RESET

5. Is the proposed action, NO YES N/A a. A permitted use under the zoning regulations? D D D b. Consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan? 0 [B" T J

6. Is the proposed action consistent with the predominant character of the existing built or natural NO YES landscape? D []} ~

7. Is the site of the proposed action located in, or does it adjoin, a state listed Critical Environmental Area? NO YES IfYes, identifY:

~ -o 8. a. Will the proposed action result in a substantial increase in traffic above present levels? NO ...YES

-c;:; ~o b. Are public transportation service(s) available at or near the site of the proposed action? -r::: "'D c. Are any pedestrian accommodations or bicycle routes available on or near site of the proposed action? ~ I-' J

9. Does the proposed action meet or exceed the state energy code requirements? NO YES If the proposed action will exceed requirements, describe design features and technologies:

D [9' ~

10. Will the proposed action connect to an existing public/private water supply? NO YES

If No, describe method for providing potable water: D [9' v

11. Will the proposed action connect to existing wastewater utilities? NO YES

If No, describe method for providing wastewater treatment: D ~ /

12. a. Does the site contain a structure that is listed on either the State or National Register of Historic NO YES Places? [g"' 0 b. Is the proposed action located iri an archeological sensitive area? y J

13. a. Does any portion of the site of the proposed action, or lands adjoining the proposed action, contain NO A'ES wetlands or other waterbodies regulated by a federal , state or local agency? Ef IJ

b. Would the proposed action physically alter, or encroach into, any existing wetland or waterbody? B"' D If Yes, identify the wetland or waterbody and extent of alterations in square feet or acres:

14. Identify the typical habitat types that occur on, or are likely to be found on the project site. Check all that apply: 0 Shoreline 0Forest ~ulturallgrass1ands DEarly mid-successional

0 Wetland DUrban uburban

15. Does the site of the proposed action contain any species of animal, or associated habitats, listed NO Yj:S

by the State or Federal government as threatened or endangered? [9' 'D 16. Is the project site located in the 1 00 year flood plain? NO YES

I~ v 17. Will the proposed action create storm water discharge, either from point or non-point sources? NO YES If Yes,

DNo DYES CEr TI a. Will storm water discharges flow to adjacent properties?

b. Will storm water discharges be directed to established conveyance systems (runoff and stom1 drains)? If Yes, briefly describe: . D NO DYES

Page 2 of 4 RESET

18. Does the proposed action include construction or other activities that result in the impoundment of NO YES water or other liquids (e.g. retention pond, waste lagoon, dam)?

If Yes, explain purpose and size:

[B" 1J 19. Has the site of the proposed action or an adjoining property been the location of an active or closed NO YES

solid waste management facility?

lQ If Yes, describe: [!:r

20. Has the site of the proposed action or an adjoining property been the subject of remediation (ongoing or NO YES, completed) for hazardous waste?

[B ~ IfYes, describe:

I AFFIRM THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE AND ACCURATE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE

('_.._v{q )~ers:a>,._::; o'" 3 /zfL, Applicant/sponsor name:

{_ .· I I

Signature:

Part 2- Impact Assessment. The Lead Agency is responsible for the completion of Part 2. Answer all of the following questions in Part 2 using the information contained in Part 1 and other materials submitted by the project sponsor or otherwise available to the reviewer. When answering the questions the reviewer should be guided by the concept "Have my responses been reasonable considering the scale and context of the proposed action?"

No, or Moderate small to large impact impact may may occur occur

1. Will the proposed action create a material conflict with an adopted land use plan or zoning D D regulations?

2. Will the proposed action result in a change in the use or intensity of use of land? D D 3. Will the proposed action impair the character or quality of the existing community? D D 4. Will the proposed action have an impact on the environmental characteristics that caused the D D establishment of a Critical Environmental Area (CEA)?

5. Will the proposed action result in an adverse change in the existing level of traffic or D D affect existing infrastructure for mass transit, biking or walkway?

6. Will the proposed action cause an increase in the use of energy and it fails to incorporate D D reasonably available energy conservation or renewable energy opportunities?

7. Will the proposed action impact existing: D D a. public I private water supplies?

b. public I private wastewater treatment utilities? D D 8. Will the proposed action impair the character or quality of important historic, archaeological , D D architectural or aesthetic resources?

9. Will the proposed action result in an adverse change to natural resources (e.g., wetlands, D D waterbodies, groundwater, air quality, flora and fauna)?

Page 3 of 4 RESET


I 0. Will the proposed action result in an increase in the potential for erosion, flooding or drainage D D problems?

I I . Will the proposed action create a hazard to environmental resources or human health? D D Part 3- Determination of significance. The Lead Agency is responsible for the completion of Part 3. For every question in Part 2 that was answered "moderate to large impact may occur", or if there is a need to explain why a particular element of the proposed action may or will not result in a significant adverse environmental impact, please complete Part 3. Part 3 should, in sufficient detail, identify the impact, including any measures or design elements that have been included by the project sponsor to avoid or reduce impacts . Part 3 should also explain how the lead agency determined that the impact may or will not be significant. Each potential impact should be assessed considering its setting, probability of occurring, duration, irreversibility, geographic scope and magnitude. Also consider the potential for short-term, long-term and cumulative impacts .

D

D

Check this box if you have determined , based on the information and analysis above, and any supporting documentation, that the proposed action may result in one or more potentially large or significant adverse impacts and an environmental impact statement is required. Check this box if you have determined , based on the information and analysis above, and any supporting documentation, that the proposed action will not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts .

Name of Lead Agency Date

Print or Type Name of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Title of Responsible Officer

Signature of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Signature of Pre parer (if different from Responsible Officer)

PRINT Page 4 of 4 RESET

• I

Pies for zoning board of appeals

Carla Henderson <[email protected]> To: Carla Henderson <[email protected]>

Sent from my iPhone

8 attachments

IMG_2254.JPG 1558K

Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 9:10AM

IMG_2241.JPG 1566K

IMG_2244.JPG 1639K

IMG_2242.JPG 1355K

{C-1' JJ_

•#. IMG_2246.JPG 9Vf.f 1378K

IMG_2248.JPG 1360K

IMG_2250.JPG 1292K

Richard J. Horsman Landscape Architects and Site Planners

TRANSMITTAL I MEMO

DATE: 11 April2016

TO: Betty-Ann Sherer Land Use Coordinator Planning, Zoning & HCZMC Village of Mamaroneck

RE: 925 Sylvan Lane Revised and Updated Submission Side Yard Variances for AC Condenser Units

RECEIVED

APR 13 2016

BUILDING DEp T.

VIA: _Mail _x_Hand _Messenger _Fed Express _FAX Total pa~es including·

_Under Separate Cover _United Parcel _E-mail transmttta . Ifinco67lete, Blease call

_Enclosed _Pickup _2LAttached (914) 9 -265

Attached are the following: • 16 copies of Drawing L-2 Location Site Plan- Right Side (11 April2016) • 16 copies of Drawing L03 Location Site Plan- Left Side (11 April 20 16) • 16 copies of site photographs. • 16 copies of letters/emails of support from neighborhood residents. • 16 copies of this transmittal.

Revised Design Criteria Information • Per the Board's request, we have reviewed the technical requirements for the project and have

based the revised design on the following: o The condenser units need to be only 12" off the building, not 42". o The flood plain elevation of 12' has been marked out on the site. Our calculations provide

for the required safety factor of2' above the flood plain elevation, and have set the condenser units at elevation 14'.

o The HV AC contractor (John Mercurio) indicated that for the most efficient operation of the heating and cooling system, the best location for the condensers is at both sides of the house.

• Per the Board's request, we have included the following information on the drawings: o North arrow and scale on the plans. o Location of right and left neighbor houses. o Fa9ade elevations of the house relative to the condenser units. o Condenser unit specification sheet. o Photographs of the house and related property.

925 Sylvan Lane Page 1 of2

PO Box 951 Rye, New York 10580 Tele I Fax (914) 967-2659 Email [email protected]

, Richard J. Horsman Landscape Architects and Site Planners

Design Revisions • Right side yard:

o Based upon the update information, the condenser unit can now sit on-grade on a 6" high concrete pad.

o Because of the reduced 12" space between building and condenser, the unit can be located in the existing recessed comer of the house, and does not protrude beyond the existing portion of the house that already extends into the side yard setback.

o For aesthetic considerations, the proposed plant bed can now screen the condenser unit from view with evergreen shrubs such as Boxwood or Japanese Holly.

o The net result is that the requested right side yard variance is now 11 '.

• Left side yard: o Based upon the updated information, the platform for the condenser units need only be 3'

above grade, and the units are only 12" away from the building. o For aesthetic considerations, the platform is incorporated in the proposed plant bed that

will not only soften the presences of the platform, but will also soften the view to the side of the house.

o Additionally, the condenser units will be contained behind a wood lattice screen that allows air circulation, and also allows flowering vines and/or flowering evergreen vines on it. This includes such plants as Climbing Hydrangeas, Wisteria, or Climbing Euonymus.

o The net result is that the requested left side yard variance is now 16'.

Summary • In summary, we have been able to increase the two side yard setbacks beyond the setbacks

originally requested , and have provided an aesthetic treatment for each condenser unit location.

• Right side yard variance request is 11 ft. • Left side yard variance request is 16 ft.

Thank you for your assistance regarding this revised application. Please call if you need additional information or clarification.

BEST REGARDS:

CC: Carla Henderson 1523UT02

Richard Horsman

925 Sylvan Lane Page2 of2

POBox951 Rye,NewYork 10580 Tele/Fax (914)967-2659 Email [email protected]

M Gr-nail

Condensing unit Specs

John Mercurio <[email protected]> To: [email protected]

RECEIVED

APR 1 3 2016

BUILDING DEPT.

Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 2:06PM

Carla, here are the specs for the Heil Condensing units. Let me know if you have any other questions. The Condensers on both sides of the house are in the most optimal locations do to where the air handlers ar~ in the house. The shorter the copper refrigeration tubing is makes the unit more energy efficient. The longer tfle run the unit starts to lose efficiency. Please send me back an email letting me know that you received this.

Thank you,

John Mercurio

Mercury Heating and Air Conditioning

i:j 16 SEER Heil NX.pdf 150K

Carla Henderson <[email protected]> To: John Mercurio <[email protected]>

Thanks John! [Quoted text hidden]

Carla Henderson

Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 2:25PM

RECEIVED ~ :1

APR 1 3 2016 From: Adam Sattler <[email protected]> Date: April11, 2016 at 10:40:14 PM EDT To: Carla Henderson <[email protected]> BUILDING DEPT. Subject: Re: Letter of Support for AC Units at 925 Sylvan Lane

Members of the Board,

I live at 935 Sylvan Lane in Mamaroneck next door to the left of the Henderson's new home. I have had the opportunity to speak to them about their request for a variance for their AC compressor units. I have reviewed with them specific proposed location and size of the units. I would prefer that the Hendersons place the two AC units on the left side elevation, as they are proposing, and not in the rear of their house. If their units were in the rear of the house, they would be closer to my house, as it is set back. I would prefer the units to be on the side of the Henderson's house, closer to my driveway. I am comfortable with the architect's plan to conceal the units with lattice and plantings.

We support their request for a variance as they are making a beautiful home in the neighborhood. I believe the Henderson's request is reasonable.

Thanks for your consideration,

Adam Sattler EBANKS & SATTLER LLP Attorneys at Law The NY Evening Post Building 20 Vesey St., Suite 503 NYC 10007 (212) 766-4411 (o) (212) 766-5899 (f)

Dave Lerner

c/3 o 5Jivah Ln . 12:38 PM (21 hours ago)

To the Zoning Board,

We live directly across from the Hendersons and give our full unmitigated support for the Hendersons to install the intended three outdoor air conditioners.

David and Kelly Lerner

Gloria Goldstein Apr 12 (1 day ago)

To The Village of Mamaroneck:

We reside at 940 Sylvan Lane, across the street from the Henderson's home at 925 Sylvan Lane.

We are delighted with the beautiful home they have constructed as it certainly enhances the neighborhood. We have no problem with the installation of the 3 AC Condenser units and thoroughly support the homeowners proposal.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely, Gloria and Arthur Goldstein 914-777-0009 940 Sylvan Lane, Mamaroneck, NY

919 Sylvan Lane Mamaroneck NY 10543

April 6, 2016

To Whom It May Concern:

I understand my neighbors, David and Carla Henderson, want to replace the existing air conditioning unit at 925 Sylvan Lane with smaller quieter units, as part of a full home renovation.

They have asked me to write to the Zoning Board in support of this application. I have no objection to the replacement of the existing air conditioning unit. The previous unit was a larger, older and noisier unit, which was not concealed. The Hendersons are proposing to conceal the units with plantings which will be a significant improvement from the old AC unit.

In this case, I believe I am the only neighbor who could have a reasonable objection, as the right side unit is on the side of their house next to my property. So, I ask the Zoning Board to consider the merits of this application. I am in full support and will be happy to speak with you if you have any further questions.

Sincerely,

Liam Robb O'Hagan

U.S. D!OPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY ELEVATION FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY

CERTIFICATE National Flood Insurance Program Important: Read the instructions on pages 1-9.

' SECTION A- PROPERTY INFORMATION . """A1':"Building Owner's Name Adam Sattler

A2. Building Street Address (including Apt. , Unit, Suite, and/or Bldg. No.) or P.O. Route and Box No. 925 Sylvan Lane

City Mamaroneck State NY ZIP Code 10543

A3. Property Description (Lot and Block Numbers, Tax Parcel Number, Legal Description, etc.) Sec 9 Blocki 32 Lot 210

A4. Building Use (e.g., Residential, Non-Residential, Addition , Accessory, etc.) Residential

A5. Latitude/Longitude: Lat. 40.93865N Long. 73.73781W Horizontal Datum: 0 NAD 1927 1:8:1 NAD 1983

A6. Attach at least 2 photographs of the building if the Certificate is being used to obtain flood insurance.

A7. Building Diagram Number ~

OMB No. 1660-0008 Expiration Date: July 31,2015

FOR INSURANCE COMPANY USE

Policy Number:

Company NAIC Number:

RECEIVED

APR 13 2016

BUILDING DEPT.

AS. For a building with a crawlspace or enclosure(s): A9. For a building with an attached garage:

a) Square footage of crawlspace or enclosure(s) NA sq ft a) Square footage of attached garage 456 sq ft b) Number of permanent flood openings in the crawlspace

or enclosure(s) within 1.0 foot above adjacent grade b) Number of permanent flood openings in the attached garage

within 1.0 foot above adjacent grade Q c) Total net area of flood openings in AB.b sq in c) Total net area of flood openings in A9.b __ sq in

d) Engineered flood openings? 0 Yes 0 No d) Engineered flood openings? 0 Yes 0 No

SECTION 8 - FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP (FIRM) INFORMATION

B1 . NFIP Community Name & Community Number I B2. County Name I B3. State Mamaroneck 360916 Westchester County New York

84. Map/Panel Number B5. Suffix B6. FIRM Index Date B7. FIRM Panel B8. Flood B9. Base Flood Elevation(s) (Zone 36119C/0353 F Effective/Revised Date Zone(s) ·· AO, use base flood depth)

September 28, 2007 AE 12

B10. Indicate the source of the Base Flood Elevation (BFE) data or base flood depth entered in Item B9.

0 FIS Profile 1:8:1 FIRM 0 Community Determined 0 Other/Source: __

B11 . Indicate elevation datum used for BFE in Item B9: 0 NGVD 1929 1:81 NAVD 1988 0 Other/Source: __ B12. Is the building located in a Coastal Barrier Resources System (CBRS) area or Otherwise Protected Area (OPA)? 0 Yes 1:8:1 No

Designation Date: __ 0 CBRS 0 OPA

SECTION C- BUILDING ELEVATION INFORMATION (SURVEY REQUIRED)

C1 . Building elevations are based on: 0 Construction Drawings* 0 Building Under Construction* 1:8:1 Finished Construction *A new Elevation Certificate will be required when construction of the building is complete.

C2. Elevations- Zones A1-A30, AE, AH, A (with BFE), VE, V1-V30, V (with BFE), AR, ARIA, ARIAE, ARIA1-A30, ARIAH, ARIAO. Complete Items C2.a-h below according to the building diagram specified in Item A7. In Puerto Rico only, enter meters.

Benchmark Utilized: GPS NY State System Vertical Datum: NAVD 1988

Indicate elevation datum used for the elevations in items a) through h) below. D NGVD 1929 181 NAVD 1988 D Other/Source: Datum used for building elevations must be the same as that used for the BFE.

a) Top of bottom floor (including basement, crawlspace, or enclosure floor) ~-~

b) Top of the next higher floor .i§..Q c) Bottom of the lowest horizontal structural member (V Zones only) NA. __

d) Attached garage (top of slab) 11.§ e) Lowest elevation of machinery or equipment servicing the building ~-~

(Describe type of equipment and location in Comments)

f) Lowest adjacent (finished) grade next to building (LAG) 1Q.Z g) Highest adjacent (finished) grade next to building (HAG) 14 .~

h) Lowest adjacent grade at lowest elevation of deck or stairs, including structural support 1 o.z

Check the measurement used.

1:8:1 feet 0 meters

1:8:1 feet 0 meters

0 feet 0 meters

1:8:1 feet 0 meters

1:8:1 feet 0 meters

1:8:1 feet

1:8:1 feet

1:8:1 feet

0 meters

0 meters

0 meters

SECTION D- SURVEYOR, ENGINEER, OR ARCHITECT CERTIFICATION

This certification is to be signed and sealed by a land surveyor, engineer, or architect authorized by law to certify elevation information. I certify that the information on this Certificate represents my best efforts to interpret the data available. I understand that any false statement may be punishable by fine or imprisonment under 18 U.S. Code, Section 1001.

18:1 Check here if comments are provided on back of form. Were latitude and longitude in Section A provided by a

0 Check here if attachments. licensed land surveyor? 0 Yes 18:1 No

Certifier's Name Richard A . Spinelli License Number 49240

Title Owner Company Name Spinelli Surveying

City Mamaroneck State NY ZIP Code 10543

Signatur ate June 4, 2015 Telephone 914-381-2357

FEMA Form 086-0-33 (7/12) See reverse side for continuation. Replaces all previous editions.

El-EVATION CERTIFICATE page 2 ' IMPORTANT: In these spaces, copy the corresponding information from Section A. FOR INSURANCE COMPANY USE

Building Stre i.ddress (including Apt., Unit, Suite, and/or Bldg. No.) or P.O. Route and Box No. Policy Number:

925 S)IJVafl L:-• .me

City Mamaroneck State NY ZIP Code Company NAIC Number:

SECTION 0- SURVEYOR, ENGINEER, OR ARCHITECT CERTIFICATION (CONTINUED)

Copy both sides of this Elevation Certificate for (1) community official, (2) insurance agent/company, and (3) building owner.

Comments C 2e) Hot water tank and heating system in the utility room. C2a) This is the sunken utility room off the lower level. The lower level has an elevation of 11 .9 Ft.

Date June 4, 2015

For Zones AO and A (without BFE), complete Items E1-E5. If the Certificate is intended to support aLOMA or LOMR-F request, complete Sections A, B, and C. For Items E1-E4, use natural grade, if available. Check the measurement used. In Puerto Rico only, enter meters.

E1 . Provide elevation information for the following and check the appropriate boxes to show whether the elevation is above or below the highest adjacent grade (HAG) and the lowest adjacent grade (LAG). a) Top of bottom floor (including basement, crawlspace, or enclosure) is --·-- 0 feet 0 meters 0 above or 0 below the HAG. b) Top of bottom floor (including basement, crawlspace, or enclosure) is --·-- 0 feet 0 meters 0 above or 0 below the LAG.

E2. For Building Diagrams 6-9 with permanent flood openings provided in Section A Items 8 and/or 9 (see pages 8-9 of Instructions), the next higher floor (elevation C2.b in the diagrams) of the building is --·-- 0 feet D meters 0 above or 0 below the HAG.

E3. Attached garage (top of slab) is --·-- 0 feet 0 meters D above or D below the HAG. E4. Top of platform of machinery and/or equipment servicing the building is --·-- D feet 0 meters 0 above or 0 below the HAG.

E5. Zone AO only: If no flood depth number is available, is the top of the bottom floor elevated in accordance with the community's floodplain management ordinance? 0 Yes 0 No 0 Unknown. The local official must certify this information in Section G.

SECTION F- PROPERTY OWNER (OR OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE) CERTIFICATION

The property owner or owner's authorized representative who completes Sections A, B, and E for Zone A (without a FEMA-issued or community-issued BFE) or Zone AO must sign here. The statements in Sections A, B, and E are correct to the best of my knowledge.

Property Owner's or Owner's Authorized Representative's Name

Address City State ZIP Code

Signature Date Telephone

Comments

--------------------------------------------0 Check here if attachments.

SECTION G- COMMUNITY INFORMATION (OPTIONAL) The local official who is authorized by law or ordinance to administer the community's floodplain management ordinance can complete Sections A, B, C (or E), and G of this Elevation Certificate. Complete the applicable item(s) and sign below. Check the measurement used in Items G8-G1 0. In Puerto Rico only, enter meters.

G1 . D-- The information in Section C was taken from other documentation that has been signed and sealed by a licensed surveyor, engineer, or architect who is authorized by law to certify elevation information. (Indicate the source and date of the elevation data in the Comments area below.)

G2. D A community official completed Section E for a building located in Zone A (without a FEMA-issued or community-issued BFE) or Zone AO.

G3. D The following information (Items G4-G10) is provided for community floodplain management purposes.

G4. Permit Number G5. Date Permit Issued G6. Date Certificate Of Compliance/Occupancy Issued

G7. This permit has been issued for: 0 New Construction 0 Substantial Improvement

GB. Elevation of as-built lowest floor (including basement) of the building : --·-- D feet 0 meters

G9. BFE or (in Zone AO) depth of flooding at the building site: __ .__ D feet 0 meters

G10. Community's design flood elevation: 0 feet 0 meters

Local Official's Name Title

Community Name Telephone

Signature Date

Comments

Datum

Datum

Datum

--------------------------------------------0 Check here if attachments.

FEMA Form 086-0-33 (7/12) Replaces all previous editions.

ELEVA "~!"ION CERTIFICATE, page 3 Building Photographs See Instructions for Item A6

IMPORTANT: In these spaces, copy the corresponding information from Section A. FOR INSURANCE COMPANY USE

Building Street Address (including Apt. , Unit, Suite, and/or Bldg. No.) or P.O. Route and Box No. Policy Number: 925 Sylvan Lane

City Mamaroneck State NY ZIP Code 10543 Company NAIC Number.

If using the Elevation Certificate to obtain NFIP flood insurance, affix at least 2 building photographs below according to the instructions for Item A6. Identify all photographs with date taken; "Front View" and "Rear View"; and, if required , "Right Side View" and "Left Side

View." When applicable, photographs must show the foundation with representative examples of the flood openings or vents, as

indicated in Section AS. If submitting more photographs than will fit on this page, use the Continuation Page.

FRONT 6/3/15

BACK 6/3/15

FEMA Form 086-0-33 (7/12) Replaces all previous editions.


ItemTitle: 2016 JOCELYN DONAT INTERPRETATION

ItemSummary:

Application #1I-2016, Jocelyn Donat, regarding 1017 Grove Street, (Section4, Block 15, Lot 32) for appeal of the issuance of three (3) building permits: BuildingPermit # 16-0303 for the construction of a new one family dwelling on lot#1, BuildingPermit # 16-0307 for the construction of a new one family dwelling on lot#2, andBuilding Permit # 16-0310 for the construction of a new one family dwelling on lot#3and seeking the revocation of said Building Permits (R-5 District).

FiscalImpact:

ATTACHMENTS:Description Upload Date Type2016 Donat Interpretation App 4/14/2016 Backup Material

• CHECKLIST· FOR INTJ'IAL ZONING BOARD OJ APPEALS SUBMISSION

g/ ApPlicable Fee

AnPli. must submit Sixteen Cl§l Copies of the followi!Jg:

~

0

0

~

0

Completed Application

All Certificates of OCcupancy or; Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for the property, or letter from the Building Department in lieu thCieOf

Violations on the property, aad preoftbat they bave been cuuectat

Photographs of the.property (3" x S" or larger) that depict the location and potential impacts of your appl~cation ( -tY ~ t..S f>-0-e._ p ~ o t-v)

Accurate survey of the cunent status of the property, which has been pl'ep8l'ed and certified by a licensed surveyor within the past 12 months of the application date, sball be submitted with each application. . Please note: wheJe a survey certified within the past twelve months is unavailable and the application does not involve any change to the exterior of the property, the ZBA will accept a certification by the owner tbat to hislhCr knowledge the exiSting survey accurately depicts the currem status of the

~petty. ( fl ll-f') Certified· Drawings, prepared by a registered architect or professional engineer. and other supparting documents

Written ~J of the owner, if you are not the owner of the pro.perty . t-1/A

Certification, as required by New York State General Municipal Law.

State Euviroamental Quality Review (SEQR) Short or Long Environmental .

·~p~/A- L~~~k& ~ ~) Copy of the Detennination being appealed.

~ Note: See Instructions regarding submittal of Supplemental Materials or New Plans (Item VII in the Rules of the Zoning Board of Appeals· of the Village of ~Instructions Cor BringiDg and Appeal ·

~~ f/t3. I I i, ~cant's Signature Date

Village of Mamaroneck. New York Zoning Board of Appeals

(Effective_ 2001)

r APR 1 8 2016

BUILDING DE Pi.

[ p1 16 Copies . [ V"' Completed Application ( r j COs or Lett«

Application No.: I 'f .... 2o1ft? Agenda No::- ll"l4.:v :r· z ott, -

[ ] Violatioos, if any [ ] Pbotoaraphs ( 1 Survey [ 1 . Certified Drawinp [ 1 Coosent [ 1 Certification/ Affidavit [ 1 EAF [ 'I' ] Copy of Doterminatioa bein& appealed [ 1 RideJa if AppJicatiou il Colp.IBusinea Entity

Por Oflice U10 Only

SP ____ _ AV ____ _ uv ____ _ F _____ _

s·---~--1~..;;..- _- ---..:._

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••


APPLICATION j 1

Date._.._t-+-_1-3___,, 2~ TO: ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS- vn.LAGE OF MAMARONECK

123 Mamaroneck Avenue Mamaroneck, New Y ode 10543

I (We) Soul L:j n '1)6Y'>cvf-"' }~'filM of AppUCIId)

of (o 10 ~ps hI 'r-e ('CJ Mc:t.-mW1MLCIL Zip I o5"lf 3 (JDICit eomp~etc Mliliaa Adclraa) N 1

Daytime Phone No. q 111 g'?> 21 2£-ytime Fax No •. _______ _

Apply to the Board of Appeals regarding property located at I D I 1 Gtov --i.. f' ~ M-0-tV\~~ l 0 03

(Insert LocatiOD ~ voA._ s Beariug VIUage ofMamaronedc Tax Map Number: -4 I j T£3 ~ 6v -

~ (Section) (Block) (Lot)

1 o 11 (;Yov e .f r I Lfl · 0 ~ - d- -~

Page 1 of8


(Effective_ 200'1.)

1. This is an Application for the following: (check one [1] or more as applicable)

2.

3.

4.

[ ] Area Variance - This is to use land in a marmer not allowed because of dimensional or topographical requirements in the Zoning Code.

[ ] Use Variance- This is to allow land to be used in a manner or for a purpose which is prohibited or not allowed by the Zoning code.

[ ] Special permit

· [ J Sign Variance

[ ] Fence Variance . ( ~ 1"\ ext-~ [X ] Appeal or Interpretation (Specify Code Section 31+ 1. - .?> ) f ..,

3 y. 1.. A+tiill-l rV'i'-A c_

[ ] Other: Specify ' ' R e. so h ..rt"\ ~ .s- i '

The Date and Description of the determination that is being appealed (a copy of the determination must be attacbe4)

( ~ ""-t-)( ~ ('~ 1

What is the present zoning of the property?

( 3) VJ~ .e._-- \ S.S\J -e J . ~- 5 f.4s, ~hee-l

This Application must be made in the name of the person or entity that bas a possessory interest in the property such as a tenant, purchaser or owner. If you are the owner» on what date did you acquire title? · If you are not the owner, list the name and address of the owner and describe your relationship to the PJ'OPC!tY and the (d.' f date said relationship commenced: fwC- V'fo~--h .e..s /HOt'- CCL\ -t-"ev

RL \ct_,h on.S h ~ e -- pro fU!:'\ 0 v.JYU!./ CL bu.. th V1C) l-o-r IF you_havc acquired title to the property within the past two years» provide the name of the prior owner: _____________________ _

NOTE: If the Applicant or Property Owner is a:

Corporation: attach a separate Rider Bsting all the corporation's officers, shareholden, and their percentage of share ownership. Partnenhip: attach a separate Rider listing the type of partnership and identijf the partners and their partnership interests. LLC: attach a separate Rider listing the LLCs members.

Page2 of8

1. This is an Application for: (check one or more as applicable) :

X Appeal or Interpretation

Part One: Interpretation of zoning definitions and minimum requirements of

subdivided lots as well as Inconsistency of Building Permit Application and Final Plat

filed with Westchester County

• Village Code 342 Attachment 2 - Minimum Requirements in R-5 Residential district

• Village Code 342- 3- Definitions of Corner Lot, Lot Depth, Front Line, Rear Line and

FAR

Part Two: Review and interpretation of the Village of Mamaroneck Building Inspector's

determination to issue three building permits on March 31, 2016 PRIOR to the

mandatory Subdivision Resolutions/Conditions of Approval being met

• "Resolutions"/Conditions of Approval of 1017 Grove Street Subdivision -Item 31

(attached)

2. The Date and Description of the determination that is being appealed (a copy of the determination

must be attached)

• Part One and Part Two - March 31, 2016 Issuance of three building permits (Permit

#16-0303, Permit #16-0307 and Permit #16-0310 - copies attached)

Village ofMamaroneck, New York Zoning Board of Appeals

(Effective_ 2001)

S. If someone else is authorized to act as your representative or to appeal with you on yo1D' behalf before the Board, hia or her name, address and telephone number must be provided:

Name:·-------------------------------------------------Ad~=--------------------------------------------Tw~e=--------------------------------------------

6. Has a prior variance, special permit, or interpretation Application ever been submitted for this property?

[ ] Yes £vf No

If YES, you must attach copies of the prior variance or resolution and describe them:_

7. List all permits you must obtain in order to complete the subject project of this Application (include all permits or approvals necessary from any federal, state, county, or locUa~yord~~):. __________________________________ __

Page3of8


(Effective_ 2007)

8. Is the property subject to aay covenants, easaneot, or other restrictions or encumbrancea? If so, list and describe these. (You may be required to provide copies of these docmnents establishing same to the Board.) Please be advised that nothing herein or within board purview will alter or modify any existing contractual rights with respect

ro~wqedpro~·---------------------------------No

9. Check here if there has been any illegal use or violations issued with respect to the property, regardless of whether it has been removed or adjudicated. [ ]

If so, describe and provide the date( a) and details, includiDg if the violation continues:_


Article Section 3tt-L- Subsecti 3 d..eJ; VI-~; f\ w- ~ on~

:J'fl \of ~ Article Section .S~on ~' -Article Section Subsection

Article Section Subsection

NOD; IF 11118 IS AN APPLICATION FOR A USE VARIANCE, COMPLETE QUESTION 11, ON PAGES. IF nus IS AN APPLICATION FOR AN AREA V ARIANCB, COMPLETE QUESTION 12, ON PACE 6. IF 11118 IS AN APPUCATION FOR ALL OTHER APPICATIONS, INCLUDING A SPECIAL PERMIT, COMPLETE QUESTION 13, ON PAGE 7.

Page4 of8

Village of Mamaroneck, New Yorlc Zoning Board of Appeals

(Effective_ 200l)

11. A use variance may only be granted if it is determined that zoning regulations and restrictions cause the property owner unnecessary hardship. New Yorlc Jaw provides that "In order to prove such unnecessary hardship, the property owner sball demonstrate to the Board of Appeals that (I) under the applicable zoning regulations, the owner is deprived of a reasonable return for each and every permitted use under the zoning regulations for the particular district where the property is located. This deprivation must be established by competent financial evidence; (2) the alleged hardship relating to the property in question is unique, and does not apply to a substantial portion of the district or neighborhood; (3) the requested use variance, if granted ,wiD not alter the essential character of the neighborhood; and (4) the alleged hardship has not been self-created."

You mut set forth the fads which support your Application request (Attach additional sheets, schedules, or other information that you want the Board to consider):

wA

PageS of8

Village of Mamaroneck, New York Zoning .Boanl of Appeals

(Effective_ 2007)

12. Under State law, the Board of Appeals must consider the following factors in making a decision on your request for. an area variance: "(1) whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties will be created by the granting of the area variance; (2) whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method feasible for the applicant to pursue other than an area variance; (3) whether the requested area variance is substantial; (4) whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district; and (5) whether the alleged difticulty was self created •.• " ·


Page 6 of8

Village ofMamaroneck, New York Zoning Board of Appeals

(Effectiw_ 200·7)

13. If this Application is not for an area or use variance, provide information that supports your Application. You must refer to the appropriate sectioDS of the Village Code and to other legal requirements necessary for the board to consider your Applicatioo. ~: If you are requesting an appeal or intelpretation, be specific as to both the remedy sought and the Code section(s) relevant to your request and provide to the Board all legal authorities tbat support your position, by attaching to this Application.)

( ~ A±tv-vke d )

<A-Md (·cCfl.) law - VQ...{tO{]c..RS

~-I k Y) e.e& e-JJ, p (.>1 +- 2--j 'P -U .m ; ±:?' { e_ V b 1:-e cf) \u Ccu.-<-:k ~

W tZA e. l 5 S J ~ rJ. -l \/) v t o ItA--1\.o ~ D(

Page 7 of8

1017 Grove Street - 3 Lot Subdivision - Zoning Board of Appeal

On or about March 30, 2016, The Village of Mamaroneck Building Inspector approved and issued three building permits for 1017 Grove Street.

This application of appeal to the Zoning Board is being made within 60 days of the permits being approved and issued.

Part One:

This appeal requests an interpretation of zoning definitions and minimum requirements for subdivided lots created from 1017 Grove Street subdivision. (On the building permit application drawings, the lots are designated as Lot 1, Lot 2 and Lot 3.)

I ask for the following interpretive determinations by the ZBA based on the definitions at 342-3 of the Code of the Village of Mamaroneck and 342 Attachment 2 Schedule of Minimum Requirements for the R-5 Residential District.

Lots 1 and 3 are "corner lots" according to the 342-3 Definitions of the Code of the Village of Mamaroneck. The owner shall have the privilege of electing the front lot line as either the Grove Street portion of the lot, or the newly created street. The applicant, as documented in his Attorney's memo to the Zoning Board dated April 6, 2016 has selected the new street as the frontage for all three lots.

Issues related to Lot 1 :

Building Permit Application Inconsistent with Final Plat filed with Westchester County: Lot 1 as shown on the application for building permits dated 1/5/16 revised does not correspond to the lot shown on the final approved subdivision plat/tax map and is therefore ineligible for a building permit.

- Corner on Grove Street and new street is a right angle vs. curved - Minimum Lot areas differ

Subdivision Final Plat has printed that "Any alteration or addition to this plan is a violation of Section 7209, Article 145, of the New York State Education Law."

Relief requested: The building permit must be disapproved/revoked because only lots that correspond to those shown on tax maps or the approved and filed subdivisions are eligible for building permits according to the definition of "lot" in the zoning code.

Minimum Required lot Depth: Lot 1 has frontage/width that satisfies the minimum required 50 feet but has lot depth of significantly less the minimum required depth of 1 00 feet. It appears to be even less than 50 feet.

Relief requested: The building permit for Lot 1 must be disapproved/revoked for lot depth less than the minimum required.

Minimum Required Front Yards and Rear Yards: The building proposed for Lot 1 does not have the required front or rear yards insofar as there is no building between the front lot line and the rear lot line. Under the definition of the Code of the Village of Mamaroneck, the front yard lies between the front line of the building and the front lot line. The rear lot line lies between the rear lot line and the rear "line of the building." There is no front yard because no part of the building lies between the front lot line and the rear lot line extending the full width of the lot. There is a portion of the building that lies near the rear lot line but the yard is 8.2 feet where 25 feet is required.

Relief requested: The building permit must be disapproved/revoked because the building does not have the minimum required front and rear yards.

Issues related to lot #3:

Minimum Required lot Depth: With its front lot line on the new street, Lot 3 meets the minimum required frontage and width but fails to satisfy the minimum required lot depth of 1 00 feet. It is significantly less than 50 feet. The building permit must be disapproved/revoked.

Relief requested: The building permit for Lot 3 must be disapproved/revoked for lot depth less than the minimum required.

Minimum Required Front Yards and Rear Yards: The building proposed for Lot 3 does not have the required front or rear yards insofar as there is no building between the front lot line and the rear lot line. Under the definition of the Code of the Village of Mamaroneck, the front yard lies between the front line of the building and the front lot line. The rear lot line lies between the rear lot line and the rear "line of the building." There is no front yard because no part of the building lies between the front lot line and the rear lot line extending the full width of the lot. There is a portion of the building that lies near the rear lot line but the yard is 6.1 feet where 25 feet is required.

Relief requested: The building permit must be disapproved/revoked because the building does not have the minimum required front and rear yards.

Issues related to permits for buildings on lots 1. 2 and 3.

The FAR calculation is at the maximum of .55 for each of the proposed buildings but gross floor area for attic space with height greater than 7 feet has been erroneously excluded.

Relief requested: The building permits for lots 1, 2 and 3 must be revoked because the maximum allowable FAR has been exceeded.

Attachments: Building Permits Building Permit Application Site Plans for each Lot 1, 2 & 3 Final Plat Resolutions

- Village Code 342 Attachment 2, Minimum Requirements Residential - Village Code 342-3, Definitions

NEW ONE AND TWO FAMILY RESIDENCE PERMIT


ParceiiD: 4-15-32

Owner: AVC PROPERTIES LLC Location: 1017 GROVE ST

Applicant: AVC PROPERTIES LLC

Permit#:

Permit Date:

Expiration Date:

Work Description: NEW ONE AND TWO FAMILY RESIDENCE New One Family Dwelling (lot 1) BAR Approval2/18/16

Contractor:

Marc Construction 32 High Street Rye, NY 1 0580

Stephen Marchesani 5 Scott Circle Purchase, NY

Required Inspections:

SILT FENCING

FOOTING

CONCRETE SLAB

FRAMING

PLUMBING

INSULATION

Tasks To Be Completed: ELECTRICAL CERTIFICATE

FINAL COST AFFIDAVIT

CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY FEE

Fees:

Work: 804-1180

Lie. Number: WC18695-H07

Work: 835-1317

Lie. Number:

FOOTING DRAINS & WATERPROOFING

CONCRETE FORMS

RE-BAR

GAS

UNDERGROUND PLUMBING

FINAL CO/CC

AS BUlL T SURVEY WITH TOPO AND UTIL

PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATION

BUILDING APPLICATION FEE

BUILDING PERMIT FEE

Total

16-0303

3/30/2016

3/30/2017

$60.00

$4,590.00

$4,650.00



ParceiiD: 4-15-32

Permit#:

Permit Date:

Expiration Date:

16-0303

3/30/2016

3/30/2017

ALL PERMITS ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE EITHER A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE ORA CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. IF A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY IS REQUIRED, ONE MUST BE OBTAINED BEFORE THE BUILDING OR ANY PART MAY BE OCCUPIED.

NOTICE: All work shall be executed in strict compliance with the permit application, approved plans, the NYS Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code, and all other laws, rules and regulations which apply. The building permit does not constitute authority to build in violation of any federal, state or local law or other rule or regulation.

Acting Building Inspector Village of Mamaroneck - Building Department

(3U at ... l> I tJ 6 PEILM1t I c ATlO-n ----- --

y~

<_ .

i \

. -t; '

::..~¥~:.~~-·-:: . ... \

4~1, .. f.A.S· 0'~"'lLAT10fo.J 3~~~~~

~~ : 2. .. 1'- ' "":ro!'Jar'E-: : . 8 -0C> Y:J ·-~P•4<-·'I> ;1S'I!S,f8' •• - - .- . MID,...,- -..001'81!>-it ' • 'f,#,

! ~et~J · ~'1'\.. 'T" z•'f'l... · • 't-&1:> • '<OA~ (+a:>.l¥>( A~'1Z>I""Ra>l2 ~ .

1 w.M> ·-· - . -- . : t3.1 '1•~ ~) ... ------ ---·-

.. :.._~'pc:tl()_~- --=--

£),.

() ... HI

4.1'2-' · · --;s~p;_~--

":"· -9 lli

,30. ~31l22C.JG!S/. Z1 . /0.$1!> or 100.t . U.7..f3.

/26$.,5

~. ~-- . . . --:- ~---.

~1$8.14'- '~ . ~+=•.'SSI

--~ - _, v- • ,.-· - - ••../

a...tN¢lC: -~':!-.CJUftJ.D.

1:1:.1~71~~1=.171.~~1

~01"' Z:!K?, ,!;"' - ...

\ I

~ '

\ ' ;, \

, .

\ 'll ·. \ ' ,,

' \

\ \ \

' ' ' ' ' \ \

A'J:i:, ~tJt! C!LC

~ 3f~ .. ·)I£+..C> - /1$(,

tta4'T"Sit( "'"""~.(,_~ - ~"?'. ~.:,._....., ·bf ... • af.s- • n-rs ·; :· ~T'S~ t:.~V> ·~ . - -~~~:: ~-

/ "'C>o., (;5(>7.:S _

~scr,>.s.;. ""<> • ~-14 ·-

·t•"l'!a::!z - -0- !-f-'2.1-• 1-?..~

tolUlfC DISTIIC'I ;!5

~~

~~~ - ~~ ~~-•o:a.· ""''o;·· ~~~g. r:.tg. --

·:2.ffi:.O' Bz'"'·-:.::_ _ r-,..~ : -~~~-- - ·--;~~~--: ~·-·

sea I F.A>:l/L.'I l'CIZ ·j,.,_\Jc. ~E.S U..G'

I • ""I.::OT · l · 01= I«>T .14'/.SZ·Z·$./

Stephen M~rchesan l 5 Scott Circle

· · Purchase, New York ·

I0/7GRO'IE sr M.b.MARONE.Cl<, )..J'f, .

118Wing

~i-re_ :PLAN .

I '--



ParceiiD: 4-15-32



Permit#:

Permit Date:

Expiration Date:


Contractor:


Marc Construction 32 High Street Rye, NY 10580


SILT FENCING

FOOTING

CONCRETE SLAB

FRAMING

PLUMBING

INSULATION




Fees:

Work: 835-1317

Lie. Number:

Work: 804-1180



CONCRETE FORMS

RE-BAR

GAS


FINAL CO/CC




BUILDING PERMIT FEE

Total

16-0307

3/30/2016

3/30/2017

$60.00

$4,590.00

$4,650.00



ParceiiD: 4-15-32

Permit#:

Permit Date:

Expiration Date:

16-0307

3/30/2016

3/30/2017

ALL PERMITS ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE EITHER A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE OR A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. IF A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY IS REQUIRED, ONE MUST BE OBTAINED BEFORE THE BUILDING OR ANY PART MAY BE OCCUPIED.


Acting Building Inspector Village of Mamaroneck • Building Department

1\_.

i :,. I ' I I I

i

!

~''-1>IN~ p~~~l1 -rf t. '{' rtno'J-

Lo-r ~

i \ \

\ \ \

"" \ \

\ \ \

~

·--~":=::.~~~: 1 FA11'.-· ~o,.1:.

~,, _ 2.5><7.'15• __ 1&.1'!>

_-.g;;.o(4..17~· .! .76 :9 J3.1i8

1:';;:"o . · ~

; . a .~

-I.E&S~ '0 -- - 6.5· ..

. Fl~ftl>Oii!- ... .-. .,.

D.. -::s:;o:w3i"~o:sol.:?,~ ;: __

' _- /08~~-z. ~~:_;:~?:!-?: ~"::;_ ;: -~ ::Ls:~~:~ - -,i~~ :~-

fj .. 1-"" ( . . ""'Sl!'a>>ID. f'll)d2 :1~ . • .

-:-tgrr:ovs~~ ··CA.U:t.JC.j.TQ.J

~"·-1-· .. :3>f;o~-n ...... l~~- .. :

~ 1 '?·~·'10- '0 · ~·. ,.: :...... .. ..:..:. . _ L,s,._7 •. Z!! ...... ·: 16 .

~ ::-...:....tuz:::.:-:-. ·.-;;,:r.·.: ~IL. .. ~

~-:nW~6

I I AY'i&¥)l; .a;g.¥§ . 9l4iS]..J!Z'E--·~ FI'ONT' ' 34~'&4.0 . • 11~- 00 . ...::-:::

=~~7::~7'": : ~~-=-~_:..::=~ ~-:=:.·-: - -''""' ~~~?A.o . ~- -11~82

· ... 1'f:':'~·~~ .. ' /:'i'}PZ. --- -~----1$9-• t<> ~7-,i-l!fJS· :!!4.:-z5 ...,.,.._

·: BU!lpl}~-~t#!f:¥!fr ~~::"'t' .. 'Kil>-~l'tl"lla>f" .' ·tUJS}~ · ·4·4?. . v~~'r:f.IW! ·g .IX)_

[<-< f'!a>lt Tt>. 'Z-~F~ _ . q . CO

A-.;,. "'"""'-w i'e!'!'U>:>I' ... ::r;n : - ., ________ -·· .B:"iO: ..

~~~~~~

·1:1:.1~1~:r:; l:tr~ . - ··

_ J.gr AIL\ . LOr COY ..... i-9J:wpm 'f.Ail)l- noft 1AIDI - IIDI l'OI. 1 UiDi - ·alDI · rtiTAL l'AIDI-WJ. .~CMT - aroRIJI . RZICilT- rut 'FA!Z,.

J~DISUICt ~

IIOUIUD ~

.... ~ ~: Zf,'g· /4'0: 25:0

~:~-· .ss

IJ..!..~ ~6U 3010' '-L/' ~;~~ z ....

n .:t&> .sf'f .. ....

&,.,....~

rsea 1 f:'AMII.."f Jtt:.SO.I~~ R.;J:A'IC ~~resuc:

AO Z, "1017 ~E. :E.T

,__Lf.;!l.f1.n--z-s.-z. 1-lAMAJZ<:>I-lEQ:, NY .

Stephe1> Marchesani 5 Scott Circle

Purchase, New York

1r8Wio;19

<5-rTE RAN. [date I /51~ ... scale ; /~ /5 ~0'· .. ravmby 'SM . ...



ParceiiD: 4-15-32



Permit#:

Permit Date:

Expiration Date:


Contractor:


Marc Construction 32 High Street Rye, NY 10580


SILT FENCING

FOOTING

CONCRETE SLAB

FRAMING

PLUMBING

INSULATION




Fees:

Work: 835-1317

Lie. Number:

Work: 804-1180



CONCRETE FORMS

RE-BAR

GAS


FINAL CO/CC




BUILDING PERMIT FEE

Total

16-0310

3/30/2016

3/30/2017

$60.00

$4,590.00

$4,650.00



ParceiiD: 4-15-32

Permit#:

Permit Date:

Expiration Date:

16-0310

3/30/2016

3/30/2017

ALL PERMITS ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE EITHER A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE OR A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. IF A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY IS REQUIRED, ONE MUST BE OBTAINED BEFORE THE BUILDING OR ANY PART MAY BE OCCUPIED.

,-


Acting Building Inspector Village of Mamaroneck • Building Department

6\t '\.l>tAI rr Pk~ I I - ==f'L.t(-,+'n ON

L.oT3

/&.3,=----._

' '

I \

I ~ \ I

.-! I

' ' .... ,~' :·.lV•';,(~lc.<··· ..... . . . I ' p ,, ,_, _..,,,t:-!IG . I . . . 3§!2.(--·- __.......- -- --- -·-

- ~ I {4~

-' ~2£%awf '

L ·~ii-~i~ ~~~ 5. . ~ .. ~=-.::- 5-s-

""'" . -:1011<.$T=S>;c~R"-

~ . 0--.

~o~:·-

:...li)..J~;~~;-:11>r.r'l·•

..Ja.a;JLZt.1=7.·"" .. · ··u; cy;s;=:-~:·

--l!ZS~

~---- - 7.2 •.,, .

:z::zrr::t'Z!I!Ef?i!!Ertr!l!ffill>..bl

~ .... :·1 ;rf, ..... - .... ~<It!:. • --:.-...sc•q.s cc:.::::::::l.tS. ~"fC.:::.......

'

,weuer ca!lJ:DE e4l C' UWH ~ l54··-o ··-··· mz::ocr -~-~-""' ... ,..~ ... -: · ;aa:b,S I ----·

~ .. :.-r.-~-- . -· .. """:oo.:·-:·. =·'SIPE ··~-•:rJ:o. · ...... ~"J, 7-4'

4•.n-~- - -~

I .s· ::s--

-·-=·: '/fJ6.S ....... - .. G>2bf.t -',f11.5 '• :U.t3

-:::W"-P'b'Q HEFW 'efFL!ATJo/.J ___ ..,._l't>INr~ 8.8S~ . .. - 4113 . :~!! ~'I>WIVJE. 6 .00 ·: l""f'l.a>l!. w z.~,.._ q,oo :;a-~--11>,..F!<>Cl' / . ,,

t?> -20,..

CI>DMle -~i::!* a.nau

!!:!tii:DimiCT

!!!!l'!l!!! ..,.,..

. ::::_ ·~ !4i_f-l = ·. 11111111 · ~ ~~ ..... - - 2.1>'-o' 4t-'Zil . = ·: =-~ ---;"ig: - ~~-~ . ,......... . i_¢· ; ;rr;.ro· :=;.:~as :- _. -/s! -• ..... _ ·itP_ '•-. Y.~ ~~~- .:~:c==.~.'l..::--·. O

"*r.'-z ' # ~~~~:,-

.. . ... .:::::Z'ilL.:.::....:..::r-;;t;F--~ · ~~.~:t•t$~~:V--

j=[ = [s/_._i;J; J=j-~-j 1 A lAfiii t iiMi .. . . ..,... Bi .f&'t"

sea ."£1> .1 ~IIY ~~ 'rol!. Avc.~,.nES ~ . P/7 c;.IZ<Ne: GT ".

~N!!.CJ", NY,

ong

StJE. R.1...._.

} I i·

CO\'E1IANTS All£li£SiliClJOIIS AS l'fll ~ IICWIIIAI'I'IIOVAI.

I. JHE PID'OSBJ 1HIEE"IEW!INGUNM.YIE$lii!MB:SHW.IEUIIJ!D 701.110 . SCILWIEA£TOFR.OOAAIEIIRWTHE~JNJM~«<CC.:x.MIE Ff£TFQitAGWGE'IORA 10TM.~l1.SCXMEif!ET. ntSIB1ffcnoNWWJ. IE IIXJIIICN,JEDMOAci!I::INMliOff, lffUWIIXZf'fNUJ'O,...,..ICWIJ ~ 7011ffiECOi:lmA&UGTH"I'Rii:ftJnylf1HEMESTO&J&Rcot.trnY ~OffiCE . .

z. II.L~a.MGMmlllnEwtAGERUfT~r NtJsmSfWLE GRAM1E IW1JtfiiiSLI8 AIJfiECIBI flY H \CLAGE 8GIIBl

l. AU....-~~HtctAGEIIQIIT.(F.MYSfWLIEII AOCICII'I:WriU'MJH~rrNORD~«TAUJKJ~TJOHS TOTHES4lJSfN:TQIOFM:~fMilll!!!lt .

< AU.~ICUIJI#8Mr1'Mllrt.MT.tncwNI'fRES~D£NJW.lMBJJIIGS '::...'=::J.~~;.,~":uiHML~ c:cwmu:nawSN:MWDNHI'M.$UIWISIIQIIJii.Ar.

VIlLAGE OF ~ZONING REfJURBENrS·

MOHE:~MILY

~Uif.tiiM _,.._ ---

R·l Oni-FMfy·IWitltla

1-

....... IBIHI" ... ,,..,J ... .... ... ---------

........... c:iMJwk , ........... _.... ... ,

""""""" M.W.t .. ...

•• . ..

NlV At. TERA.TlON OR ADOf110N TO l1«S PlAN IS A VIOlATlON OF SECTlON not, NmCLE 1·-45: OF THE NEW YORK STATE EDUCII.TlON LAw.

\ \

'\.~

11r~ ~ !??~

~~ ........ ""..

~<'

'\.~ '~> .. .,,

"'~

N

·t·

" ~ ~

,}

It

l I ~

· Afa!rosmtMJaii(,WfNEJ~~ IJY7HE~JOiirltMJERMJIIIICI .

/ 4L .... ,.:dt/;L_ ~-UJ'IIIESDEiiGNBJ IY.wla:MB,F. ~I' .E. OF

IU>SOif~&~ ... ,~ "''~-'~'-,. ~~.,.,. ~--

SITE

PR!lfllSil) I'UBUC WATER/I'UIIUC SB4ER-EXrfMIOH

-~-of---.-\'Qt . .,_. ,....., ...... m. ..... lC Sd:N m..t .,., 11l111111 ........ w liffiXJI'fl .......... ~.s.lirr'~fllllldlb. lll,.,..(f/Ji~M:"* ... • ,.........,_.._. .......................... ~n.. ........ ....wlh ........ , ....................... .,. --·----· ......... ., .. .....,. w;.....,,...,...,...._., • .,.,. ... ..,,.,..,.,.,..,.........._ Mit~~ ...... -....fii..,HMIII(IIt;...._fl ..... f#,._.......,. --.. ~ .......... ___ ~;-,0 ~.,.. rl,.,..lltlwlflllt~(J/,... 01111

~farlrngllflo-CMiyCiolt'I~OMsilndl.and-

~ +1'1/rr; (-Oonor) A~PROPemESU.C. 0e1t

''ec;.iAMrfowtiM' lifo

/VIfxfNtdby-Ho.-=-dfllol'llmllg-dfllo \ollogod--Yatonfllo~Diyaf '":G'( 2015

SUJjoctloll~ltltl .......... daid-.My~-=:;;J?::;:-'N:.•-I a..nnon

I.Goolgo~-_;,.....,,...ol!omido'*-'*'ltotol>y _ COIIII'fhll,......,...,.._,....,,_ .. ~"' r~~ Scplember27,20f2,111dfhll'*'""'-~"'"""""7. 201fsra-.t ~f'Z7-/s:' H.~~-l.andSUW,...!Io.49752

SUBDIVISION MAP OF PROPERTY BELONGING TO AVC PROPERTIES LLC

VIllAGE OF MAMARONECK WESTCHESTER COUNTY, N.Y.

.Sca/e: 1'= 2tJ' Dele : l.fstth 7, 2015 RO'Jised : Alay 20, 2015

M£Sra£STERCOIJNTY IHOEJ( SYSTBI ShQ1'11, fi.OQ{ 4080

PARCEL TAX IIAPIO. 141.12.Z.f mrAL AREA~40,8M.tr• O.NACRD

""-

-·--·--·- ·--·--·- · ...

s~~~ f>N -[_{>-_

\-L c; s ~VI) sro'0tciA

--·-·-·-· -·-·

/ '""d ... --:·-

/ ' .

VILLAGE OF MAMARONECK PLANNING BOARD (Adopted May 27, 2015)

RE:1017 Grove Street - 3 Lot Subdivision Resolution of Conditional Final Subdivision Approval

After due discussion and deliberation, on motion by Mr. Sjunnemark, seconded by Mr. Mendes and carried, the following resolution was adopted:

WHEREAS, on January 10, 2014,AVC Properties LLC, the Applicant, (all references to which shcill include and be binding upon the Applicant's successors and/or assigns) submitted to the Village of Mamaroneck Pianning Board ("Planning Board") an Application with accon\paiwing documentation seeking to subdivide an existing lot containing an existing two family residence ("Premises") into three lots, to demolish the existing two family residence and to construct three new single family residences on the newly created lots ("Application"); and

WHEREAS, the Applicant's property Is located at 1017 Grove Street ("Property"), situated within the R-5 Residential District; and

WHEREAS, the Planning Board conducted a site visit on the Property on March 29, 2014 and is familiar with the Property and all aspects of the proposed action and has been satisfied that the subdivision plat will conform to the requirements of the Village Code; and

WHEREAS, the Planning Board has carefully reviewed the application and considered comments from the Village Planner in memoranda datedJune 19, 2014 and September 19, 2014as well a~ in memorandafrom the Village Landscape Consultant datedFebruary 12, 2014, July 8, 2014, SeptemberS, 2014, September 12, 2014, September 15, 2014 and October 22, 2014, Westchester County Planning Department's referral review dated October 20, 2014 and from the Village Engineer dated July 6, 2014. The Village Engineer has evaluated and approved the Applicant's SWPPP revised December 10, 2014 and verbally provided Information to the Planning Board at Its public meetings on the Application; and

WHEREAS, the Plaoning Board has requested and reviewed alternate subdivision plats from the Applicant regarding impervious surfaces, layout design, street design, positioning of the footprints of the proposed residential units vis-~-vis neighboring properties, landscaping, watershed analysis, location of cultecsand other stormwater management improvements on the Property, fire truck turning analysis, driveway configurations, proposed rendering of residential units and location of garages. The Board reviewed the Applicant's Engineer's memo dated June 4, 2014 outlining the Impacts of alternative layouts. The Board also reviewed the following set of plans dated January 17, 2014 with final revision dated October 13, 2014(except for WJWW S/15/15 revisions as noted), a Short-Form Environmental Assessment Form ("EAF") and a Coastal Assessment Form ("CAF") dated December 17, 2013 and a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan ("SWPPP")(dated April11, 2014 and revised October 13, 2014) prepared by Hudson Engineering& Consulting, P.C. (HEC) as submitted by the Applicant which forms a

· part of the Application:

1.Drawing C-1- "Proposed 3 Lot Subdivision, 1017 Grove Street, Mamaroneck, "Existing Conditions Map. n

2. Drawing C- 2 - "Layout Plan. " 3. Drawing C-3- "Stormwater Management Plan." 4. Drawing C-4 - NUtllitles Plan Revised." (Revised 5/15/15 per WJWW)

{00621165.DOCX.}

5. Drawings C-5- "Roadway and Utility Profiles." (Revised 5/15/15 per WJWW) 6. Drawing C-6- "Erosion & Sediment Control plan." (Revised 5/15/15 per WJWW) 7. Drawing C-7- "Site Details." (Revised 5/15/15 per WJWW) 8. Drawings C-8- C-1.3 - "Site Details." 9. Drawing C-14- ''Site Details." (Revised 5/15/per WJWW) 10. Drawing C-15- "Notes." (Revised 5/15/15 per WJWW) 12. "Pre-Conditions Watershed Map, Proposed 3 Lot Subdivision.'' 13. "Landscape Plan" prepared by Anthony Acocella, Landscape Architect, P.C., dated June 21, 2014 and revised July 16,2014. 15. Coastal Assessment Form ("CAF") dated December 17, 2013 and submitted pursuant to Local

Law No. 30-1984; 16. Short-Form Environmental Assessment Form ("EAF") dated December 17, 2013.

WHEREAS, the house locations shown on the"Layout Plan, were established through extensive study and mutual agreement between the Applicant and the Planning Board; and

WHEREAS, a duly advertised public hearing on the application was opened on March 26, 2014 and continued on April23, 2014, June 11, 2014, July 9, 2014, September 10, 2014, and October 22, 2014 and closed on October 22, 2014at which the opportunity for public comment was offered to all Interested parties. The Planning Board received and reviewed written communications from neighbors and other interested parties as well as Applicant's response and his Engineer's response to certain of those communications in separate letters both dated October 22, 2014; and

WHEREAS, on February 12,the Planning Board tentatively determined that the Project was an unlisted action under SEQRA and directed Issuance of a Notice of Intent to be lead Agency and on March 26, 2014, assumed lead Agency status; and

WHEREAS, on November 12, 2014, after reviewing Part 1 of the SEAF and completing Parts 2 and 3 of the EAF andbased upon the application as revised by the Applicant, the Planning Board determined that the proposed unlisted action . would not result in any significant adverseenvironmental impacts and adopteda Negative Declaration for the proposed unlisted action; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to the authority granted to it under Section A348-19 of the Village's Subdivision Regulation the Planning Board has determined to grant the Applicant a waiver from strict compliance with the provisions of Section 348-14(E) of the Subdivision Regulations; and

WHEREAS, the Applicant appeared before the Harbor and Coastal Zone· Commission (HaMC) on September 17, 2014 and November 19, 2014,and, on that later date, the HCZMC determinedthat the Project is consistent with the Village's local Waterfront Revitalization Program {"lWRP") pursuant to Chapter 240 of the Village Code; and

WHEREAS, on December 10, 20111, the Planning Board adopted a Resolution of Preliminary Plat Approval on the Application; and

WHEREAS, onMay 13, 2015 application was made for approval of a final subdivision plat entitled "Subdivision Map of Property Belonging to AVC Properties LLC Village of Mamaroneck Westchester County. NY" prepared by George J. Mottarella PE, LS. PC dated May 20, 2015 ("Final Plat"); and

{00621165.DOCX.}

WHEREAS, the Final Plat is in substantial conformity with the previously approved Preliminary Subdivision Plat so as to obviate the need for a public hearing on the Final Plat; and

WHEREAS, the Planning Board has received and considered comments on the Final Plat from staff, counsel and the Acting Village Engineer and has received and considered comments from the public on the Final Plat; and

WHEREAS, the Planning Board has completed its review and evaluation of the application and the final plat and has fully considered the factors set forth In Village Code and determined that such standards and criteria have been satisfied:

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT .

RESOLVED,that the application for approval of a final subdivision plat composed of C-2, Proposed 3 Lot Subdivision, 1017 Grove Street, Layout Plan, C-2 Grading and Drainage Plan, C-3 Stormwater Management Plan, C-4 Utilities Plan, C-5 Roadway and Utility Profiles, C-6 Erosion and Sediment Control Plan, C-7 through C-14 Site Details and C-15 Notes prepared by Hudson Engineering & Consulting, P.C. revised October 13, 2014 for the subdivision of property located at 1017 Grove Street into three lots ("Premises") and the construction of new single-family residences on each lot, and approval of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan("SWPPP") M'Sd 9 ) I J I approved subject to compliance with the fo.llowing conditions and modifications

1. The Applicant shall pay all outstanding consultant review fees in connection with the Planning Board review of this Application.

2. All conditions of this resolution shall be satisfied prior to the Planning Board Chairman's signing of the Final Plat, unless otherwise provided herein.

3. The preparation and submission to the Planning Board of a plat in final form within 180 days of the date of the filing of this resolution granting conditional final subdivision plat approval, which shall be accompanied by the items of Information enumerated in Section A348-10 of the Village of Mamaroneck Subdivision Regulations. One or more extensions may be granted by the Planning Board provided that the Applicant makes application to the Planning Board not less than thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of the original or subsequent approvals. A request for an extension of time to submit a final plat must include information regarding the date that the Planning Board granted final subdivision approval and a statement as to whether any prior application for an extension of time has been made by the Applicant and the action taken by the Planning Board on such application.

4.The Applicant, in form satisfactory to Counsel to the Village shall submit to the Village (1) a written offerof dedication of all streets shown to be Improved; and (2) a written offer of easements as required across lots or parcels of land not covered by the above offer of dedication, giving the Village the right to install, construct, reconstruct and maintain therein all storm and sanitary sewers, water services and other Village services.

5. The Planning Board having determined that the need for recreational facilities created by this subdivision cannot be met on the property, payment of a recreation fee of $8,125.00 for each of the three newly created lotsor a total of $24,375.00pursuant to Section A 348-13 of the Village Code in accordance with the subdivision recreation fee schedule established under Chapter A347, Fees in the Village Code.

{00621165.DOCX.}

6.The proposed three new single family residences shall be limited to 2,750 square feet of floor area for the residence and an additional 400 square feet for a garage for . a total of 3,150 square feet. This restriction shall be incorporated into a Declaration, In form acceptable to counsel to the Village to be recorded against the property in the Westchester County Clerk's office.

7.Any change In the house locations shown on the "layout Plan" shall require prior approval of the Planning Board.

8.The submission by the Applicant of a Declaration, in recordable form subject to the approval of the Village Engineer and counsel to the Village, concerning the construction, maintenance and Inspection of

····· tti·e ·teature·sarthestormwater··r~ianasemeritsvstem··for ·e·ac:fl ·at .. tfle .. thiee.io1i·a·na·itie .. posti.il8.oia .. bon·d· or bonds required for maintenance of the storm water management system on each of the three lots.

9. As offered by the Applicant, the Applicant will undertake the construction and improvement of Village Infrastructure on Grove Street as shown on the "Grading and Utilities Plan" as part of final plat approval by the Planning Board , including, but not limited to, the following: (1) Installation of a proposed Village standard precast concrete catch basin (NYSDOT Type 'F'} and casting, (2) installation of proposed 15 inch minimum diameter storm sewerand extension of the existing 30" RCP storm sewer, and any other modifications, as required, to complete the Work , (3) removal andreplacement of the existing double grate catch basin on Grove Street with a Village standard precast concrete catch basin (NYSDOT Type '0') and casting, {4) Installation of a stormwater bypass system capable of temporarily diverting surface, groundwater or other flows during installation of the proposed Village standard catch basins, (5) due to an existing Village utility conflict, modification (i.e. re-routing) of approximately forty (40} linear feet of existing 15 inch vitrified clay sanitary sewer main adjacent and parallel to the existing double grate catch basin, (6) removal of an existing sanitary sewer manhole located Immediately north of the existing double grate catch basin and replacement with a proposed VIllage standard precast concrete sanitary sewer manhole, (7) installation of a proposed (new) sanitary sewer manhole required for the re-alignment of the existing sanitary sewer main away from the existing double grate catch basin, (8) installation of a sanitary sewer bypass system capable of temporarily diverting sanitary sewer flow during modification to the existing 15 inch sanitary sewer main and (9) replacement of a portion of the existing sidewalk located to the south of the property with a VIllage standard concrete sidewalk, including the installation of a Village standard curb ramp and detectable warning unit.

10. The Applicant will install a fire hydrant on the Property in a location approved by the Fire Chief and Village Engineer. The type of fire hydrant shall be specified by Westchester Joint Water Works (WJWW).

ll.AII proposed curbing within the Village Right-of-Way and site shall be granite, with finishes (e.g. split face, sawn top) as specified by the Village Engineer.

12\ If the Applicant, during the course of construction, encounters such conditions as flood areas, undergr·ound water, soft or silty areas, Improper drainage, or any other unusual circumstances or conditions that were not foreseen in the original planning, heshall report such conditions immediately to the Village Engineer. The developer may submit, if he so desires, his recommendations as to the special treatment to be given such areas to secure adequate, permanent and satisfactory construction. The Village Engineer, without unnecessary delay, shall investigate the condition or conditions, and shall either approve the Applicant's recommendations to correct the conditions, order a modification thereof, or Issue his own specifications for the correction of the conditions. In the event of the

{0062116S.OOCX.}

Applicant's disagreement with the decision of the Village Engineer, or in the event of a significant change resulting to the site plan or any change that Involves the wetlands regulated areas, the matter shall be decided by the Planning Board. Any such conditions observed by the Planning Board or its agents shall be similarly treated.

13. All work performed within the Village Right-of-Way shall be in accordance with Village standard construction details and speclficatlonsto the satisfaction to the Village Engineer.

14. Submission of Westchester County Department of Environmental Facilities (WCDEF) and Westchester Joint Water Works (WJWW) "Will Serve" letters stating that each utility has the ability to the accommodate the additional sanitary sewer flow and water supply demand generated from the proposed development.

15. The Applicant shall obtain all necessary approvals from the Westchester Joint Water Works (WJWW) and Westchester County Department of Health (WCDOH) for the proposed modifications to the existing water and sanitary sewer mains located within Grove Street. The installation of a proposed fire hydrant and modifications to the existing sanitary sewer are considered "public water and sewer main extensions". Therefore, the Applicant shall coordinate the applications for the "public water and sewer main extensions" with the WJWW and WCDOH. The Applicant shall coordinate all regulatory agency submissions with the Village Engineer. Prior to receiving final plat approval, the Applicant shall provide the Village Engineer with the approvals Issued by the WJWW and WCDOH.

16. The Applicant shall include approximate locations for proposed gas, electric and telephone service

~M~~~ ]

17. The Applicant shall provide a "Maintenance and Protection of Traffic Plan'' for all work performed If within the Village Right-of-Way to the satisfaction of the Village Engineer.

18.Submlssion of a completed MS4 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) Acceptance Form for Construction Activities Seeking Authorization under SPDES General Permit GP-0-10·001 (or as amended or revised), in form acceptable to the Village Engineer.

19.Submission of an "Existing Conditions Map" to the satisfaction of the Village Engineer. Two (2) signed and sealed copies of the original survey shall also be submitted to the Village Engineer and Building Department.

20.Submission of a final "Erosion and Sediment Control Plan" to the satisfaction of the Village Engineer.

21.Submission of a final" Roadway and Utility Profiles" to the satisfaction of the Village Engineer.

22. Submission of finai"Site Details" to the satisfaction of the Village Engineer.

23.1nclusion of additional plan notes related to the proposed development, as deemed appropriate by the Village Engineer.

24.Addition of the following notes to the final construction and soil and sedimentation control plans:

(a) Throughout the construction period, a qualified professional retained by the Applicant J( shall, on at least a weekly basis, prior to any predicted rain event and after any runoff-producing rain

{00621165.DOCX.}

event, inspect the soil erosion and sedimentation control measures to ensure their proper functioning. Soil shall be removed from the silt fence when bulges develop in the fence, in accordance with Village and New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) recommendations.

(b) Prior to the commencement of any site work, the Applicant shall stake the location of . the proposed residences and the proposed roadway, and shall flag the trees to be removed and/or relocated for Inspection and approval by the Village Engineer and Building Inspector.

(c) All soil erosion and sedimentation control measures shown on this plan shall be In place prior to the start of any site work. The Village Engineer shall have Inspected the installation of all required soil erosion and sedimentation control measures prior to the authorization to proceed with any phase of the site work.

(d) Grading and clearing and other construction-related activities shall take place only within the delineated area of disturbance lines. These area of disturbance lines represent the maximum limits of construction activities. Every attempt shall be made to further reduce grading and clearing activities within the area of disturbance lines by maintaining natural vegetation and topography wherever practicable.

(e) Area of disturbance lines shall be clearly delineated in the field by Installing snow fence around the entire proposed construction area. No encroachment beyond these limits by workers or machinery shall be permitted.

25. The Applicant will develop an area for snow removal and note such on the plans.

26. The Applicant shall provide a performance bond,letter of credit or other security acceptable to the Village Board,as required, for utilities, streets, landscaping, curbing, lighting, stormwater improvements, off-site stormwater/catch basin improvements and construction In form acceptable to counsel to the Village in an amount or amounts to be established by the VIllage Engineer.

27. The Applicant shall provide a maintenance bond or other suitable guarantee sufficient to cover the full cost, as estimated by the Village Engineer of maintaining all such Improvements and of making such repairs and improvements as may be necessary in that at the end of the five (5) years completion, said improvements shall conform to the requirements imposed by the Planning Board.

28. Prior to the Planning Board Chairman's signing of .the final subdivision plat, the Applicant shall provide liability Insurance as required by Section A348-18 of the Village Subdivision Regulations.

29.Prlor to the Planning Board Chairman's signing of the final subdivision plat, the Applicant shall secure approval of the water supply and wastewater disposal system and the endorsement of the plat by the Westchester County Department of Health.

30.Approval by the Planning Board, acting upon the advice of the Village Engineer, of the Slonnwater Pollution Prevention Plan ("SWPPP) for a land development activity pursuant to Chapter 294 of the Village Code.

31. Prior to and during the course of construction, the care and treatment of tree roots in close proximity to construction shall be supervised by a Certified Arborist. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall submit to the Village Engineer and Building Oepartmenta protocol from the

{00621165.DOCX.}

arborist that follows industry standards/procedures, including, but not limited to, the use of hand tool « excavation of soil to locate roots, clean cuts using hand saws, and wounds covered with wet burlap until back filled, and the submission of a final report after project excavation is completed confirming that the protocol was adhered to and observed at all stages by the arborist. As agreed to by the Applicant, the name and credentials of the Arborist selected to perform the above tasks shall be submitted to the Village for review and approval prior to commencement of those tasks.

32.Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall furnish to counsel to the Village, and file with the Village Clerk, a copy of all documents required to be recorded as a condition of this approval and written evidence of the submission of such documents to the County Clerk's Office for recording.

33.Prior to the Issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any of the lots, the Applicant shall submit to counsel to the Village and to the Building Department written evidence of the actual recording in the County Clerk's Office of all documents required to be recorded as a condition of this approval.

ANDBE IT FURTHER

RESOLVED, that the physical work as set forth in the above conditions shall be completed on or before the date this Final Plat Is submitted for signature by the Planning Board Chairman, provided, however, in lieu of performing said physical work prior to the Planning Board Chairman's signature on the Final Plat, a performance bond or other security acceptable to counsel to the Village sufficient to cover the full cost of said work, including the required set of "As Built" drawings, as now estimated by the Planning Board acting on the advice of the Acting Village Engineer, to be $162,010, may be filed with the Village Board of Trustees prior to the submission of the Final Plat for signature by the Planning Board chairman, such bond or other security to be issued by a surety company or other institution approved by the Village Board of Trustees and further approved by Counsel to the Village as to form, sufficiency and manner of execution, and said bond or other security shall expire no later than three years from the date this Resolution is adopted.

AND BE It FURTHER

RESOLVED, that in the event that prior to the completion of the designated improvements to the Village's satisfaction, the issuer of the bond or other security furnished to the Village hereunder becomes insolvent or, for any reason, disaffirms the validity of such security, the Applicant shall notify the Village Board immediately and replace the invalid or disaffirmed security with a new bond or other security acceptable to the Village Board within thirty (30} days thereafter. The existence of a valid bond, letter of credit or other security shall be a condition precedent to the validity of any permits issued or to be issued in connection with this final subdivision plat.

AND BE IT FURTHER

RESOLVED, that if said conditions be not fully complied with within the above time limit, the said subdivision plat shall be disapproved.

VOTE: Ayes: Sterk, Sjunnemark, Mendes, Verni Nays: Wexler

{0062116S.DOCX.}

Date: May 27,2015

{00621165.DOCX.}

"' Lj..A6' Co1>4: 3'12.--.31 o~ ... .,~J

VILLAGE ZONING CODE 342-3 DEFINITIONS LOT AREA The total horizontal area included within lot boundaries. LOT, CORNER A lot at the junction of and abutting on two or more intersecting streets, where the interior angle of intersection does not exceed 135°. Any lot adjoining a curved street at a point where the street line describes an arc subtended by an angle of 135° or less shall also be considered a corner lot. All corner lots are deemed to have two front yards, two side yards and no rear yard. LOT DEPTH The horizontal distance from the street line of a lot to the rear lot line of such lot. LOT LINE, FRONT In the case of a lot abutting upon only one street, the line separating the lot from the street in the case of any other lot, the owner shall, for the purpose of this chapter, have the privilege of electing any street lot line as the front lot line. LOT LINE, REAR The lot line which is generally opposite the front lot line; if the rear lot line is less than 10 feet in length or if the lot comes to a point at the rear, the rear lot line shall be deemed to be a line parallel to the front line, not less than 10 feet long, lying wholly within the lot and farthest from the front lot line. LOT LINES The property lines bounding a lot as defined herein. LOT LINE, SIDE Any lot line not a front or rear line. LOT WIDTH The horizontal distance between the side lot lines, measured at right angles to the lot depth.

'/tl .. I.AEri" ~1>W S'tl-31 0.~ ,.,, t\QV\~ ,. 2..

YARD An open space on the same lot with a building or group of buildings, which open space lies between the building or group of buildings and the nearest lot line and is unoccupied and unobstructed from ground upward, except as may be specifically authorized in this chapter. In measuring a "yard," as hereinafter provided, the "line of a building" shall be deemed to mean a line parallel to the nearest lot line, drawn from a point of a building or the point of a group of buildings nearest to such lot line, and the measurement shall be taken at right angles from the line of the building, as defined herein, to the nearest lot line.

YARD, FRONT A space on the same lot with the building between the nearest front line of the building and the front line of the lot and extending the full width of the lot.

YARD, REAR A yard extending across the full width of the lot and lying between the rear line of the lot and the nearest line of the building. YARD, SIDE A yard between the side line of the lot and nearest line of the building and extending from the front yard to the rear yard or, in the absence of either of such yards, to the front or rear lot line, as the case may be.

FLOOR AREA, GROSS The sum of gross horizontal areas of the several floors of the buildings or buildings on a lot, measured from the exterior faces of exterior walls or from the center line of party walls separating two buildings. Any interior space with a floor-to-ceiling height in excess of 12 feet shall be counted 1.5 times, except in the M-1 Zone. The following are excluded: [Amended 5-12-2008 by L.L. No. 5-2008, effective 5-15-2008; 11-25-2013 by L.L. No. 12-2013, effective 12-5-2013] (1) Any attic space with a floor-to-ceiling height of less than seven feet. (2) Cellar and basement areas where the average height of all exposed exterior wall or walls is less than three feet measured from the existing grade prior to construction. (3) For single-family and two-family homes, all accessory parking garages of 400 square feet or less. If any such garage exceeds 400 square feet, the first 400 square feet shall be excluded. (4) For all other uses, any areas or structures devoted only to accessory off-street parking or loading. FLOOR AREA, HABITABLE All spaces within the exterior walls of a dwelling unit, exclusive of garages, cellars, heater rooms and unheated porches and breezeways. FLOOR AREA RATIO The numerical value obtained by dividing the gross floor area, as defined in this Code, within a building or buildings on a lot by the area of the lot, excluding underwater lands.

V I vt_,A-&e:. coDe 34-2- Pt Hu....-ch~ -r 2-

ZONING

342 Attachment 2

Vlll•g• of M•m•roneck SCR2DUL2 OF MINIMUM REQUIREMmTS FOR RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS

(Amended 9-tt-1971, effective9-17-1971; 10-25-19111 by LL No. 13-19111, effective 11-1-1911; 1~9-1!114 by L.L No.ll-198ol, dfectlvr.I0-29-1984; S-ll-1915 by L.L. No. U-19851 d'rettlvc 5-11-1915; 4-11-1916 by LL. No. 10-1916, effective 5-8-19116; 9-14-1918 by L.L No. 11-1911, d'fedlvc. 9-11-190; 9-26-1919 by L.L. No. 17-1919, dfec:tive JO-S-IY89; tl-1~1000 by L.L No. 11-2000, effective 11-21-1000; S-11-1001 by LL No. 5-1008, dl'ectlvc S-IS-1008; 11-14-2014 by L.L. No. 11-1014, dledivc. ll-10-lOJ.4)

I 2 3 4 5 6 7 I 9 10 II 12 13 14

Mas:lmura HdP,t of Priod 1al Bulldin! Minilllu• Requiml Yll"ds

Minimum MiniBnun Muimara Covcnge Minimum Lot Width Minimum Habitable LaKr lSide~ AIIBuildinp LotAru .nd Frontacc LotDq~tb Floor Area Front Side Co•bined R..•r <•• puunta&e or Other Maximum fioor

Dirt rid (sq•arefedl _(fed) tr .. ti (.., .. ,..red) Stoms F..t (f .. t) (fed) (f .. t) (fed). lot area Reuuircmeats An:a Ratio11

R-20 One-Family 20,000 1110 100 2-story : 1,800; 21\ 3S 25 20 4S 30 35% Notes 4, 6, II 0.30 1-stOI)': 16SO

R-15 One-Family 15,000 100 100 2-story : 1,800; 21\ lS 2S IS lS 30 JS% Notes4, 6, ll 0 .3S 1-storv: I 6SO

R-10 One-Family 10,(1(10 100 100 2.-story: 1,600; 21\ lS 2S 10 2S 30 JS% Notes 6, II 0,40 I -story: 1400

R-7.5 One-Family 7,sm 1S 100 l..story: 1,600; 21\ lS 2S a 20 30 3S% Notes 4, 6, II 0.4.S 1-storv: 1.400

R-6Qne..family 6,000 60 100 24ory: 1,500; 21\ lS 20 I II 25 3S% Notes 4, 6, II 0 .50 1-story: 1.300

R-.5 One-Family 5,000 "" 100 2-story: 1,400; 21\ 35 20 6 14 25 351'. Notes 4, 6, 11 o.ss 1-storv: I 100

R-lF One- and Two-Family 3 7.SO_pe:rdwellig,g unit 1S 100 Each dwelling urUt: 900 21\ 3S 20 6' 16' 2S 3l% Notes6. 11 0.65

R-4F One-to Four-Familv l.SOO per dwellina unit "" 100 E..ch dwellin1. unit 900 21\ 3S 20 6' 16' 2S 35% Notes6 11 0.70

RM-1 Multiple Residence 40,000 but not less than ISO ISO - 21\ 3S z.SOO Dtr dwellinr. unh

40 30 60 2S 25% Notes 2, 3,4, .5, 6, 7, II 0.!50

RM-2 Multiple RcsidehCC: 20,000, but not less than 1:10 ISO - 3 -10 2S 25 "" 25 30% Notes 1, 2, 3, 4, S, 6, 7, 0 .10 1,500 per dwelling unit (JY..onwide a. 11 .......

RM-3 Multiple Residence 7,SOO, but not less than 1110 100 - 4 "" s 8 20 25 SO% Notes I, 2, 3, 4, .S, 6, 7, 1.2 100 pc:r dwelliq unil (4\4on wide I, II .......

RMISC Multiple R.esidencel 20,000, but not less lhan 100 100 41S I 1S 10 l 10 30 SO% Notes 1, 2, J , ... 5, 6, 7, 4.0 Sc:niorCitizt:n 300 per dwelling unit (4Y:aon wide I , 9, 10, 11

slr«ts) P Parking 5,000 so - - 2 3l MirUmum of 3 feet and maximum of 20 feet. as determined Ill% Note~ 4, 6 and§ 342-16.

by the Planning Board (Precedinc standards aP.Iy only to P District}

342 Attachment 2: I

'

07-0I-20IS

VI LL-k~G- Co 1) e P . 2-

MAMARONECK CODE

NOTES: 1 The Planning Board may approve a site plan which increases to the total number of permissible dwelling units by 20-;o to provide for below~market housing in accordance with Article XV of this chapter. In addition, where at least 213 of a project•s units are

a s:nix of zero- and one-bedroom units, the Planning Board may grant an additional ten-percent bonus in the total number of permissible dwelling units. This bonus shall be dependent upon a finding of no seriously adverse impact upon the school district. ' There shall be provided a minimum of 400 square feet of usable open space per dwelling unit in the RM-1 District, 300 square feet per dwelling unit in the RM-2 District, 150 square feet per dwelling unit in the RM-3 District and, in the RMISC District,

the amount of usable open space shall be determined by the Planning Board during site plan approval. "Usable open space" shall be defined as active recreation, sitting or landscaped areas open to the sky. Parking shall not be considered usable open space. On any lot containing more than 15 dwelling units, the design, layout and equipment of such open space shall be subject to Planning Board approval. Rooftop and atrium open spaces that are open to all the residents of the building may account for up to I 0% of the open space requirements if the Planning Board finds that they provide usable open space. For purposes of open space calculations, an 'atrium' is defined as a continuous area open to a sidewalk and street which is open and unobstructed, except for sitting and landscaped areas, to a height of at least 25 feet and whose roof and wall configuration allows natural sunlight as the main light source.

' No building may exceed a length of 160 feet in overall dimension in the RM-1 Zone or 185 feet in overall dimensions in the RM-2 and RM-3 Zones. ' The following minimum distances shall be observed between buildings on the same lot: a distance equal to the average height of such buildings at the points where such buildings are nearest each other. ' The least horizontal dimension-of any court, at any level, shall be not less than the height of any vertical wall forming part of such court above the sills of the lowest windows served by such court, but not less than 20 feet for an outer court nor less than 40

feet for an inner court. ' For off-street parlcing and loading requirements, see Article VIII. 1 Nq side yards are required between attached dwellings. 1 On Mamaroneck Avenue and Boston Post Road, the Planning Board may approve an additional half floor if it is determined by the Board that such a half floor will not present undue bulk and height or be incompatible with the adjacent properties, and

provided that such an additional half floor will not cover more than 50% of the building footprint and will be set back from at least two sides of the building at least one foot horizontally for every one foot in elevation. The latter requirement on horizontal setback may be waived by the Planning Board on any building whose setback to the street or adjacent homes exceeds the required setbacks by 50"1 •. In the case of two or more buildings, the Planning Board may allow a full fourth floor on one of the buildings, provided that such a floor still does not exceed 50% of the footprint of all the permitted buildings.

' ln the RMISC Residence District, a building may have a mix of studios, one- and two-bedroom units. However, the number of two-bedroom units may not normally exceed ISo/o of the totaJ dwelling units, unless the applicant can show, to the satisfaction of the Planning Board, that such units are necessary for senior citizens and will only be used exclusively by senior citizens.

" In the RMISC Residence District, the following special requirements for the elderly and handicapped shall apply: (a) Walks, ramps and driveways: Gradients shall not exceed I<>-'.!. ~ single riser grade changes in walks shall not be permitted. (b) Handrails: Handrails shall be provided as deemed necessary by the Planning Board, for the handicapped. (c) Fixtures: The size of the kitchen and bathroom and arrangement of the fixtures, accessories and trim shall be selected for and provide the maximum features of design that contribute to the safety, convenience and aid to older persons. The bathroom floor

finish shall be impervious to water, have nonslip characteristics and slope inward. Tl_le threshold shall be flush with the floor. Doors of all rooms shall be of sufficient width, at least two feet 10 inches, to accommodate wheelchairs and persons on crutches.

(d) Elevators: Elevator service shall be provided to all floors. 11 Every accessory building or structure shall conform in all respects to the minimum front and side yard setbacks applicable to the lot in question and shall not be located closer than six feet to the rear lot line. ll These maximum floor area ratio provisions shall not apply to additions to existing single-family residences where at least 5()11/o of the existing structure is retained and the footprint of the structure is not increased.

342 Attachment 2 :2 07-01 - 101~

Final Plat Approved- May 2015

VILLAGE OF MAMARONECK ZONING REQUIREMENTS

R • 5 One • Family Residence

R-5 ONE FAMILY REQUIRED J, PROPOSED

LOT 1 LOT2 LOT3

Ml'JIMUM LOT AREA 5,000 ft' fit.. 10.725ff ) 12.368ft' 14.322.1 ft'

MINIMUM LOT FRONTAGE 50.0 tt 106.46 ft 5~11 66.94 It

MI'JIMUM LOT DEPTH 100.0 ft 235.60 ft 182.87 ft 258 .9~ ft

~lAX BUv_D'NG HEIGHT (Stories I Feet) 2~135' 2i 135' 2il35' 2!135'

ll iNIMIJM FRONT Y.A.RD 20ft 200ft 30.1 It 44.62 it

V ,NIMUM ONE SIDE 6 ft 6.0 ft 6.C ft 6.29 ft

1/,NIMUM BOTH s,OES 14ft 14.0 fi 14.0 ft 14 29ft

MINIMUM REAC( "A.RD 25ft 82.15 ft 8112 ft 108.38 ft

tiAXIMJM BJILDING COVERAGE 35% 19.4 % 16.8% 14 5% ( As Percentage of lot Area )

ANY ALTERATION OR ADDITION TO THIS PLAN IS A VIOLATION OF SECTION 7209. ARTICLE 145, OF THE NEW YORK STATE EDUCATION LAW.

\ ···~ · ·

' .

Building Permit Application Plan - January 2016- Lot 1

ZONING DISTRICT ~

c.$. ~'E.~!::> -c-A;, ...... ~v-C.-.P-.. f20-. - .-ps:}L-_--....-.1 -iE-·.s--LL-c._.· ld rAwi g number

I0{7Gg0\!E ST ·. . 0 =;j;:;::;:::i;:VJ:A:M:A:rz.:o:N:'E.:O:::.:, :":iY:. =II ·--

]

dra~~~ .. . 'L.;) date J/~/lb ·_ .... · ~ rn::. .I L.h...N. scale /'~ IS! o · · -.· .. · · . drawn by~

\ ...

PART TWO:

This appeal requests a review of the Village of Mamaroneck Building Inspector's determination to issue three building permits on March 31, 2016 prior to the mandatory Subdivision Resolutions/Conditions of approval being met.

From the approved Site Plan Resolutions governing this land use project: "' Item 31 . Prior to and during the course of construction, the care and treatment of tree roots in close proximity to construction shall be supervised by a Certified Arborist. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall submit to the Village Engineer and Building Department a protocol from the arborist that follows industry standards/procedures, including, but not limited to, the use of hand tool excavation of soil to locate roots, clean cuts using hand saws, and wounds covered with wet burlap until back filled. and the submission of a final report after project excavation is completed confirming that the protocol was adhered to and observed at all stages by the arborist. As agreed to by the Applicant, the name and credentials of the Arborist selected to perform the above tasks shall be submitted to the Village for review and approval prior to commencement of those tasks.

Resolutions: A protocol on how the neighboring trees, specifically the tree at 670 Hampshire Road, in close proximity to the building lots was to be submitted to the Village for review and approval PRIOR to the issuance of any building permits

Violation: A certified arborist protocol was not ever submitted to the Village PRIOR to the issuance of the building permits. This was confirmed by the Village Building Inspector.

Violation: Mr. Castaldi did not follow the actual requirements of the Site Plan/Resolutions on how the trees will be handled and in particular, my tree! Now, according to the professional tree specialist I hired, the tree has been compromised, has irreparable damages and will need to be taken down (see memo regarding the opinion of the professional/specialist I retained to help protect my tree).

Mr. Castaldi used an excavator to dig within 3-4 feet of the base of my tree despite the fact that the foundation is supposed to be s•2" from my tree base. I now have irreparable damages as a result of his non-compliance of the Site Plan/Resolutions.

Violation: No certified arborist was on site during the excavation work on Friday, April 1, 2016 to supervise ''the care and treatment of tree roots in close proximity to construction."

Resolutions: The name and credentials of a Certified Arborist to perform tasks on neighboring trees was to be submitted to the Village for review and approval prior to approving the building permits.

Violation: The first certified arborist's credentials submitted (Stephen Pshierer) were proven to be fraudulent as per the ISA Arboriculture Agency. (Documentation from the agency was forwarded to the Village Manager)

Violation: The second certified arborist's credentials submitted (Edward Mancuso) were accurate credentials but Manor Tree ("Kif') indicated on Friday April 1, 2016 and again on Monday morning, April 4, 2016 that "Mr. Mancuso was not at 1017 Grove Street on Friday, April 1, 2016 and was not contracted or contacted for any work at that location."

Violation: The large deciduous maple tree on my property was trimmed on March 23rd and/or March 24th without any supervision of a Certified Arborist and was trimmed over my fence line by approximately 2'. This constitutes trespassing.

Additional Violation: Mr. Castaldi disregarded the "stop work" issued by the Village Building Inspector on Friday morning by continuing to work on Lot 1 in the afternoon of April 1, 2016.

As a result of Mr. Castaldi's actions on Friday, April 1, 2016, he has caused irreparable damage to the very tree Susan Oakley, the planning board, Village Manager, building inspector and my hired consultant, Frank Buddingh all committed would be protected.

Action sought: Revocation of three building permits issued given the conditions stated in the Resolutions were not met prior to their issuance and cannot be met retroactively.

Attachments: - Resolutions - Memo from BuddinghTree Consultancy LLC

Documentation of Prior violations of the Subdivision Resolutions/Conditions for approval beginning in December 2015.

Buddi nqhtree Consultanc4 LLC

Larchmont, 5 April 2016

Mrs. Jocelyn Donat 670 Hampshire Road Mamaroneck NY 10843

RE: Tree management

Dear Jocelyn,

Excavation near Maple on boundarv with 1017 Grove Street

"Balancinq the Needs of Trees and People"

Tree Management and Diagnostics

On Friday April 1 I visited your property again upon your request to ascertain the impact upon the above tree as result of foundation excavations at 1017 Grove street.

I insert a photo to illustrate the excavation work.

5 Pineridge Road Larchmont NY 10538 Phone : 914- 426 69 66 e-mail: frank@buddinghtree .com Web : www.buddinghtree .com

The excavation shows that this soil profile for tree root systems is very shallow. The dark brown topsoil contains all root development. Underneath is a light sand coloured soil that does not contain any nutrients, therefore o root development will be found there. That does mean that the roots grow over a large distance. One will still find roots of your maple at the point where the digger stands. Some larger roots have been capped off with skrim or jute. The excavation as can be seen on the photo (taken on April 1, 2016) shows only partial excavation.

This means that more roots will be damaged and or removed. Essentially, near 50% of the roots on the windward - southwesterly side of the tree has to be considered as lost. IN my opinion this is an unacceptable portion of the root system that is compromised and will have its (negative) effect upon the stability of the tree. It can be expected that further canopy die-back will take place over time and when the remainder tree canopy will leaf out, wind resistance will increase, thereby increasing the likelihood of wind throw.

5 Pineridge Road Larchmont NY 10538 Phone : 914- 426 69 66 e-mail : [email protected] Web : www.buddinqhtree.com

With current root damage caused, it should be considered to take the tree down in order to safeguard your home.

Despite the fact that the sub-division works are regulated by conditions that regulate the safety and the health of the tree, it is clear that these already have been poorly executed.

I have been in touch per telephone with the Village Manager Mr. Slingerland, to express my concerns with regard to the developer's actions and that tree removal and resultant costs should be carried by the developer. I have again expressed my concern how it can be ensured that the measures with respect to safeguarding the tree can be monitored effectively as to avoid what has happened to date.

Sincerely,

Frank C Buddingh' MSc FRIH Consulting Arborist

5 Pineridge Road Larchmont NY 10538 Phone: 914- 426 69 66 e-mail: f rank@budd inqhtree.com Web: www.buddinqhtree.com

Other Violations of the Site Plan/Resolutions ignored - Reported previously to the building department in December, January and February:

Resolutions* Item 24 (b) "Prior to the commencement of any site work, the Applicant shall stake the location of the proposed residences and the proposed roadway, and shall flag the trees to be removed and/or relocated for the inspection and approval by the Village Engineer and Building Inspector"

Violation: The locations of proposed homes and roadway were not staked when this clearing activity and tree cutting took place and still were not staked as of February 22, 2016 despite grading and clearing on the site since early December.

Resolutions* Item 24 (c) All soil erosion and sedimentation control measures shown on this plan shall be in place prior to the start of any site work. The Village Engineer shall have inspected the installation of all required soil erosion and sedimentation control measures prior to the authorization to proceed with any phase of the site work.

Violation: The Village Manager confirmed on December 16th when we spoke in person that the clearing and tree removal (aka site work) took place PRIOR to the Village Engineer having visited the property.

Resolutions* Item 24 (d) "Grading and clearing and other construction-related activities shall take place only within the delineated area of disturbance lines. These area of disturbance lines represent the maximum limits of construction activities. Every attempt shall be made to further reduce grading and clearing activities within the area of disturbance lines by maintaining natural vegetation and topography wherever practicable [sic]"

Resolutions* Item 24 (e) "Area of disturbance lines shall be clearly delineated in the field by installing snow fence around the entire proposed construction area. NO encroachment beyond these limits by workers or machinery shall be permitted."

Violation: Clearing took place the last week of November and first week of December when NO delineated disturbance lines existed. A low fence was installed in response to my letter and last week an orange construction fence has finally been installed. This was supposed to take place PRIOR to any clearing activity or tree removal.

Violation: Installation without any building permit or electrical permit issued: A utility pole with a large sheet of plywood attached has been installed on the front lawn of 1017 Grove Street. (See photo below) Multiple foil requests made indicate that no type of building permit was issued for the installation of a utility pole on the front lawn of

1017 Grove Street. I'm fairly confident that if I wanted to install a utility pole on my front lawn that some type of permit would be required.

Violation: Since the first week of December, we, the surrounding neighbors of 1017 Grove Street have had to look at the storage of large industrial equipment on both the front and back lawn of 1017 Grove Street as well as a huge, ugly temporary utility pole. All equipment and installation has been done WITHOUT ANY ISSUANCE OF PERMITS. We request that this equipment be removed Immediately and stored elsewhere until the proper permits are issued. They are an eye sore and negatively impact the surrounding neighbors due to proximity to our homes. See pictures attached or just drive by and see.

Other Violations: Mr Castaldi has violated the Landscape and Layout Plans. According to the Layout Plan approximately 5 trees were supposed to remain on the site but were cut down - see Layout Plan legend for "Existing Trees to be Removed" vs. Trees to remain: Lot 1 -a very tall Spruce Tree 14" diameter was cut down. Lot 2 - a 7" Maple tree, a 1 0" Hernik, a 9" maple where all cut down and possibly a 15" oak (to be confirmed whether this was removed or if it sits on Top of the Ridge property) Lot 3 - the plan was to keep the existing rhodedendrons however, they were cut down and removed despite their being on the Landscape plan and the Layout plans

Approved Landscape Plan http ://mamaroneck. novusagenda. com/agendapubl ic/ AttachmentViewer. ashx? Atta chmentl 0=5022& Item I 0=3765 Approved Layout Plan http://mamaroneck.novusagenda.com/agendapublic/AttachmentViewer.ashx?Atta chment10=5025&1teml0=3765.

As I indicated in my prior emails, we recognize that under ordinary circumstances that Village residents can cut trees without a permit however, this property owner is subject to conditions of an active land use application as well as Resolutions dated May 27, · 2015 which reference an approved Landscape and Layout Plan- there were conditions tied to the 31ot subdivision approval. It appears that these have been ignored.


(Effective_ 200})

It is the my responsibility as the Applicant to complete this Application completely and carefully, and to provide sixt=l (16) copies of this Application, together with all necessary papers, plans, surveys, documents or other required information.

Failure to submit the required documents and information will delay my Application or result in its denial, since the ZBA cannot review or grant relief to incomplete ApplicatioDS.


Although employees of the Village may provide me with assistance, I understand it is my responsibility to be fwniliar and comply with all applicable laws and to submit all necessary papers. pJaus, surveys, documents or other requUed information. I understand tbat copies of the Village Code are available for my review at the Village Clerks office, and that I may be represented at the ZBA hearing.

I HEREBY CERTIPY THAT .ALL STATEMENTS MADE ON THIS APPLICATION ARE TRUE TO THE BEST OJ' MY KNOWLEDGE.

Swom to before me this _/_3;;.._.._-fi_~---day of Ape ,' f • ..l00-_.'2 d 1'

ROBERT G. STARK Notary Pub' ic, Sta :e of New York

No. 01ST4846635 Qualified in Westchester County Term Expires November 30, 20 I 7

Page 8 of8

~.~)

CIMII'ICU%011 (Required by Hew York State General Municipal Law)

·J6~ /I ~ atatea aa fo~lowa: (Appli6Ant'a name)

1. I am interested in this application for a variance or special use permit now . pending before the Village of Mamaroneck Board of Appeals.

' 2. I reside at b 7o l~esh :v-~ .f(_J H~~cA~

in the aforesaid application is as follows:· -----N--tA.Jk' "e/

4. If the Applicant or owner is a corporation, list the corporation's officers:

President: --------- Vice President:

Secretary: --------------- Treasurer:

5. Do any of the followinq individuale .have an interest, ae defined below, in the ONDer or Applicant: .

a. Any New York State officers, or b. Any ofncer or employee of the Village of Mamaroneck, Town of Rye, Town of

Mamaroneck, or Westchester County.

[ J Yes [ -/i No

For the purpose of this disclosure, an officer or employee shall be deemed to have an interest in the owner or Applicant when he, his spouse, or their bothers, sisters, parents, _Children, grandchildren, or the spouse of any of them:

a •. is the Applicant or Otffter, or . b. is an off~cer, director, partnerl or employee of the Applicant or owner,

or c. legally or benefioially owns or controls stock of ·a corporate Applicant ot

owner~ or d. is a party to an agreement with such an Applicant or owner, . express or

i.Japlied, whereby he may receive any payment or other benefit, whether or not for services rendered dependent or continqent upon the favorable approval of such application.

A PERSON WHO KNOWINGLY AND INTENTIONALLY FAILS 1'0 HAKE SOCB DISCLSOORE S~ BE GOIL!Y 01' A NISDIHBAROa AS PROVIDED IN GENERAL MUNICIPAL LAW, SEC'l'ION 809

If .. Yea, • state the name and nature and extent · of the interest of such ind1 vidual: --1' . r ~

-v oc_e...t,1 n ~Ov"\.~ (Name) (Residence}

(Extent of interest)

ROBERT G. STARK

Notary Pub' ic, Sta :e of New York No. 01ST4846635

Qualified in Westchester County Term Expires November 30, 20/ 1


ItemTitle: 1017 Grove- JOCELYN DONAT

ItemSummary:

Adjourned Application #2I-2015, Jocelyn Donat, regarding 1017 Grove Street,(Section 4, Block 15, Lot 32) for an appeal of the Planning Board final plat approvalfor the proposed 3 lot subdivision dated May 27, 2015 and as amended, for an appealof the Building Inspector’s Memo of Review and Zoning Compliance dated February2, 2016. (R-5 District)

FiscalImpact:

ATTACHMENTS:Description Upload Date Type1017 Grove 8/31/2015 Backup Material02 02 2016 1017Grove BI Memo 2/2/2016 Cover Memo02 04 2016 Donat ZBA Presentation 2/8/2016 Backup Material02 10 2016 Donat Amendment 2/18/2016 Cover Memo04 06 2016 1017Grove Donat Amendment 4/6/2016 Cover Memo

VILLAGE OF MAMARONECK

OFFICE OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR

Village Hall Mamaroneck, N.Y. 10543

TELEPHONE 914-777-7731

FAX 914-777-7792

Address Reply to: Building Department

169 Mt. Pleasant Avenue

February 2, 2016

MEMO OF REVIEW AND ZONING COMPLIANCE

RE : 1017 Grove Street Mamaroneck, NY

Dear Chair Weprin and Members of the Zoning Board of Appeals

I have reviewed the below noted plans submitted for 1017 Grove Street; and have

determined they are Zoning Compliant as per 342 attachment 2- Schedule of Minimum

Requirements for Residential Districts.

Lot 1: 147-82-2-8.1

Sheet AO Title: Site Plan Dated 1/S/2016, Sheet A1 Title: Elevations Dated 1/S/2016, Sheet A2

Title: Foundation Dated 1/S/2016, Sheet A3 Title : First Floor Plan Dated 1/S/2016, Sheet A4 Title :

Second Floor Plan Dated 1/S/2016, Sheet AS Title: Elevation Dated 1/S/2016, Sheet A6 Title: Elevation

Dated 1/S/2016, Sheet A7 Title : Section Dated 1/S/2016

Lot 2: 147-82-2-8.2

Sheet AO Title: Site Plan Dated 1/S/2016, Sheet A1 Title: Elevations Dated 1/S/2016, Sheet A2

Title : Foundation Dated 1/S/2016, Sheet A3 Title: First Floor Plan Dated 1/S/2016, Sheet A4 Title :

Second Floor Plan Dated 1/S/2016, Sheet AS Title: Elevation Dated 1/S/2016, Sheet A6 Title: Elevation

Dated 1/S/2016, Sheet A7 Title : Section Dated 1/S/2016

Lot 3: 147-82-2-8.3

Sheet AO Title : Site Plan Dated 1/S/2016, Sheet A1 Title : Elevations Dated 1/S/2016, Sheet A2

Title: Foundation Dated 1/S/2016, Sheet A3 Title : First Floor Plan Dated 1/S/2016, Sheet A4 Title :

F or Plan Dated 1/S/2016, Sheet AS Title: Elevation Dated 1/S/2016, Sheet A6 Title: Elevation

1/S 7 Title : Section Dated 1/S/2016

Village of Mamaroneck

TH E F RI ENDLY VILLAGE

Background - Inquiries on Zoning Compliance

• Following closing of the Public Hearing on October 22, 2014

o October 24, 2014- Met with Village Engineer and Building Inspector with Susanne Metz (owner of property next to 1017 on Grove Street) questioning the lot widths and frontage of the application

o November 2, 2014- Followed up on our meeting and additional information that was supposedly forthcoming (via email to Village Engineer and Building Inspector)

o December 1, 2014 - Followed up with the Village Manager via email and phone as no additional information was being provided o January through April- attempted to follow up via phone and emails (all documented) o April 28, 2015 - Sent an email to the Planning Board, Village Planner, Building Inspector, Village Manager documenting issues

with drafted Resolutions as well as highlighting outstanding questions about zoning compliance o May 11, 2015 - Sent a request to the Planning Board to review Village Zoning Code 342 Attachment 2 before approving Drafted

Resolutions and Final Plat o May 27, 2015 - Formally requested that Planning Board and Chair condition their approval on Zoning Board review o June 3, 2015 - Contacted the Village Manager to request an in person meeting since the Final Plat was approved without any

formal documentation of Zoning Compliance. Also wanted Village guidance on how to appeal the voted approval on the Final Plat on May 27, 2015. Meeting request was denied.

o July 3, 2015 - Contacted the Village of Mamaroneck Mayor to inform him and the Board of Trustees that our Village Code and processes were being compromised.

• Formal submission of ZBA Appeal July, 2015 (within 6o days of Planning Board approval of Resolutions and Final Plat

2

The Appeal As of February 4, 2016 there is still no written, signed determination by the Village Building Inspector that

the 1017 Grove Street Subdivision is Zoning Compliant.

• Final Plat is recorded with Westchester County

• Applications for Building Permits have been made on January 8, 2016

• Building Inspector records a written document determining Zoning Compliance on Feb 2, 2016

Reminder on Background:

• Asked Village Planner and Land Use Attorney when the appropriate time to submit an appeal was • Zoning Compliance was implied when Resolutions and Final Plat were approved on May 27, 2015 (why would the

Planning Board approve an application that they believed was not Zoning Compliant?) • Zoning Compliance was implied by the Builder throughout the application process (he had the right to apply for a

Variance directly to the ZBA without being referred to do so by the Planning Board) • Given the confusion regarding whether the ZBA could hear my appeal September, 2015 - present, I asked to amend

my Application requesting that it be deferred until the Building Inspector provides a written determination that any or all of the subdivided lots are zoning compliant.

• The Building Inspector has now refe_rre<l the Building Permit applications to the Board of Architectural Review 3

ZBA's Jurisdiction • Concerned about reviewing a decision by the Building Inspector that have not

been made • Reluctance to hear the appeal based on its merits in September, October and

December

The Building Inspector has referred all three Building Permits to the Board of Architectural Review on January 12, 2016.

"Every application for a permit for the construction or reconstruction, as defined in § 6-3 herein, of any building or structure within the Village of Mamaroneck shall be referred by the Director of Building, Code Enforcement and Land Use Administration to the Board of Architectural Review within five days of the date of the application, provided that it conforms in all respects to all other applicable laws and ordinances."

4

Th e Lan d -1017 Grove Street • One lot, zoned as a 2-family home • g6' of frontage on Grove Street • Not enough frontage on Grove Street to subdivide in R-s zone • By definition, this subdivision was not "as of right" given the above

1-w w a=: 1-C/)

w > 0 a=: C)

... .........

Frontage approximately 96 feet

~ 5

The new lots- 1017 Grove Street • 3 non conforming, irregular shaped lots ranging in number of sides from 5

sided lot to 7 sided lot • No variances sought

..... w w 0:: ..... en w > 0 0:: (!)

....

c. -

........ 6

c

The new lots- 1017 Grove Street • 3 non conforming, irregular shaped lots ranging in number of sides from 5

sided lot to 7 sided lot • No variance

1-w w a:: len w > 0 a:: C)

* End of a line segment 7

Corner Lots - Lots 1 & 3 • Curved property lines to create frontage that did not exist • Added the two lot lines along Grove Street and the newly created street • BUT, by curving the property lines, developer created two corner lots (angles

are less than 135 degrees) • With a corner lot, owner has the privilege to choose his "front" - it can be

either along Grove Street or along the newly created street • Note- Frontage can not be added together for two streets- that would be

circumventing zoning code • Distorting a property line creates difficulty in determining the streets

intersection - all streets connect through extrapolation • Important precedent being set that has not been explored for zoning

compliance- do we want it to be? 8

Zoning Code 342 Attachment 2 ••• IIJv 6_ e.. !!J

·:!I MA0954-342b Minimum Resldential.pdf (page 1 of 2)

ZONJN<i

J42A..,.,_1

Wllleeoi-KIIUK:U. (Jt. XL'U.L'M IU.QliJIIL~'\U KMliU.SlDf.." IIALOK11CK:n

L IY B3 Q

~~·11-l,l.6a:w• ... JMtn;la.JS.Iti2.,.U-~IS.IWl.6dMli•J.Itll:I .... IIM'fLL~U.IIM. ..... l .. zt..I~S.U·ItiS11rLL~U.I_._.I5-ll· 111:k"-ll-l ... "tLL!M.II4-..... .W.I-: t.l '-1ti&..,. LLS..I I-t ..

1-ll-:.tu.•~,.-

lli o.M.-n..)

1 -IIH)M-.t•._.,·

• . ., , ~Oiof.J'-'y

. .. u..·.-. .~y

a,,(lfto.F-;Jr

•. ,,. o.w-- _, r~,_,......,. k-4f' Ont·1Q F..-f: I.W- IW~tpk~

1"-2 '4ui t'P"~·c

k M-] ~':iple a..:iaxa

ll."SC M:..h;p~ &c.id.:a:c.· s.-c.':.U.wa

,.,,.,"'&

_...,._,.._ .. w..No.rn __ ....._,_,..u..,.,,..__,....._ • ._., ..... ,..,.__..._,.,... ... .,u..,..,-..,-,__

-.... _ { __ .... -...... .... 1,~

...... ,_

""' .... :~ --7'-:' =-=-=== !Q,OOO, INI M!IiM .... I,*' pert ..... ,~ ....

1.lOQ,buiNit--~~out~,. .... c.,.

ZO.G . bllllOliaslbM JOO prr~-

:'l.oot

-.. - ---.:.-.... _ ... ,. ""' , ... ,..,

... '"" " "'' .. '"' ,. 100

1~ "" " 100

"' 1,.

,,. ;'o

1 ... :oo

100 '"' ,.

,_ -·--·-J. .uary: I.Mit ~~ ! -IIIW)'i i .ICiil; I·WtTI.t~

1,.-.,y. 1,6411: ,...,..~ 1.-

1-tlo:lt)': I.M&:

1-~·--1·*.1f)'t i .$GG; , ....... , . l .. lOC 2·._.,.,, .. ~

f. .......... rlhrtll~ 11M ... ... dac'litnK ~'OI· tol

...

. , . ,. II 11 '"' ~--~., -L ..... - ............ _, ....... ""'•-c ... .,.. ._.. , .... ..._

·- - c-.. - , .... ~., ._ - .... ... .... ... .... ...... --b " l! "' .,

"' .1>1· S IXCI •,t, II

,. J~ , " "

,. u~ .. ~ ... .. 11

,. J> !> 10 , JO ,,., Sc.s a.l1

z~, " 1., • " "' n-..o ~4.4.,1 1

J'-~ ,. lO • ,. " J, ... ........ ... &.11

11 " lO • ,. ~ U"i ~4.b.l l .. lO • •• " J-'"' ~. fill

'" " '" • I. " , .. ~-taft I I l~ .. .. lO 1(1 " ,, .... N!Mtl. J,<I.J, t ... , 11

l ... " " "' " )CO, "'otn I, ~.}.".~ • •. 1,

iJ'n" .,. 1,1': mo'

• "' ' • " " ""' '-Ia I, 2, J. &, ~. 6, ~.

~·~····· '·'· ·~· • " :o , 10 "' ""' s... t • .!,J.4. ) ,t,,, l

'" ..... ...... 1, 9,10,1. ...... , '

,. M ... ~.r, ~wo~-..._\'f:Orwt.t>~ \01'<1 ..,._, 4,4NIJ.4N• ..,..t'rt.ls••"'*'" (--.!Wo onb ..,P1li<~1M:t

M--..Jolliw NaMa .. "

fUll

O.l~

.... 0.4~

0~1

&~~ ... '"' , .. . .. ·~ ~.II

9

Lot Width • Note- Zoning Table Legend does not include Lot Width on Final Plat. The

Zoning Table Legend included the Lot Width on initial application but it has mysteriously disappeared

• Village Code 342 Attachment 2 requires so feet of width for any new lot • AND, Village Code 342 Attachment 2 requires so feet of frontage • Code says "Frontage and Width" not either I or • Depending upon the owner's decision on his "Front"- either, Grove Street or

the newly created street, the width can then be measured. o If the newly created street is the "Front" - the depth would be opposite the front and the width

would be less than so' (required to be 100') .

o If Grove street is the "Front" - the depth would be opposite the front and the width would

range from < 20' for about l/4 of the property and then eventually so' 10

Frontage • Grove Street and the newly created road "intersect" even if the property line is

curved • Is the Front on Grove or the newly created road? • How can frontage be created where it did not exist (see Slide 5)

11

. Conforming Lots? • Creative? Yes. • Conforming? We don't think so. • Irregular - s, 6 or 7 sided lots - newly created lots. • Precedence for village planning going forward

12

Zoning Board of Appeals • Study the Final Plat and Layout Plan • Review it for Village Zoning Compliance with Code 342 Attachment 2

o Lot Width - minimum of so' o Frontage- minimum of so;

• Review it for Village Zoning Compliance with All codes o Conforming or Non-conforming o Other issues?

• Request that Building Permits not be issued until ZBA finalizes its review of Village Zoning Compliance with All codes

13

Lot Definitions LOT

A parcel of land not divided by streets, consisting of one or more lots as shown on a filed subdivision plat or on the Village Assessor's

Map, devoted or to be devoted to a particular use or occupied or to be occupied by a building or buildings as permitted by this chapter,

together with such open spaces as are required under its provisions, and having its principal frontage on a street or on such other means

of access as may be deemed, in accordance with the provisions of law, to be adequate as a condition of the issuance of a building permit

for a building or buildings on such land.

LOT AREA

The total horizontal area included within lot boundaries.

LOT, CORNER

A lot at the junction of and abutting on two or more intersecting streets, where the interior angle of intersection does not exceed 135°.

Any lot adjoining a curved street at a point where the street line describes an arc subtended by an angle of 135° or less shall also be

considered a corner lot. All corner lots are deemed to have two front yards, two side yards and no rear yard.

LOT DEPTH

The horizontal distance from the street line of a lot to the rear lot line of such lot.

16

Lot Definitions Continued WT LINE, FRONT

In the case of a lot abutting upon only one street, the line separating the lot from the street in the case of any other lot, the owner shall,

for the purpose of this chapter, have the privilege of electing any street lot line as the front lot line.

WT LINE, REAR

The lot line which is generally opposite the front lot line; if the rear lot line is less than 10 feet in length or if the lot comes to a point at the rear, the rear lot line shall be deemed to be a line parallel to the front line, not less than 10 feet long, lying wholly within the lot and farthest from the front lot line.

WTLINES

The property lines bounding a lot as defined herein.

WT LINE, SIDE

Any lot line not a front or rear line.

LOT WIDTH

The horizontal distance between the side lot lines, measured at right angles to the lot depth. 17

Lott • Yellow Shaded portion is less than so' wide for approximately 25% of the new lot • Lot has irregular shape • Lot has six sides

15

Lot2 • Orange Shaded portion is an odd triangle of sorts • Lot has a highly irregular shape • Lot has six sides

16

Lot3 • Yellow Shaded portion is less than so' wide • Lot has a highly irregular shape • Lot has seven sides

17

1

Betty-Ann Sherer

From: [email protected]: Wednesday, February 10, 2016 3:36 AMTo: Betty-Ann ShererSubject: Fwd: Formal Request to Amend existing ZBA Application submitted July 2015

Betty-Ann, I've updated my request below as I referred to the plans as "construction plans" in error. I simply deleted the word construction in this updated request to amend my appeal. My apologies for the confusion. Mr. Weprin, Zoning Board of Appeals Chairman and Zoning Board of Appeals members, In July 2015, I submitted my application to the Zoning Board of Appeals, requesting that the “zoning compliance” of the recently approved Final Plat and Resolutions for the 1017 Grove Street be reviewed. Since the premature closing of the public hearing in October 2014, we, the surrounding neighbors have made dozens of requests and inquiries regarding the lack of zoning compliance of this project. Once the Resolutions and Final plat were voted favorably on May 27, 2015 (despite our written request to condition this approval on ZBA review of zoning compliance) I submitted a formal appeal given a final decision was made on a large scale land use project without any formal determination on zoning compliance. The initial appeal still merits a fair hearing. The subdivision project has gone through our Village processes having never received a proper review of zoning compliance. No formal, written determination (as required by NY State law) has ever been made. Yet, the project continues to progress to the stage of building permits. We clearly believe that the subdivision required at least two variances which were never sought for frontage and lot width as per the Village Code 342 Attachment 2. Given that the Building Inspector has recently reviewed (on February 2, 2016) three building permit applications for this subdivision and provided a written determination that the plans in the building application are “zoning compliant" I’d like to formally request that my current, active ZBA application, be amended to include a formal appeal of the Building Inspector’s determination of February 2, 2016 as well as any subsequent building permit(s) issued. We need the ZBA to review how any building can be constructed on these lots because of the setback requirements and the front line of the lots is yet to be determined. In addition, there are additional issues with the building application that need immediate attention including; plans that violate specific conditions of the subdivision approval, clearly stated in the Resolutions of May 2015, no SWPPP submitted for each of the three building permits and ensuring that a proper bond is in place (which was not the case as of February 4, 2016).

2

It is our concern that this project has NOT followed the proper legal approval process to date, despite our diligent follow ups with the Village Planner, Village Manager, Land use attorney and the Planning Board. It has progressed to the point of building permit applications and the real issues of zoning compliance have never been reviewed. Please amend my application to include last week’s formal determination of the zoning compliance of the building permit application plans as well as any subsequent building permit(s) issued as detailed above. Thank you, Jocelyn Donat 670 Hampshire Road Mamaroneck, NY 10543 - Jocelyn Begin forwarded message:

From: Jocelyn Donat <[email protected]> Date: February 8, 2016 at 6:36:24 AM EST To: Betty-Ann Sherer <[email protected]> Cc: Mayor and Board <[email protected]> Subject: Formal Request to Amend existing ZBA Application submitted July 2015

Mr. Weprin, Zoning Board of Appeals Chairman and Zoning Board of Appeals members, In July 2015, I submitted my application to the Zoning Board of Appeals, requesting that the “zoning compliance” of the recently approved Final Plat and Resolutions for the 1017 Grove Street be reviewed. Since the premature closing of the public hearing in October 2014, we, the surrounding neighbors have made dozens of requests and inquiries regarding the lack of zoning compliance of this project. Once the Resolutions and Final plat were voted favorably on May 27, 2015 (despite our written request to condition this approval on ZBA review of zoning compliance) I submitted a formal appeal given a final decision was made on a large scale land use project without any formal determination on zoning compliance. The initial appeal still merits a fair hearing. The subdivision project has gone through our Village processes having never received a proper review of zoning compliance. No formal, written determination (as required by NY State law) has ever been made. Yet, the project continues to progress to the stage of building permits. We clearly believe that the subdivision required at least two variances which were never sought for frontage and lot width as per the Village Code 342 Attachment 2.

3

Given that the Building Inspector has recently reviewed (on February 2, 2016) three building permit applications for this subdivision and provided a written determination that the construction plans in the building application are “zoning compliant" I’d like to formally request that my current, active ZBA application, be amended to include a formal appeal of the Building Inspector’s determination of February 2, 2016 as well as any subsequent building permit(s) issued. We need the ZBA to review how any building can be constructed on these lots because of the setback requirements and the front line of the lots is yet to be determined. In addition, there are additional issues with the building application that need immediate attention including; construction plans that violate specific conditions of the subdivision approval, clearly stated in the Resolutions of May 2015, no SWPPP submitted for each of the three building permits and ensuring that a proper bond is in place (which was not the case as of February 4, 2016). It is our concern that this project has NOT followed the proper legal approval process to date, despite our diligent follow ups with the Village Planner, Village Manager, Land use attorney and the Planning Board. It has progressed to the point of building permit applications and the real issues of zoning compliance have never been reviewed. Please amend my application to include last week’s formal determination of the zoning compliance of the construction plans as well as any subsequent building permit(s) issued as detailed above. Thank you, Jocelyn Donat 670 Hampshire Road Mamaroneck, NY 10543

1

Betty-Ann Sherer

From: Jocelyn <[email protected]>Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2016 4:50 AMTo: Betty-Ann ShererCc: Dan GraySubject: Fwd: Formal Request to Amend existing ZBA Application submitted July 2015

Betty-Ann, Can you please forward to the ZBA. Mr. Weprin, ZBA Chairman and ZBA Members: In early February I amended my long-standing appeal of zoning compliance of the subdivision at 1017 Grove Street. In that amended appeal, I included that the amended appeal cover "any subsequent building permits issued." Being that three building permits were issued at the end of last week, I am formalizing my request made previously to continue my appeal challenging the very same zoning compliance issues (frontage/lot width and/or depth and FAR being over maximum) of the following decisions made by Billage of Mamaroneck officials or boards - the Final Plat approval (May 27, 2015) - the Zoning Compliance determination of the three building lots (February 2, 2016) And now, - the Zoning Compliance of the three issued Building permits (April 1, 2016) - Jocelyn Donat 670 Hampshire Road Mamaroneck, NY Begin forwarded message:

From: [email protected] Date: February 10, 2016 at 3:35:47 AM EST To: Betty-Ann Sherer <[email protected]> Subject: Fwd: Formal Request to Amend existing ZBA Application submitted July 2015

Mr. Weprin, Zoning Board of Appeals Chairman and Zoning Board of Appeals members, In July 2015, I submitted my application to the Zoning Board of Appeals, requesting that the “zoning compliance” of the recently approved Final Plat and Resolutions for the 1017 Grove

2

Street be reviewed. Since the premature closing of the public hearing in October 2014, we, the surrounding neighbors have made dozens of requests and inquiries regarding the lack of zoning compliance of this project. Once the Resolutions and Final plat were voted favorably on May 27, 2015 (despite our written request to condition this approval on ZBA review of zoning compliance) I submitted a formal appeal given a final decision was made on a large scale land use project without any formal determination on zoning compliance. The initial appeal still merits a fair hearing. The subdivision project has gone through our Village processes having never received a proper review of zoning compliance. No formal, written determination (as required by NY State law) has ever been made. Yet, the project continues to progress to the stage of building permits. We clearly believe that the subdivision required at least two variances which were never sought for frontage and lot width as per the Village Code 342 Attachment 2. Given that the Building Inspector has recently reviewed (on February 2, 2016) three building permit applications for this subdivision and provided a written determination that the plans in the building application are “zoning compliant" I’d like to formally request that my current, active ZBA application, be amended to include a formal appeal of the Building Inspector’s determination of February 2, 2016 as well as any subsequent building permit(s) issued. We need the ZBA to review how any building can be constructed on these lots because of the setback requirements and the front line of the lots is yet to be determined. In addition, there are additional issues with the building application that need immediate attention including; plans that violate specific conditions of the subdivision approval, clearly stated in the Resolutions of May 2015, no SWPPP submitted for each of the three building permits and ensuring that a proper bond is in place (which was not the case as of February 4, 2016). It is our concern that this project has NOT followed the proper legal approval process to date, despite our diligent follow ups with the Village Planner, Village Manager, Land use attorney and the Planning Board. It has progressed to the point of building permit applications and the real issues of zoning compliance have never been reviewed. Please amend my application to include last week’s formal determination of the zoning compliance of the building permit application plans as well as any subsequent building permit(s) issued as detailed above. Thank you, Jocelyn Donat 670 Hampshire Road

3

Mamaroneck, NY 10543 - Jocelyn Begin forwarded message:

From: Jocelyn Donat <[email protected]> Date: February 8, 2016 at 6:36:24 AM EST To: Betty-Ann Sherer <[email protected]> Cc: Mayor and Board <[email protected]> Subject: Formal Request to Amend existing ZBA Application submitted July 2015

Mr. Weprin, Zoning Board of Appeals Chairman and Zoning Board of Appeals members, In July 2015, I submitted my application to the Zoning Board of Appeals, requesting that the “zoning compliance” of the recently approved Final Plat and Resolutions for the 1017 Grove Street be reviewed. Since the premature closing of the public hearing in October 2014, we, the surrounding neighbors have made dozens of requests and inquiries regarding the lack of zoning compliance of this project. Once the Resolutions and Final plat were voted favorably on May 27, 2015 (despite our written request to condition this approval on ZBA review of zoning compliance) I submitted a formal appeal given a final decision was made on a large scale land use project without any formal determination on zoning compliance. The initial appeal still merits a fair hearing. The subdivision project has gone through our Village processes having never received a proper review of zoning compliance. No formal, written determination (as required by NY State law) has ever been made. Yet, the project continues to progress to the stage of building permits. We clearly believe that the subdivision required at least two variances which were never sought for frontage and lot width as per the Village Code 342 Attachment 2. Given that the Building Inspector has recently reviewed (on February 2, 2016) three building permit applications for this subdivision and provided a written determination that the construction plans in the building application are “zoning compliant" I’d like to formally request that my current, active ZBA application, be amended to include a formal appeal of the Building Inspector’s determination of February 2, 2016 as well as any subsequent building permit(s) issued. We need the ZBA to review how any building can be constructed on these lots because of the setback requirements and the front line of the lots is yet to be

4

determined. In addition, there are additional issues with the building application that need immediate attention including; construction plans that violate specific conditions of the subdivision approval, clearly stated in the Resolutions of May 2015, no SWPPP submitted for each of the three building permits and ensuring that a proper bond is in place (which was not the case as of February 4, 2016). It is our concern that this project has NOT followed the proper legal approval process to date, despite our diligent follow ups with the Village Planner, Village Manager, Land use attorney and the Planning Board. It has progressed to the point of building permit applications and the real issues of zoning compliance have never been reviewed. Please amend my application to include last week’s formal determination of the zoning compliance of the construction plans as well as any subsequent building permit(s) issued as detailed above. Thank you, Jocelyn Donat 670 Hampshire Road Mamaroneck, NY 10543


ItemTitle: ARLENE KEEL & SHARON NEWMAN

ItemSummary:

Application #1UV-2016, Arlene Keel & Sharon Newman, 1024 Keeler Avenue,(Section 4, Block 31, Lot 170A) for a use variance to allow a mixed use (commercialand residential) at the premises. A delicatessen was previously operated at thepremises. This Application violates Chapter 342-64 C. 'Non-conforming use ofbuildings' in which “any nonconforming use of a building ceases for any reason for acontinuous period of more than six months or is changed to a conforming use or ifthe building in or on which such use is conducted or maintained is moved for anydistance whatever, for any reason, any future use of such building shall conform andbe subject to the prevailing standards specified by this chapter for the district inwhich such building is located” and this business was closed for more than sixmonths. (R-5 District)

FiscalImpact:

ATTACHMENTS:Description Upload Date Type03 10 2016 1024 Keeler Application 3/17/2016 Presentation03 10 2016 1024 Keeler Petition to ZBA 3/17/2016 Presentation

Village ofMamaroneck, New York Zoning Board of Appeals (Effective January 2007)

RECEIVED '1 1~

[ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

MAR 1 0 2016

BUILDING DEPT. 16 Copies Completed Application Cos or Letter Violations, if any

Application No.: ____.l""'"u<L....L.v_· ....,ZO.~'/_,G?~·-AgendaNo.:

Photographs Survey Certified Drawings Consent Certification/ Affidavit EAF Copy of Determination being appealed Riders if Application is Corp./Business Entity

For Office Use Only

SP ______ _ AV ______ _ uv _______ _ F _______ _ s _______ _ Interpretation. ___ _

*****************************************************************************


APPLICATION

Date: MARCH 2, 2016

TO: ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS -VILLAGE OF MAMARONECK 123 Mamaroneck A venue Mamaroneck, New York 10543

I (We) ARLENE KEEL and SHARON NEWMAN (Name of Applicant)

of 4664 Mill Run Drive, New Port Richey, Florida Zip 34653 (Insert Complete Mailing Address)

Daytime Phone No. Daytime Fax No. -----------

Apply to the Board of Appeals regarding property located at------------1024 KEELER A VENUE

(Insert Location of Premises)

Bearing Village of Mamaroneck Tax Map Number: 4 I 31 I 170A (Section) (Block) (Lot)

Page 1 of8

1.

Village of Mamaroneck, New York Zoning Board of Appeals (Effective January 2007)

This is an Application for the following: (check [1] or more as applicable)

[ ] Area Variance - This is to use land in a manner not allowed because of dimensional or topographical requirements in the Zoning Code.

[ X ] Use Variance - This is to allow land to be used in a manner or for a purpose which is prohibited or not allowed by the Zoning Code.

[ ] Special Permit

[ ] Sign Variance

[ ] Fence Variance

[ Appeal or Interpretation (Specify Code Section

[ ] Other: Specify

2. The Date and Description of the determination that is being appealed (a copy of

the determination must be attached'--------------------

3. What is the present zoning of the property? --~R""'"-'""'5 ________ _

4. This Application must be made in the name of the person or entity that has a possessory interest in the property such as a tenant, purchaser or owner. If you are the owner, on what date did you acquire title? 1977 ; If you are not the owner, list the name and address of the owner and describe your relationship to the property and the date said relationship commenced: -------------------

If you have acquired title to the property within the past two years, provide the name of thepriorowner: ______________________________ _

NOTE: If the Applicant or Property Owner is a: Corporation: Attach a separate Rider listing all the corporation's officers, shareholders, and their percentage of share ownership. Partnership: attach a separate Rider listing the type of partnership and identify the partners and their partnership interests. LLC: attach a separate Rider listing the LLC's members.

Page 2 of8


5. If someone is authorized to act as your representative or to appeal with you on your behalf before the Board, his or her name, address and telephone number must be provided:

NAME: PAUL J. NOTO, ESQ.

ADDRESS 650 Halstead Avenue, Mamaroneck, New York 10543

TELEPHONE: 914-698-9331

6. Has a prior variance, special permit or interpretation Application ever been submitted for this property?

[ X] YES [ ] No

If YES, you must attach copies of prior variance or resolution and describe them:

Special Permit- March, 2014

7. List all permits you must obtain in order to complete the subject project of this Application (include all permits or approvals necessary from any federal, state, county or local agency or department):--------------------

ZBA

Page 3 of8


8. Is the property subject to any covenants, easements or other restrictions or encumbrances? If so, list and describe these. (You may be required to provide copies of these document establishing same to the Board.) Please be advised that nothing herein or within Board purview will alter or modify any existing contractual rights with respect

to the subject property. NONE--------------

9. Check here is there has been any illegal use or violations issued with respect to the property, regardless of whether it has been removed or adjudicated. [ ]

If so, describe and provide the date(s) and details, including if the violation continues:

NONE


Article ----"XIII'-"="-----' Section --=3~4~2--==-9::.=2~---'' Subsection __ _;.A..:o._ __ _

Article , Section , Subsection -------- ---------- ---------

Article , Section , Subsection -------- --------- ---------

Article , Section , Subsection -------- ------- -------

NOTE: IF THIS IS AN APPLICATION FOR A USE VARIANCE, COMPLETE QUESTION 11 ON PAGE 5. IF THIS IS AN APPLICATION FOR AN AREA VARIANCE, COMPLETE QUESTION 12, ON PAGE 6. IF THIS IS APPLICATION FOR ALL OTHER APPLICATION, INCLUDING A SPECIAL PERMIT, COMPLETE QUESTION 12, ON PAGE 7.

Page 4 of8

Village ofMamaroneck, New York Zoning Board of Appeals (Effective January 2007)

11. A use variance may only be granted if it is determined that zoning regulations and restrictions cause the property owner unnecessary hardship. New York law provides that: "In order to prove such unnecessary hardship, the property owner shall demonstrate to the Board of Appeals that (1) under the applicable zoning regulations, the owner is deprived of a reasonable return for each and every permitted use under the zoning regulations for the particular district where the property is located. This deprivation must be established by competent financial evidence; (2) the alleged hardship relating to the property in question is unique, and does not apply to a substantial portion of the district or neighborhood; (3) the requested use variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood; and (4) the alleged hardship has not been self-created."


PLEASE SEE ATTACHED DOCUMENTATION

Page 5 of8


12. Under State law, the Board of Appeals must consider the following factors in making a decision on your request for an area variance: "(1) whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties will be created by the granting of the area variance; (2) whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method feasible for the applicant to pursue other than an area variance; (3) whether the requested area variance is substantial; ( 4) whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district; and (5) whether the alleged difficulty was self created .. . "

You must set forth the facts which support your Application request. (Attach additional sheets, schedules or other information that you want the Board of consider):

Page 6 of8


13. If this Application is not for an area or use variance, provide information that supports your Application. You must refer to the appropriate sections of the Village Code and to other legal requirements necessary for the Board to consider your Application.

(NOTE: If you are requesting an appeal or interpretation, be specific as to both the remedy sought and the Code section(s) relevant to your request and provide to the Board all legal authorities that support your position, by attaching to this Application.)

Page 7 of8


It is my responsibility as the Applicant to complete this Application completely and carefully, and to provide sixteen (16) copies of this Application, together with all necessary papers, plans, surveys, documents or other required information.

Failure to submit the required documents and information will delay my Application or result in its denial, since the ZBA cannot review or grant relief to incomplete Applications.


Although employees of the Village may provide me with assistance, I understand it is my responsibility to be familiar and comply with all applicable laws and to submit all necessary papers, plans, surveys, documents or other related information. I understand that copies of the Village Code are available for my review at the Village Clerk's office, and that I may be represented at the ZBA hearing.

I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT ALL STATEMENTS MADE ON TIDS APPLICATION ARE TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE.

Sworn to before me this 2nd day of~JP-~lff· 2016

..,.,..~v P(l(l Shelley Snow o~<.., : ~ State of Florida

·~~ 7 My Commission Expires 06130/2018 o, f\: Commission No. FF 137781

Page 8 of8

(Applicants Signature) ARLENE KEEL

SHARON NEWMAN

CERTIFICATION (REQUIRED BY NEW YORK STATE GENERAL MUNICIPAL LAW)

ARLENE KEEL and SHARON NEWMAN , states as follows:

1. We are interested in this application for a variance or special use pennit now pending before the Village of Mamaroneck Board of Appeals. 2. We reside at 4664 Mill Run Drive, New Port Richey, FL 3. The nature of my interest in the aforesaid application is as follows:

Owner - Applicant 4. If the applicant or owner is a corporation, list the corporation's officers:

President : Vice President : Secretary : Treasurer

5. Do any of the following individuals have an interest, as defined below, in the owner of applicant: a. Any New York State officer, or b. Any officer or employee of the Village ofMamaroneck, Town of Rye, Town

of Mamaroneck, or Westchester County. [ ] YES [X] NO

For the purposes of this disclosure, an officer or employee shall be deemed to have an interest in the owner or applicant when he, his spouse, or their brothers, sisters, parents, children, grandchildren, or the spouse of any of them:

may

a. Is the applicant or owner, or b. Is an officer, director, partner, or employee of the Applicant or owner, or c. Legally or beneficially owns or controls stock of a corporate Applicant or owner, or d. Is a party to an agreement with such Applicant or owner, express or implied, whereby he

receive any payment or other benefit, whether or not for services rendered dependent or contingent upon the favorable approval of such application.

A PERSON WHO KNOWINGLY AND INTENTIONALLY FAILS TO MAKE SUCH DISCLOSURE SHALL BE GUILTY OF A MISDEMEANOR AS PROVIDED IN GENERAL MUNICIPAL LAW, SECTION 809

If YES, state the name and nature and extent of the interest of such individual:

(Name) (Residence)

(Extent of Interest)

~.,. .. v "u• Shelley Snow f~ ~ State of Florida \. ~ My Commission Expires 06/3012018

0' ,~..o Commission No. FF 137781

(Applicant's signature) ARLENE KEEL

J)J~~-?SHARON NEWMAN

01/05/1999 14:10 7273727351 --.. ·--··· '' ........... .. ...... _ ..... .. FRANK KEEL

vm• of Mamaroneck, New York Zoninl Board of Appeals (Eft'ective J11nuary 2007)

PAGE 02

It is my responsibility u the Applicant to complete this Application completely and carefully, and to provide sixteen (16) copies of this Application. together with all necessary papers, plans, swveys, documents or other required infonnation.

Failure to submit the required documents and infonnation will delay my Application or reault in its denial, since the ZBA cannot review or grant relief to incomplete Applications.

It is my responsibility to comply with an related requirements in presenting this Application, and the ZBA reserves the right to request additional documentation and/or drawinp, and to condition any requested relief upon the filing of covenants and rettrictions.

Although employee. of the Village may provide me with Ulistance, I understand it is my responsibility to be familiar and comply with all applicable laws and to submit aU necessary papers, plan1, surveys, documents or other related information. I understand that copies of the Village Code are available for my review at the Village Clerk's office, and that I may be repreaented at the ZBA hoarina.

I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT ALL STATEMENTS MADE ON THIS APPLICATION ARE TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE.

Sworn to before me this :0, J: m;;·2016 (Applicants Sipature) ARLENEKEBL

7273727351 FRANK KEEL PAGE 03

CBR.TIFICA TION (REQUJRBD BY NBW YORK STATE GENERAL MUNICIPAL LAW)

ARLENE KJmi, and SHARON NBWMAN • states as follows:

1. We are interested in this application for a variance or special use permit now pending before the Villap of Mamaroneck Board of Appeals. 2. We reside at 4664 Mill Run Drive, New Port Richey, FL 3. The nature of my interest in the aforesaid application is as follows:

Owng- &mlicant 4. If the applicant or owner is a corporation, list the corporation's officers:

President : Vice President : Secretary : Treasurer

S. Do any of the following individuals have an interest, u defined below, in the owner of applicant: a. Any New York State officer, or b. Any officer or employee of the Village ofMamlll'Oncc::k, Town of Rye, Town

ofMamaroneck, or W~ County. ( ]YES [X]NO

For the purposes of this discloiUl'e, an officer or employee shall be deemed to have an interest in the owner or applicant when he, hisapoUJe, or their brothers, sisters, parents. children. grandchildren, or the spouse of any of them:

may

a. Is the applicant or owner, or b. Is an officer, director, partner, or employee of the Applicant or owner. or c. Legally or beneficially owns or controls stock of a coJPOrate Applicant or owner. or d. Is a party to an agreement with such Applicant or owner, express or implied, whereby he

receive any payment or other benefit, whether or not for services rendered dependent or contingent upon the favorable approval of auch application.

A PERSON WHO KNOWINGLY AND INTENTIONALLY FAILS TO MAKE SUCH DISCLOSURE SHAlL BE Gun..TY OF A MISDBMBANOR AS PROVIDED IN GENERAL MUNICIPAL LAW, SECTION 809

lfYBS, state the name and nature and extent of the interest of such individual:

(Name)

(Extent of Interest)

aAA.QCAIIIO Nollly Nile. ..... cl Floltda

CamftiiiDiW FF 117127 .., Clllllll, ..... ctt. ••• ,.

(Residence)

Instructions for Completing

617.20 AppendixB

Short Environmental Assessment Form

Part 1 -Project Information. The applicant or project sponsor is responsible for the completion of Part 1. Responses become part of the application for approval or funding, are subject to public review, and may be subject to further verification. Complete Part l based on information currently available. If additional research or investigation would be needed to fully respond to any item, please answer as thoroughly as possible based on current information.

Complete all items in Part 1. You may also provide any additional information which you believe will be needed by or useful to the lead agency; attach additional pages as necessary to supplement any item.

Part 1 - Project and Sponsor Information

Name of Action or Project:

1024 KEELER

Project Location (describe, and attach a location map):

1024 Keeler Avenue, Mamaroneck, NY 10543

BriefDescription of Proposed Action:

USE VARIANCE FOR MIXED USE

Name of Applicant or Sponsor: Telephone:

ARLENE KEEL and SHARON NEWMAN E-Mail:

Address:

4664 Mill Run Drive

City /PO: State: I Zip Code: New Port Richey FL

1. Does the proposed action only involve the legislative adoption of a plan, local law, ordinance, NO YES administrative rule, or regulation?

[l] D If Yes, attach a narrative description of the intent of the proposed action and the environmental resources that may be affected in the municipality and proceed to Part 2. If no, continue to question 2.

2. Does the proposed action require a permit, approval or funding from any other governmental Agency? NO YES If Yes, list agency(s) name and permit or approval:

[{] D Building Department

3.a. Total acreage of the site of the proposed action? acres b. Total acreage to be physically disturbed? acres c. Total acreage (project site and any contiguous properties) owned

or controlled by the applicant or project sponsor? acres

4. Check all land uses that occur on, adjoining and near the proposed action. DUrban 0 Rural (non-agriculture) D Industrial Ill Commercial 12JResidential (suburban)

DForest 0Agriculture 0Aquatic OOther (specify):

DParkland

Page 1 of4

5. Is the proposed action, NO YES N/A a. A permitted use under the zoning regulations? [Z] D D b. Consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan? D [{] D

6. Is the proposed action consistent with the predominant character of the existing built or natural NO YES landscape? D [Z]

7. Is the site of the proposed action located in, or does it adjoin, a state listed Critical Environmental Area? NO YES IfYes, identify:

[{] D 8. a. Will the proposed action result in a substantial increase in traffic above present levels? NO YES

b. Are public transportation service(s) available at or near the site of the proposed action? [{] D D [l]

c. Are any pedestrian accommodations or bicycle routes available on or near site of the proposed action? D [Z] 9. Does the proposed action meet or exceed the state energy code requirements? NO YES If the proposed action will exceed requirements, describe design features and technologies:

D [Z]

10. Will the proposed action connect to an existing public/private water supply? NO YES

If No, describe method for providing potable water: D [Z]

11. Will the proposed action connect to existing wastewater utilities? NO YES

If No, describe method for providing wastewater treatment: D [Z]

12. a. Does the site contain a structure that is listed on either the State or National Register of Historic NO YES Places? [Z] D

b. Is the proposed action located in an archeological sensitive area?

D [ J 13. a. Does any portion of the site of the proposed action, or lands adjoining the proposed action, contain NO YES

wetlands or other waterbodies regulated by a federal , state or local agency? Iii [ J b. Would the proposed action physically alter, or encroach into, any existing wetland or waterbody? [Z] D If Yes, identify the wetland or waterbody and extent of alterations in square feet or acres :

14. Identify the typical habitat types that occur on, or are likely to be found on the project site. Check all that apply: 0Shoreline 0Forest 0 Agricultural/grasslands DEarly mid-successional

0 Wetland DUrban Ill Suburban

15. Does the site ofthe proposed action contain any species of animal, or associated habitats, listed NO YES by the State or Federal government as threatened or endangered? [Z] D

16. Is the project site located in the 100 year flood plain? NO YES

II' I I I 17. Will the proposed action create storm water discharge, either from point or non-point sources? NO YES If Yes,

DNo DYEs [Z] D a. Will storm water discharges flow to adjacent properties?

b. Will storm water discharges be directed to established conveyance systems Doff and storm drains)? If Yes, briefly describe: NO DYES

Page 2 of4

18. Does the proposed action include construction or other activities that result in the impoundment of NO YES water or other liquids (e.g. retention pond, waste lagoon, dam)?

If Yes, explain purpose and size:

0 D 19. Has the site of the proposed action or an adjoining property been the location of an active or closed NO YES

solid waste management facility? If Yes, describe: 0 D 20. Has the site of the proposed action or an adjoining property been the subject of remediation (ongoing or NO YES

completed) for hazardous waste? If Yes, describe: 0 D I AFFIRM THAT TilEr"' A TION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE AND ACCURATE TO THE BEST OF MY

KNOWLEDGE ~llc /J76,4 Applicant/sponsor name: J. N 0, Attorney Date:-~ _8 2016

Signature: \ y JO ...........

v Part 2- Impact Assessment. The Lead Agency is responsible for the completion of Part 2. Answer all of the following questions in Part 2 using the information contained in Part 1 and other materials submitted by the project sponsor or otherwise available to the reviewer. When answering the questions the reviewer should be guided by the concept "Have my responses been reasonable considering the scale and context of the proposed action?"


1. Will the proposed action create a material conflict with an adopted land use plan or zoning D D regulations?

2. Will the proposed action result in a change in the use or intensity of use ofland? D D 3. Will the proposed action impair the character or quality of the existing community? D D 4. Will the proposed action have an impact on the environmental characteristics that caused the D D establishment of a Critical Environmental Area (CEA)?

5. Will the proposed action result in an adverse change in the existing level of traffic or D D affect existing infrastructure for mass transit, biking or walkway?

6. Will the proposed action cause an increase in the use of energy and it fails to incorporate D D reasonably available energy conservation or renewable energy opportunities?

7. Will the proposed action impact existing: D D a. public I private water supplies?

b. public I private wastewater treatment utilities? D D 8. Will the proposed action impair the character or quality of important historic, archaeological, D D architectural or aesthetic resources?

9. Will the proposed action result in an adverse change to natural resources (e.g., wetlands, D D waterbodies, groundwater, air quality, flora and fauna)?

Page 3 of 4

-. No, or Moderate small to large impact impact may may occur occur

10. Will the proposed action result in an increase in the potential for erosion, flooding or drainage D D problems?

11. Will the proposed action create a hazard to environmental resources or human health? D D Part 3 - Determination of significance. The Lead Agency is responsible for the completion of Part 3. For every question in Part 2 that was answered "moderate to large impact may occur", or ifthere is a need to explain why a particular element of the proposed action may or will not result in a significant adverse environmental impact, please complete Part 3. Part 3 should, in sufficient detail, identify the impact, including any measures or design elements that have been included by the project sponsor to avoid or reduce impacts . Part 3 should also explain how the lead agency determined that the impact may or will not be significant. Each potential impact should be assessed considering its setting, probability of occurring, duration, irreversibility, geographic scope and magnitude. Also consider the potential for short-term, long-term and cumulative impacts.

D

D

Check this box if you have determined, based on the information and analysis above, and any supporting documentation, that the proposed action may result in one or more potentially large or significant adverse impacts and an environmental impact statement is required. Check this box if you have determined, based on the information and analysis above, and any supporting documentation, that the proposed action will not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts.

Name of Lead Agency Date

Print or Type Name of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Title of Responsible Officer

Signature of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Signature ofPreparer (if different from Responsible Officer)

PRINT Page 4 of4

'


---------------------------------------------------------------x

IN THE MATTER OF

ARLENE KEEL f/k/a ARLENE CARUSO and SHARON NEWMAN f/k/a SHARON SCAUZILLO

SEEKING A USE VARIANCE

----------------------------------------------------------------X

HISTORY OF THE PROPERTY

Pursuant to the records available in the Village of Mamaroneck, the

earliest information indicates that the building was built in 1890. Attached hereto

as Exhibit "A" is the property assessment record from both the Town of Rye and

the Village of Mamaroneck which indicates the year built of 1890 and it was listed

as an "apartment and store" and the store is noticed as being in the front of the

building.

The ownership record on the card dates back to 1967 and runs through

1977 when my clients Arlene Caruso and Sharon Scauzillo purchased the property

from Val Enterprises LTD.

The property had been a mixed use property with a store in the front

and residential unit in the upper level of the building since at least 1926. Attached

hereto as Exhibit "B" is a survey from Kamp & Nolte dated July, 1926 which

shows the property and the designation on the building is "store and dwelling".

Since 1926, pursuant to all of the records in the Village of

Mamaroneck this property, it has been classified as a multi-use building. See

property description from 2014, attached hereto as Exhibit "C". The Village of

Mamaroneck assessment classification as recently as 20 14 classified the property

as a mixed use, Class 481. See attached assessment roll as Exhibit "D".

Upon information and belief, a deli or food store has been operating in

the front portion of the building continuously from 1926 through 2014. In 1977,

the applicants purchased the building from Val Enterprises Ltd. and a copy of the

Deed is attached hereto as Exhibit "E". In 1968, the Village ofMamaroneck

adopted a revised zoning code and the property remained in an R-5 zoning district

although the mixed use continued at least until 2014. The mixed use would

constitute a pre-existing non-conforming use under Section 342.64 of the current

Village Code. There are no records of any special permits granted to any

delicatessen operating although the applicants' parents, Anthony and Filomena

Caruso owned and operated the deli from 1974 through 1983 under the name of

"Hogan's Heros". Their daughters, Arleen and Sharon, purchased the property in

1977. Subsequent to 1983, there was a continuous delicatessen operation at the

location and in 2014, this Board granted a special permit to Elizabeth Brandt to

operate a delicatessen. While the application does not specify that it was a pre

existing non-conforming use, the Resolution did state that the operation of the

delicatessen will be "in harmony with the appropriate and orderly development of

the district", that "the use will not hinder or discourage the appropriate

development and use of adjacent land and buildings, the proposed deli will utilize

existing commercial space at the premises previously used as a deli" and that "the

use as set forth will not adversely affect the public health, safety and welfare and

the comfort and convenience of the public in general and the residents of the

neighborhood in particular". A copy of said Resolution is attached hereto as

Exhibit "F".

,_

An updated survey has been provided pursuant to the Rules and

Regulations of the Board of Appeals and that new survey is attached hereto as

Exhibit "G".

Elizabeth Brandt's delicatessen vacated the premises on January 1,

20 15. The commercial premises has been vacant since January 1, 20 15.

The applicants put the premises up for sale in 20 15 and marketed the

property pursuant to its current use as a mixed use building. See attached MLS

listing sheet attached hereto as Exhibit "H". There were some potential

purchasers who were only interested in the property so long as it was a mixed use

building. The most recent interested purchaser wanted to put a bakery in the

commercial space while continuing to rent the residential unit.

While undertaking their due diligence, the purchaser contacted the

Village of Mamaroneck Building Department where they learned that the property

is zoned entirely in the R-5 district and that the pre-existing non-conforming use

had expired as the commercial space had been vacant for more than six ( 6) months

and therefore the only legal use of the property would be exclusively residential.

Applicants could not sell or lease the property in its current

configuration as a mixed use building without obtaining a use variance from the

Zoning Board of Appeals. The present application requests that the Board grant a

use variance for the property at 1024 Keeler Avenue permitting it to continue as a

mixed use building with the commercial space on the first floor front of the

building and the continued residential use in the upper level of the building.

·-


---------------------------------------------------------------x

IN THE MATTER OF



----------------------------------------------------------------X

PAUL J. NOTO, an attorney duly admitted to practice before the

Courts of the State of New York, affirms the following under the penalties of

peiJury:

1. Applicants ARLENE KEEL and SANDRA NEWMAN are

seeking a Use Variance for the mixed used building at 1 024 Keeler A venue,

Mamaroneck, New York. The record reflects a lengthy history of this property

being a mixed use building since 1926. As recently as 2014, the Zoning Board of

Appeals granted a Special Permit for an applicant to operate a delicatessen on the

site which the Board determined would not adversely affect the public health,

safety, welfare and comfort and convenience of the public in general and of the

residents of the neighborhood in particular.

2. Pursuant to Village Law 7712(b) in order to obtain a Use Variance,

the applicant must show that without the variance, they would suffer an

unnecessary hardship. To prove that hardship, the applicant must demonstrate to

the Zoning Board that ( 1) the applicant cannot realize a reasonable return,

provided that the lack of return is substantial as demonstrated by competent

financial evidence and (2) that the alleged hardship related to the property in

question is unique and does not apply to a substantial portion of the district or

1

neighborhood; (3) that the requested variance, if granted, will not alter the

essential character of the neighborhood and (4) that the alleged hardship has not

been self-created.

3. I believe that all of these four ( 4) elements are present and that the

applicant has demonstrated that they meet the threshold for the granting of a use

vanance.

4. Lack of reasonable return- The applicants purchased the property

in 1977. They have owned the property since that time and rented it as a mixed

use building. There is a residential unit on the second floor and commercial space

on the 1st floor which, for at least the last 40 years, has been a delicatessen.

Records indicate that prior to that, there was a store and it not always clear as to

what the nature of the store was. Applicants have attached to their affidavit , a

profit and loss statement showing three (3) sample years including the last two (2)

years that indicate that without the commercial use, they have suffered a

substantial loss in that they cannot generate any additional rent for the commercial

space which is approximately one-half of the building and they are responsible for

100% of the expenses. The singular residential unit is not sufficient to carry the

costs of the premises and they are, therefore, unable to realize a reasonable return.

5. The affidavit from Kathleen Spadaro, the real estate broker, also

corroborates the fact that the marketing of the building without the commercial use

makes it virtually impossible to sell it. The costs of either tearing the building

down and rebuilding a single family home or converting the commercial space to a

residential unit would be somewhat prohibitive given the cost of the land and the

existing building. It would be unfair to impose that hardship on the applicants who

would then be in the position to suffer a loss for their inability to sell the building

as a mixed use, were they limited to the existing zoning which is R-5. The only

2

uses under the applicable zoning ordinance R-5 will not allow the applicant to

realize a reasonable return.

6. This is not a situation where the applicant is seeking a variance

because there are more profitable uses than those permitted. In fact, there is only

one use permitted which is residential and given the nature of the area and the

historic needs of the building, the applicants are unable to realize a reasonable

return were they limited to the existing R-5 use.

7. In the R-5 district, the only permitted uses are one-family

dwellings, places of worship and any municipal use of the Village of Mamaroneck.

None of those, if even applicable here, would give the applicant a reasonable return

on the property.

8. The applicant must also show that the alleged hardship relating to

the property is unique and does not apply to a substantial portion of the district or

neighborhood. See Village Law 7712(B). This is a very unique situation because

the building has a historic use as a mixed use building and this request does not

apply to any other portions of the district and is unique to this parcel as it sits on a

fairly busy road and has always had a store operating in the front with one

residential unit above. Clearly, this hardship does not affect a substantial portion

of the district or neighborhood as it is only unique to this particular piece of

property.

9. Having established the applicants inability to realize a reasonable

return and the unique circumstances, they are also obligated to demonstrate that the

permitted use will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. I believe

that that has already been demonstrated by this Board granting a Special Permit in

2014, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "F" wherein this Board has

already determined that the use will not adversely affect the public health, safety,

welfare and comfort and convenience of the public in general and of the residents

3

of the neighborhood in particular and that the proposed use is conforming with the

neighborhood.

10. Given the lengthy history and the fact that there have been no

complaints about the operation of the delicatessen or any potential impacts it might

have, clearly not only would this not have a negative impact on the neighborhood

but, in fact, it would be an improvement as this commercial use will be up and

running and provide a little more activity in an area that currently has an

abandoned storefront in an R-5 district. The granting of this use variance would

not represent a change at all in the historic use of the property and would permit

the continuation of that historic use.

11. In applicants' affidavit, they explained that they purchased the

property in 1977 with the understanding that it was a legal mixed use building.

Having known the history of the site prior to purchasing the building, they had

also, over the years, had conversations ~th the Building Inspectors and had

obtained Certificates of Compliance for various improvements on the property and

those Certificates of Compliance also corroborated that the property was in

conformance with all existing laws and ordinances of the Village of Mamaroneck.

In 2014, they added a fence and removed and replaced the existing roof, both times

obtaining Certificates of Compliance from William Gerety the Building Inspector

and said Certificates of Compliance make reference to the fact that the Building

Inspector is convinced that the building was operating in compliance with all the

laws, ordinances and regulations effecting the premises. Conversations over the

years with the various building inspectors had led the applicants to believe that the

mixed use was consistent with the existing Zoning Code. The applicants had no

knowledge that the existing use was prohibited and nor would they have had any

reason to suspect it was, given the fact that the property had historically been

utilized in this fashion.

4

12. Having relied on the Certificates of Compliance and assurances

that the use was legal, there would be no reason to suspect that hardship herein was

self-created. All of the improvements they made to the property was to enhance

the mixed use nature of the building.

13. While the burden is high for the granting of a use variance and

use variances are quite rare, in this particular situation, applicants have met their

burden by showing that they cannot realize a reasonable return, that it would be a

hardship were they not able to continue the mixed use, that this is a very unique

circumstance, the use will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood and

the hardship was not self-created.

WHEREFORE, I respectfully request that the Board grant the Use

Variance in its entirety.

Dated: Mamaroneck, New York

February -2l' 2016

5


---------------------------------------------------------------x

IN THE MATTER OF



----------------------------------------------------------------X

STATE OF COUNTY OF

ARLENE KEEL and SHARON NEWMAN, being duly sworn,

depose and say:

We are the owners of the property located at 1 024 Keeler A venue,

Mamaroneck, New York. We purchased the property on May 31, 1977 from Val

Enterprises, Ltd. We were familiar with the property as our parents, Anthony and

Filomena Caruso owned and operated a delicatessen on the site by the name of

Hogan's Heros from 1974 to 1983. As long as we have known that property, it has

always been a mixed use building with a delicatessen and a residential unit above.

We have leased the property since we have owned it and the leases always entailed

a mixed use. On January 1, 20 15, the most recent tenant of the commercial space,

Elizabeth Brandt, vacated the premises and closed the delicatessen. We had

decided it would be appropriate at this time to put the property up for sale and we

listed it with Kathleen Spadado of Spadaro Real Estate for the purposes of selling

the building in its current configuration as a mixed use building.

We had several offers on the property, all were for a mixed use. As

one of the purchasers was undertaking his due diligence, the Building Department

1

advised him that the property was, in fact, rezoned residential in the R-5 zone and

it could not be used as a mixed use building and that it would have to be converted

to exclusively residential in order to be legally utilized in the R-5 district.

We have been advised of the various statutory tests for the granting of

a use variance which will be addressed in our attorney's affirmation attached

hereto.

The fact that according to all the records pertaining to this property

corroborate that this has been a mixed used building since at least 1926, there has

always been a delicatessen or some food service store. A use variance would not

in any way change the character of the neighborhood nor would it have any

negative impact on the neighborhood. In fact, this is a unique situation in that to

be unable to market the property and sell it as a mixed use building would impose

a serious hardship on us.

As you will note from the affidavit from our real estate broker, the

value of the property is in its mixed use, not in its residential component. We have

attached hereto a profit and loss statement from three (3) sample years, 2007, 2014

and 2015. As you can see, in 2007 we had rent of$30,000.00 a year, expenses of

$23,448.00 which rendered a small profit on the operation of the property. That

rent reflects the commercial tenant. In 2014, we received significantly less rent

and we lost money even though the property was rented. In 2015 with no rental

income, we are now subsidizing the property for almost $23,500.00 a year with no

mcome.

Without the commercial option, the property is significantly less

desirable and inhibits our ability to realize a reasonable return for each and every

permissible use of the land which is exclusively residential. Furthermore, were we

to convert the property to entirely residential so as to generate income, we would

2

have to convert the delicatessen space into a residential unit which would be very

expensive and prohibitive for us.

The only use under the existing code would be as a residential use.

Thus far, no purchasers have been willing to purchase the property with that

limitation in place other than an offer of $300,000.00 to tear down the building.

Furthermore, we think that this is a very unique circumstance in that

our application does not apply to a substantial portion of the district or the

neighborhood. It is a very peculiar situation that you have a mixed use building in

an R-5 district. However, it has an historic use as it is on Keeler Avenue which is

a fairly busy street and it has become a fixture in the community as a delicatessen

has been on that site for what we believe to be at least 90 years.

We appreciate the fact that this Board is constrained by the

requirements that the permitted use shall not alter the essential character of the

neighborhood. Clearly, given the fact that this use has been in place for 90 years

with the exception of the last 12 months, the granting of the use variance would not

in any way alter the essential character of the neighborhood. In fact, it would

enhance the neighborhood as our neighbors have been asking when a deli will be

opening in this location and the potential of a new bakery opening up, we believe

is an attractive commercial use which would be a complement to the

neighborhood. The proposed use variance would not, in any way, increase traffic

or pollution as this Board made that very determination in the granting of the

special permit to Elizabeth Brandt in 2014.

The identified hardship herein was not self-created as we purchased

the building when it was a full mixed use. We did not purchase it with the

intention of changing anything. In fact, we purchased the building with the

intention of continuing the mixed use and eventually selling it as a mixed use

building.

3

Given the long history of this property and its mixed use, we would

have had no reason to think that it would not continue. It has always been a

desirable location for a delicatessen or small food operation and we have always

operated it in compliance with Village regulations and codes.

We believe that the granting of the use variance would be appropriate

under the circumstances given the fact that we cannot attain a reasonable return on

the property in the current R-5 configuration. As the Village has always

considered the property a mixed use and historical records corroborates that it has

been a mixed use for at least 90 years, there would be no negative impact on the

neighborhood or surrounding community. Given that we cannot realize a

reasonable return on the land, we respectfully request that our application for a use

variance be granted.

ARLENE KEEL ~ SHARON NEWMAN

4

STATE OF FLORIDA

COUNTY OF f;9 5 t. v . . . .

On FEBRUARY~ 2016 before me, the undersigned personally appeared ARLENE KEEL personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be in the individual whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that she executed the same in her capacity and that by her signature on the instrument, the individual or the person upon behalf of which the individual acted, executed the instrument, an~at such individual made such appearance before the undersigned in u ep! a R I J'Ci r t/ f!o~·dtr ~ /

(insert citv or · 1: • • 1

"" bdivision and state or county or other place acknowledgment taken) KATHLEENL.MCCLAFFERTY Notary Public, State of Aerlda

eommlssionf FF 154231 t.ty comm. expires Sept. 1. 2018

STATE OF FLORIDA

COUNTY OF

. .

. .

On FEBRUARY ~ 2016 before me, the undersigned personally appeared SHARON NEWMAN personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be in the individual whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that she executed the same in her capacity and that by her signature on the instrument, the individual or the person upon behalf of which the individual acted, executed the instrument, and that such individual made such appearance before the undersigned in----------

(insert city or political subdivision and state or county or other place acknowledgment taken)

(Signature and office of individual taking acknowledgment)

5

..

Given the long history of this property and its mixed use, we would

have had no reason to think that it would not continue. It has always been a

desirable location for a delicatessen or small food operation and we have always

operated it in compliance with Village regulations and codes.

We believe that the granting of the use variance would be appropriate

under the circumstances given the fact that we cannot attain a reasonable return on

the property in the current R-5 configuration. As the Village has always

considered the property a mixed use and historical records corroborates that it has

been a mixed use for at least 90 years, there would be no negative impact on the

neighborhood or surrounding community. Given that we c~ot realize a

reasonable return on the land, we respectfully request that our application for a use

variance be granted.

ARLENE KEEL SHARON NEWMAN

4

4

STATE OF FLORIDA

COUNTY OF

:

. .

On FEBRUARY_, 2016 before me, the undersigned personally appeared ARLENE KEEL personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be in the individual whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that she executed the same in her capacity and that by her signature on the instrument, the individual or the person upon behalf of which the individual acted, executed the instrument, and that such individual made such appearance before the undersigned in-------------

(insert city or political subdivision and state or county or other place acknowledgment taken)

STATE OF FLORIDA

COUNTY OF


. .

. .

On FEBRUARY~. 2016 before me, the undersigned personally appeared SHARON NEWMAN personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be in the individual whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that she executed the same in her capacity and that by her signature on the instrument, the individual or the person upon behalf of which the individual acted, executed the instrumlent, and that such individual made such appearance before the undersigned in IL{L'{f l.Jc..~lrtJ-o.m R..\J

~Q fL. 33tf!f1 tot'tAth · ()._ CD~Lls EcaD eM~ (insert city or political subdivision and state or county or other place acknowledgment taken)

BejkeRt KaFaesmaAi _ , "" Notary Public J.\~ State of Florida ~My Commission Expires 10/29/2018

Commission No. FF 172728 Bonded through CNA SURETY


5

1024 Keeler Ave Mamaroneck NY

2007 Expenses Income

Rent received $30,000.00

Expenses

Repairs $3104.00

Insurance $2430.00

Taxes $ 9742.00

Utility $1086.00

Fuel Oil $7086

Total expenses$ 23,448.00

2014

Rent received $20,000.00

Expenses

Insurance $1108

Taxes $16,726.00

Utility $3290.00

Fuel$ 7250

Total Expenses $2, 8374.00

2015

No rental income

Expenses

Repairs $2008.00

Insurance $1183.29

Taxes $11,225.96

Utility $4454.83

$4673.04 (fuel oil)

Total expenses $23545.12


---------------------------------------------------------------X

IN THE MATTER OF

ARLENE KEEL flk/a ARLENE CARUSO and SHARON NEWMAN flk/a SHARON SCAUZILLO


----------------------------------------------------------------X

STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER ss:

KATHLEEN SPADARO, being duly sworn, deposes and says:

I am a licensed New York State realtor with my office located in

Mamaroneck, New York. I have been a realtor in Mamaroneck since 1974. I am

fully familiar with the real estate market and the property in question.

I was hired by Arlene Keel and Sharon Newman to market and sell

the premises known as 1024 Keeler Avenue, Mamaroneck, New York. I did my

research at the Village of Mamaroneck Building Department where I learned that

the property has been classified as a mixed use building since at least 1967

according to the Building Record property card, having had a delicatessen on the

premises since at least 1974, according to other records, and listed as a "store and

apartment" going back to 1926.

I listed the property at $499,000.00 in March of2015 which I thought

was a fair and reasonable listing price based on commercial comps. My listing

sheet is attached hereto as Exhibit "H".

After advertising the property and undertaking a marketing campaign,

I did receive some inquiries from interested parties and the highest offer received

on the mixed use building was $470,000.00.

1

The purchaser did some research and learned that the property is in an

R-5 zone and the pre-existing commercial use had been discontinued and,

therefore, the only use of the property at the current time would be solely

residential. The purchasers then withdrew their offer indicating that they were not

interested in the property unless it was a mixed use building.

Subsequent to that, I have since marketed the property solely as a

residential piece and have received no offers on the property. I believe that given

the fact that there is an existing commercial space, the cost of converting it to

residential would be prohibitive and not cost effective. The other option would be

for someone to purchase the building, tear it down in its entirety and rebuild a

single family house which, given the land costs, would also be prohibitive but not

impossible. I did receive one offer for $300,000.00 for a tear down but the

purchaser wanted it for a mixed use according to the other realtor. People in the

neighborhood have indicated their desire to have a delicatessen or some type of

food store at the premises as there has been one on site for we believe 90 years but

certainly we know for the last 40 years.

As a professional real estate broker in this area and specifically in

Mamaroneck, I can state, that in my opinion, this property will be virtually

impossible to sell at a reasonable return as a sole residential property. Given its

long history and its location on Keeler Avenue, its best use would be as a

· continued mixed use building. I believe that the owners of the property could not

realize a reasonable return on their investment without the granting of a use

variance. I would strongly urge the Board of Appeals to grant the applicants'

request for a use variance on this property so that it can be marketed and sold or

2

rented as an ongoing mixed use building.

PAUL NOTO NOTARY PUBLIC. STATE OF NEW YORK

NO. 4740754 QUALIFIED IN WESTCHESTER COUN~

COMMISSION EXPIRES SEPT. 30, 20 -f..-!

3

' '·

EXHIBIT "A''

~k\1 ft~R . . . .,

PERTY ASSESSMENT RECORD -TOWN 0 I SBL 1.,4. 4* II I I - :!JI "'loA 1- 12. 0 -elass411 ltulll

-t= • . ..!_IC110H llOCIC lOT MAl v ~ OSBL 4-31 -70A School.SS4801 STtlrTI No.

1024 ll'AAlar Ava l'!nt"ft~r_ of .Ja1 1024 KEELER AVE.

4 31 70A 22 OWNII• .Imlap.h.l».l.f'i:L~ rd fa - B:i chaaaa S~MH: • Ui:fe/./JI!.;;t. i~..L. 'rLJ ~~ ' A

. . • P. .... . VAlUIS .......... " ······- "······ "· .... "··· .... " ·····-· lt ........ " ·-·····

LAND . .

IMPIOVIMIMIS

IOTAl

IliON I Oti'JH COINII DIPL AiSISSOI"S IOAIIO Of ... AV. DIPill. ~~ PIICI fACTOI ADJ. I . f. PIICI 101Al

ltlfL SOUND VAWI YAlUI tAl( IIVIIW

{o,gl, ,5'() Ill) It:~,' //)~ ~ ,{",S() 53nJ

. IINTAL INfOIMAliON CONCEINIMG THIS PIOPIIn TOTAl VAUlt lAND

?.r~~ s:>.rl )6~0

Doot. ..... , Sile .. u.. ..... -~··

_..., s.r.Jces lold.. TOTAL YAlUl IUilDING$ ~~~ u..ltt U.llo .... ,_, _ ,_.. fOIAl YAlUI lANO AND IUILOIHGa /~~ ~ 4 /717) 'J"D

IKOIO OP owtlll IIYIHU' MfG. 1ST. SALl Lilli. PAOI DATI If AM'S PIIU

R. Smal~ & Wife 110-20

67 .35 20 .1? nor "7b..n l7b..n

CAPITAUZATION- OIIOIS- Hlf ~c...fl rC' 11. .... .1~ .._..... ...

~.Q.; -4,/~.;Sf:) 17.~ 7~ ~-- ~ ,.4.3

1•11-t..t lllfi•M• c .....

~./N ... ~M~f1~t'"•'-..... "' Grooo A...,.,., 1-• ,s ... ~/ ..5'/.~ ~ S.leri" & w_, Vo-iK

. .,-., 17~ .2.5€ ~ IJ ! ···-- :

._Ms .... , .... a.---.·-PIIMIJS ----· Nell_ ...... _

.J ....... ... .. ....,_lotioa DA.11 f'I'PI COST INSPIC110

• lleclticil• ................ ~ , .... ' l.l rt JU J>. IJ.1 f ... c.~ .

~ ~-\1 • t· Other ...... 1-1 ,. , .... ~ o.,.. . ,. -

c. ........ .a..:

: . TOTAl

s.t .. .I lhla ,_,, or C-•~ Pr.,..tloo

I ~~. Dele ... ,... ...... ,, ... .... _ _ .. , •• &._ .... ~ t

: ..._ .....

~ BUILDING RECORD ·1 10410 01

tAX IEVIIW

OUt ILDG.

MAIM autL61HO CONRauC'hOtl m. I DIMIHSIONS I SQ. JT. I UNIT I . ._. ·-· TOtAl VALUE ..... _,

-$Tilt I

"' n MODliN

__ 1

• -~ • P_AYID - ·-- LIYIL • . - / - WAYII tAHCH ·IYPI

1/ SIMI-IIIU'IOYID 1110" HWII · SPLit UVIL .F ,_, I '

1 • Dtlt \OW GAs · COHYIN110NAL

jllllly I . . . ~ . . . . . IIOIWALI( lotliNO . EUCliiCIJY

T . SW-'-Y ALL UTILiflis / ~

• • • •

EXHIBIT "B"

. .

EXHIBIT "C"

Property Description Report For: 1024 Keeler Ave,

Municipality of Village of Mamaroneck

Total Acreage/Size: Land Assessment: Full Market Value: Equalization Rate: Deed Book: Grid East:

Owners

Newman 9642 Crestview St Seminole FL 34642

Sales

0.12

2014 - $205,400

2014 - $335,400

706781

Caruso Newman 9642 Crestview St Seminole FL 34642

No Sales Information Available

Utilities

Sewer Type: Utilities:

Inventory

Comm/public

Gas&. elec

Overall Eff Year Built: 1974

Overall Grade:

Buildings

Basement AC% SprinlderO/o Alarm% Elevators Type

0 0 0 0 Unfinished

Site Uses

Status: Roll Section: Swis: Tax Map ID #:

Property Class: Site: In Ag. District: Site Property Class: Zoning Code: Neighborhood Code: School District: Total Assessment:

Legal Property Desc: Deed Page: Grid North:

Water Supply:

Overall Condition: Overall Desirability:

Active

Taxable

554803

154.44-1-12

480 - Mult-use bid

COM 1

No

480 - Mult-use bid

OS 00099

Rye Neck

2014 - $335,400

773712

Co.mm/public

0

0

Gross Floor Year Built Condition Quality Area (sqft) Stories 1974 Normal Average- 2016 2.00

Use Rentable Area (sqft) Total Units

Improvements

Structure Size Grade Condition Year

Land Types

Type Size

Primary 5,176 sq ft

Special Districts for 2014

Description Units Percent Value

CS483-Mamk v sewer 0 0% $335,400

SW481-Solid waste 0 0% $335,400

Exemptions

Year Description Amount Exempt 0/o Start Yr End Yr VFiag H Code Own °/o

Taxes

Year Description Amount

*Taxes may not reflect exemptions or changes in assessment

EXHIBIT "D"

.. ' M

·-· '" c

.::

.... ""

t ·~

"' > z r. > <

~ ..•

> <

.~. ... ... , .. iSS§~

_, .,. 'JO

! -i

J ~ ! .:... i

..::. .,~ .......

~~~~ .... ·~ '""'

~·~ -~3

RFV · Property Type Classification Codes Section APP· B

400 COMMERCIAL (cont.)

4 70 Miscellaneous Services

4 71 Funeral Homes

4 72 Dog Kennels. Veterinary Clinics

4 73 Greenhouses

474 Billboards

475 Junkyards

480 Multiple Use or Multipurpose

Assessor's Manual

A building readily adaptable, with little physical change, for more than one use or purpose.

481 Downtown Row Type (with common wall) Usually a two or three story older structure with retail sales/services on the first floor and offices and/or apartments on the upper floors; little or no on·site parking.

482 Downtown Row Type (detached) The same type of use as in code 481, above, but this is a separate structure without party walls.

483 Converted Residence A building usually located in a residential area, which has been partially converted or adapted for office space (e.g., a doctor's or dentist's office with an apartment upstairs).

484 One Story Small Structure Usually a modern, one occupant, building adaptable for several uses (e.g., retail clothing store, small office, warehouse, pet shop, etc).

PAGE 12.00 DATE 9/01/06

_. ' , .

EXHIBIT "E"

! I I

i j

i, ! l i I

i; ! I I

I

l: l i

ttkll7395 f~t256 l Rim 1Ut\ \IUl \1111 m\1 \0\\11\ UIU lli\ '"\\11\

woll9H15~*

tt~at~• tr; ;\ tl l J.'. t ...... -.c. :e-e ......... M Wr ,.,. uri: C~•l.&f&lwr4r.ru.n ot '~ .b.11o · • ll f~Mtlwu•l·,•r-~•tC :11110'.._..)

COMIILT \'Oft I.AWrH -.ciU 1S.WIIC. ftiTt IIIUliiNINI • 'nlll 11111lW111TSliCIDl.l nlnn ft I.AWYIH 011\.' ' ,,

nusiHDEJCTUR£, mo~ the 3J dby ol M!iy '111!\t' ICI'Il hw. ... ~r.,O ;,.II<!. lle•renty-&eV~!I

BE'rh"EEN VAL ENTEJU>RlSES I..'l'O, a dQllleatie cor~ratlon, having its office .l!nd principal plac@ of businoas at ll4:Q Jensen A\•enuc, Mamar~neok. New York

twl.l' of lht,ir~ 1ort,..W. SIIAMN SCAUz:tr.I.O and ARLENE CARUSO, both resi.dinq at 42l Manhattan AVQnue, Baw~~rne, Mew York

"'"' ot the ~ part, WlTNESSEn«. r"attho p.ulr uf lh.! lr" p.trl , in cORdcltrati(lll of t;on •JoiiL4n.lll•1 •tlt..r valu.'lbk con;I.J.:.-tirlt1 p~irt t>,. the f*t!)' toltht S«mulp.ll1, clots hcrc:bf l(l';ftt 01100 rtltUf tmlo ~~~ fl3tny uf t !•c srror.d part, ~~ !l~ir• nr tll«''""'-""' arld ; -.i.:n• of :1~ ]>arty"'' thr lf('tll"til l""' fuot\..,r,

ALL that c..rtcln pl!ot , p~ <>t parct•l uf Wld, .,•kl\ ~~ lllliltl!nl:l ~•111 i•lpruVf'ftW'~h lt.cncNt Kmrci, lft~&a~•, l,yin~:arulbelflrinth~Town <:>f .1\y~, Vlllage of !ola.nlarcnocY., COunty of

Wcstcheat~r ana Stat~ o! ~ew Yor~, known and deeig~~ted a~ part of Lot. No. 3 on a certain map cmtitlec1, •Map Of land in tb(; 'l'own of Tl.ye, Westch~ster COunty, !few Yorlt, formerly ltnO!i.'Il as Keeler Place and belo~qing to Prcdarick Lorenken•, surveyed in o.,cetnber 18.84, by Horace Crosby, Civil Bnginee:r and fllgd in th: county Clerk's Office, Divislon of Land Rocords, formor:ly Reqiatet' s Office o1' Weatchast•r Co ~Ant~· • Ne-., York, January 12, 1885, aa Kap No, 2$8, whiah 5a1d portion of lot No. 3 on said ~P ia more p~rt!cularly bounded and des~r!bod e11 follows:

B2C!lffiiNG at the ccrne~ !ormed by the inters@Ction of the Nor~~r:ly side of Reeler Avenue with the W~sterly side o~ Jensen Avenucr

RU!I:NING th•:mce •long 1M1ld :si~D cf Jensen Avenue, Nort.h 17 degxecs 16' .West 100 f~t tu Lot No. 4 on s~td ~PJ

RU~~ING t~ence elong aa1d Lot No. 4, south 72 de9roes 4~' '~~st 50 Feetl

RUIIll'llNG thonce through. Lot No. 3 and pllrallel wit:l-, sold elcle of Jensen ~venue, So~th 17 degrooc 15' east 101.27 feet to a point on the ~ox~h.erly aid~ of Keeler ~venuer

RUM~ING thence along said ~ide of keeler Av•n~e, North 71 degrees 16' JO~ taat 50.02 fGet to tbe point or pl•~e of JmGn!NING.

Also tnown on the official tax ~ap of the TOwn o! Ryo, Villa~e o! Mamaroneok as Section 4, Block 31, Lot 7CA,

t"OGETJIP.R ,.·jth .1ll :if;llt, ti(lc and lott...-..t, if aay, 11f th.· ].:111)· ul I~ ftnt put ln anti tn ~'"" !>lrtl'l$ ond ..... rt~ .JitUI!IIIR the a!:ou~f •le...'t'ibnlpt(nli!.rS Ill II"' ""'"r llt~eo tltor...-1 ; Ttlt.~I ·:TIU~ I-C ,.-ith tllo• oi'1i0Ja1m.l1>d oll 11w •~tall· :.11<1 rll(l>l~ .. 1 tllr p.l1l,Y ul !!It• lln.t portia :m;J tu ;;Jitl f•mot~~: TO HA\'1;: 1\-:ofll TO HOLD '"" ('rcml~~ lwrnu ~r•nl.-.l 1•r.tLt thr pal"!.)' <JI 1hto '"'"''<! 1-"UI, llw hrln CJr "'-'"t'U"!'JI'' o.rul ~ s-;1!;'11' of lit<- ~tty Gf lhr !oei'Ond 1"'11 !oc~.

A !olD lhr p:arty of tht fi~ l"'rt ..,,•nanll lt~t the p:rtt~· of tflt: lir.t pilrt ha~ *" ,.J~ I)( sllfl"trl...! a>l)"!hl~ "''~l'('hf dKo .at.lfmnhh havt lot.t1 tiiUiftlbtr•<! in L'l)' my .. h:U<'Wr, I'X<'t')lt a' ;~~m-s~ilt. A~'ll llw jJ<Irl)' ol ltlt Ar.t ,...,.1, in ro>m:•lhtl<l' ll'ith N-.:liun IJ uf !lw 1-lt!n !.all', Ul\"l'llllnl9 tlut 1h~ 1o..r1~ (If the 1\..st pi.rt wi!l r"-..i"" lhr <on~W•·ro.l~'<l ~or lhi• rut i>'UQilC<' 'nd •·lll IILioltilf rll(ht tu ro••'' 'l' st!<h u,.,.,.,_ uatl..b •• it tru.t hmd ttl ~ t['i~l\~l [!":')! fllf lhll' purpu.._.".,f J""')"WIIi: !lw ruoll nf th• iM)Ifol\"l"ftlt:T.I<II •.! wl:l oii1~)" tl11· "'tnt' flro.t teo 11M: paym....t tof lhl- «<>lof ttl• i"'l,..,,,. • .,,.nl 'hco fnr., Mit ;my ~rl ''' !l~e t«~•ll "i 11~ <."lt11t' I<>~' ... , 4<!1-ttr pu~.

Tbf.o Y.1>td "p;trf)'" wll bot Cutt>lntn! ~' iF lt ~ad ''p;.rli .... ~ fo"hl1>l'Wf lilt -><" ut !hi' inUelllllt( '$:.1 tt'{JIIit ....

JN. WITMES! WHII'!REOF, tltc 1"'11¥ of ~~ .;,., part t.;o, duly ""'""'eel lhi> ~ 11to t.br•n·l yr.v !iu ~ awrwntl••a.

..

• I

I

l I

I

•

• I

I

I

•

LL'!l1liuutUI &u.lt iltrb WIT II U.n.>oA.'\ r ,'\cu a:ocn liRA"-1\Jit'J Acta

Tlfl.t PIO_._(._?J.." '? n ".} L..

VAL l'JNT!SRI>f<ISBS LTD. TO

Ill~~~ CIM I llm!AIG ... um: &ta IUS'la~s.•

•

LLw, 7395 fact 25 7 ITAlY ~ IIIW YOU. COtllln' Of II:

Oo 11ft cby of prrloOrllllr cam,. the lollbJ(rlbinll' witn•~' ltl lh~ furq:t.-lrc irl•tJcnne~. with w.iloun I 1111 Pf'UDNIIy Mqllllnttd, who. bf.iaa 1., ...... duly • ..,Ill, did dtpo)te 1M ~ that "" rnill.s at No.

' 31

LOT 70!\

~To~ of Rya VillatJe of "*b!;ll.. c g l ·

.-.~ .. " ~-., CJUIOAGo nru: t,."KJUN<".& r.o~~tANr

~,. A.L'r!ltt. If S5J 1~41 I! :d:.-.1 orl 1\Jr ll J., : ~\ ~ ... t.t .. ..,.,C:l~~ N .. y I•S"Y J

Zip-

• "!'!it ~l'fllll'r.o tlslnmenf • endorsed far rae6rd Ia Yc.t llllll51'fftY ·~ t!y I!W. ill£lnlma!lt " clcta klllll •

'l'On OP .RYE ~ol~!l"1 tL'f.Atrl.!llCDP~ofllll..._,lll4ll '' ,

~ In ~ Olvl$~ lleoords of tilt Co!riy ~ Offlcle of ~ Coully 111 JU!iJ 6 t 1977 at 3£211- P N In Uiler 739S Pl!il 25"6 If Qllds.

~MIW 111J li..ll ..u &oiiiOo* Iiiii ~JI ~ 'Y"""-CJ «~large R. Mlmw b1ly Olerit

.

_. " • •

EXHIBIT "F"

SCANNED AT A MEETING OF THE ZONING BOA

1 • • 'F APPEALS OF THE VILLAGE OF

MAMARONECK, HELD ON MARCH ;6, 2 · ~ THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED:

0. SSJ)-2014

Name: Elizabeth Brandt Premises: 1 024 Keeler A venue

R-5

• I . : . ' h ., District: I ..

I -: ~ • I

I Section 4, Block 31, Lot 70A -<:g.

1 c~ ~ f -;:c _.. ..-.

WHEREAS, Elizabeth Brandt ("Applio 1t") has applied to this Board for a~p'§iaF.

permit to operate a delicatessen ("deli") at 1024JKeeler Avenue ("Premises") within a~-5~ District, pursuant to Article X Chapter 342 (Zp~ing) of the Code of the Village of ~ Mamaroneck; and 1

WHEREAS, delis have previous!~ b~do perated at the Premises; and I , ' I

WHEREAS, after due notice, thi~fBo 1held a public hearing on such application on March 6, 2014, at which time it heard· all p ies and received their evidence and proofs; and the public hearing having been clclse~; nd members of this Board having made personal inspection of the Premises and b~ing , miliar therewith; and

WHEREAS, after duly considering all U e proofs and evidence before it, this Board finds as follows: '

I

1. The location and size of the u 1the nature and intensity of the operation, and the traffic involved in or conducted in con btion with it, the size of the site in relation to it, and the location of the site with resp9 to the type, arrangement, and capacity of streets giving access to it, are such thaUhe us~', as set forth by the Applicant, will be in harmony with the appropriate and orderly development of the district in which it is located.

I

. I 2. The location, nature, and heiB,n jof buildings, walls and fences, and the

nature and extent of the landscaping and scre~llfpg on the site, as existing or proposed, are such that the use will not hinder or dis'cou~~ ·~ the appropriate development and use of adjacent land and buildings. The proposed ~eJ ,

1ill utilize existing commercial space at the Premises, previously used as a deli. ~ ;•! I • • •

II 3. The operation in connecti~J! wif the usc, as set forth by the Applicant, will

not be objectionable by reason of noise, 'fumes, smoke, dust, vibration, glare, intensity, or flashing lights. , l 1

.) . I i 4. The use, as set forth by the'I· .Applicant, will not adversely affect the public

health, safety and welfare, and the comfor'umd convenience ofthe public in general, and of the residents of the neighborhood in particJr'aV.

l ,

5. The application is in ~omplia~1ce with special permit standards and requirements as set forth in Sections 342-45 nd 342-71 of the Code of the Village of

I J l

:x . :~·. rr c:: c: ..~-rr·

~. <. ~:r. .-- r-·

t ' : : . ~ ~

: I . I I

Mamaroneck. · · ~: . ! I i i

6. The Applicant is entitled ~ to ,~ granting of the special permit under the circwnstances of this application. 1; ;; !·. :q1 !

. ' ' ' ; '• I ' .. ; . ~ .. l t • NOW THEREFORE, on motioni~~ ~eprin, and seconded by Ms. Kramer:

BE IT RESOLVED, this Board ~ds :Jh~t the within application is a Type II action

~o~:' to review under the State ~rffttal Quality Review Act {SEQRA}, and it

. . . ~ I RESOLVED, that in accordance With ~e vote of this Board taken on March 6,

2014 that the application for such special ·pe~itjis hereby granted, subject to the following conditions: Y i i

;: II

A. That the special permit ~~ herein shall be valid for an initial probationary period of three (3) years beiJ.fhing March 6, 2014, with the renewal application having to be made by Appli~\PO less than four (4) months prior to the expiration date; and, upon the Applicant's ~-~re to make said renewal application, the special permit granted herein shall expire wi* ;t further notic~ to the Applicant.

I ~ C

B. That the special permit is .g~~~ to the Applicant and shall expire upon a transfer of ownership or a change in the use ~~~~e Premises.

C. That any work done hereunder ~~~~~~ be in strict compliance with the plans as filed with this application, except as expresslY modified by the conditions herein or as approved by the Building Inspector. · ·. ;'

D. That the granting of this : app~~tion shall not be deemed to relieve the Applicant of the need to obtain approval ~Qf B!JY ;~ther board or agency or officer prescribed by law or ordinance with regard to the· pl~ wr construction or any other phase of the proposed project. ; ;;i;i r .

. • 'I, ~ f • J" I

E. That the Applicant shalt j :p ~ a building pennit from the Building Department within one (I) year where .pee . · 1 to comply with federal, state, or local codes, laws, regulations or requirementS an( J work shall be completed within one (1) year from the date of the building permit, 9. rwise this application is denied; and any request for extending the time within whjcp ~~qbtain said building permit shall be filed no less than sixty ( 60) days prior to the expif.dU9ri::dr the one (1) year J1Ctiod.

,. I ~ t . . ' ' ~

F. The hours of operation slij.b b~~do greater than betw~n the hours of 5:30 a.m. to 5:30p.m. Monday through Sunday. · ··.~ ~ I

':':£· ·· : '

•

I

G. That the failure to observe anq P;erform any of these conditions shall render this pennit invalid.

In favor: Opposed: Absent:

' ' ti

Gutterman, Kramer, ~ullivan, Weprin None i'' · t

Neufeld 11/ ' !·~ ; ~

'•

I ,

I I i

. . .

Dated: March 6, 2014 Mamaroneck, N.Y.

a , i !;f : ··' · ,. , , · , : .. _, .

. ' ~ . : , I

.. ... .. . :. 1, 1

. , 1 ~+ '1'

G. Secretary

EXHIBIT "G"

122 Jen1«1 Avenue N/F VIto lombertl SBL 154.44-1-13

nod Mop Lot 4

N 72"44'00" E 50.00'

io "! 0 Wood Fence

8 8.9' g __1,.,,._.::.:::....--a

1020 KMI« Awnue N/F John Gatuft SBL 154.44-1-11

o.f

z

0.~

o.f

3 .!

16.4'

....

·~~:\. · .... . ·: ..

. .. 4 • •

• 'I .• ~

·. : .. ...

Rlc:hQrd J . Spinel!~ L~ Lie:. 50975

-Unauthorized oddltlono to or alterations of thlo pion lo o violation of Section 7209 of the N. Y.S. Education Low.

AC ,..-un1to

0

ill!

1 Story

____ _.

2 1/2 Story

frame BuUding

1 Story

·.ol .. l

50.02' .

KEELER AVENUE

0 -- 15

6.1'

.. ... ·

. 0 0

"' z

30

I

Surveyed r ebruo.ry 9~ 2016 Mo.p Dro.wn reDruo.ry 1e, 2016

. , • t

EXHIBIT "H"

•

Cross Property Agent Full

Current Use: Building Class: Elevator: Ceiling Height: Elec Co: Elevator Type: Parking: Traffic Count:

Food Services Invest Prop?: Yes

No Sprinkler: Grs Lse Area: 672

Con-Edison Aoor Num:

2 Car Detached

MLS# : 4510981 Addr: 1024 Keeler Avenue PO: Mamaroneck Clty/Town:Rye Town Village : Mamaroneck

COM Type :Retail Tran Type:Sale

List Price: $499,000

County: Zip : Hamlet/Lac:

Westchester County 10543-2935

SubType: Free Standing Bulldlnt Complex:

Bldg Size: 2,016 Levels: 2.00 Sqft/Av Spc: 2,016

Lot Size: 0.1188 Acres Zoning : R-5

Bus Desc: Apartment • Store

Permit Use : Food Services, Other/See Remarils, Residential Street Type : Public #Ttl Units: 2 Wkend Svc: # Res Units: 1 Yr Bit: 1890 1 Estimated Yr Renovated: Elec Amps: # Bldgs: 1 Elec Phase: Single Phase #Docks: Elec Volts: 120/220 Volts # Dv/Grd Drs: Ovrhd Dr Hgt:

Tax ID#: 4803-154-000-00044-001-0012-GOOOOOOAssum Mort: Tot Inc Yr: Tax : $10,900 Tax Year: 2014 Assmt: $328,600 Tot Exp Yr: Cap Rate: Grs Rent Mult: Ann Bus Inc: Ann Rent Inc:

Inc/Exp Info: Eff Gross Inc: Grs Op Inc: Financial Year: Debt Info: Loan Info: Net Op Inc: Net Op Inc: Pre-Tax Csh Aw: Due In: Interest Rate: Ann Debt Svc: Amortized Over: Net Lse Invest: Down Paymnt: Occupancy : 50 Tenancy: Multiple Price Confld: Utilities: Elec:tridty I Power available

Amenities: Includes: Excludes: Heat Zones/Type : 1/Base Board A/C: Window Units Garbage: Plumbing : Construction: Lot Description: Location Desc:

Remarks

Frame Comer Lot First Floor

Prp On Grd Ls :

Fuel : Water: Sewer: Hotwater: Gas Avail:

Oil Above Ground Munldpal Munldpal Gas Stand Alone

Parking Ratio:

Multiple-use Building with high visibility and plenty of traffic. Located on the comer of Keeler and Jensen Ave., just blocks from the schools. This converted Colonial Style house consists of a neighborhood Dell on the first floor with approximately 700 SF, and a large 2 bedroom apartment on the 2nd floor. Great opportunity for owner occupant with small business-work without leaving home! Assessement Property Class 480/Multl-use bldg. -Current area zoning Is R-5. Agent Only Remarks VIllage of Mam"k AV = $10,200

Show Instr: Call Centralized Showing Service 1·866-642-1222-can show storefront anytime, apt after 4 on weekdays Access for Show: Combo Lockbox Improvements : Directions: Between Boston Post Road and Harrison Avenve on comer of Jensen

Appt Ph : Owner: LA: LA Email : LO: CLA: CLA Email : CLO : SA :

866-642-1222 N-man/Newman Caruso (7276) Kathleen Spadaro [email protected] (SPADAR) Spadaro Real Estate, Ltd.

0% BA : 2%

Appt Ph 2: REO: LA Ph :

LO Ph : CLA Ph:

CLO Ph : BRA:

DOM: Org Price:

(914} 646-3202 Mod/Excl: Ust Dt:

(914) 698-1017 Expire Dt: Agr Type : Neg Thru: $/SqFt:

2% TOM Dt: OM Date :

26 $499,000 NONE 03/30/2015 06/30/2015 EA Listing Agent $247.52

Prepared By: Kathleen Spadaro Date Printed: 04/25/2015

© Copyright 2015 Hudson Gateway Multiple Listing Service, Inc. Data believed accurate but not warranted.

•

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE

•

VILLAGE OF

OFFICE OF THE

BUILDING INSPECTOR

' . Address Reply to:

P.O. Bex 369

MAMARONECK

Telephone

(914)777-7731

CERTIFICATE 0 COMPLIANCE

No. 15452 DATE: l/9/2014

' THIS CERTIFIES that the building located at 1 024 Keeler Avenue, Tax Map # 4-31-70A of the Village of Mamaroneck, conforms substantially te the approved plans and specifications heretofore filed in this office, pursuant to which B11ilding Permit No. 15452 dated 6/4/1979 was issued and conforms to all of the requirements of tpe Zoning Ordinance or Special Ruling by the Zoning Board of Appeals or Village Board of Trustees. The use for which this certificate is issued is:

addition fence

This certificate is issued to Sharon Newman, o'1er of the afor~said property.

ll I

Building Inspector

(The Certificate of Compliance will be issued only nfier the Building Inspector is convinced of the completion of the construction in compliance with State Uniform Ouilding & Fire l'rcvention C ' c und with other laws, ordinances, or regulations affecting the t~tcmises. and in conformity with the approved plans ond specifications. A final electrical and plumbing certificnfe or other evidence of compliance will be required before the issuance of the Certificate of Compliance.)

THE FRIENDLY VILLAGE

•

VILLAGE OF MAMARONECK

.~

Village ~all Mamaroneck, .Y. 10543

l OFFICE OF TI-lE

BUILDING INSPECTOR Address Reply to: Telephone

(914) 777-7731 P.O. Box369

4'

CERTIFICATE OFjCOMPLIANCE

No. 10-0184 i~ DATE: 1/9/2014

THIS CERTIFIES that the building located at lp EELER AV, Tax Map# 4-31-70A of the Village of Mamaroneck, conforms substantiall lbc approved plans and specifications heretofore filed in this office, pursuant to whicli uilding Permit No. I 0-0184 dated 4/15/20 I 0 was issued and conforms to all of the rcquircmen of the Zoning Ordinance or Special Ruling by the Zoning Board of Appeals or Village Board oM"r;ustccs. The usc for which this certificate is issued is:

remove and replace existing roof, npproxl tely 16 squares

(The CertiRcate of Compliance will be issued only aficr the llull in compli:mce with State Uniform Building &. Fire Prevention (l prcmis~. lllld in conformity with the approved plnns au1d spec[ evidence of compliance will be required hcforc the issuuucc ott

Building Inspector

ri' Inspector Is convinced of the completion of the construction ~and with other law~ ordinances. or rei:" lations affecting the

tiOhs. A 11nPI electrical nnd plumbing ccrtilieJ~Ie or olhcr dnlficolc nfC111nplionce.) I


IN THE MATTER OF

. '

ARLENE KEEL flk/a ARLENE CARUSO and SHARON NEWMAN f!k/a SHARON SCAUZILLO


PREMISES KNOWN AS: 1024 KEELER A VENUE, MAMARONECK, NY

HISTORY OF THE PROPERTY, AFFIRMATION OF PAUL J. NOTO, AFFIDAVIT OF ARLENE KEEL and SHARON NEWMAN, AFFIDAVIT OF

KATHLEEN SPADARO

PAUL J. NOTO, PLLC 650 Halstead Avenue- Suite 105

Mamaroneck, New York 10543 914-698-9331

FAX 914-698-2148

PURSUANT TO 22 NYCRR 130-1.1, THE UNDERSIGNED, AN ATTORNEY ADMITTED TO PRACTICE IN THE COURTS OF NEW YORK STATE, CERTIFIES THAT, UPON INFORMATION AND BELIEF AND REASONABLE INQUIRY, THE CONTENTIONS CONTAINED IN THE ANNEXED DOCUMENT ARE NOT FRIVOLOUS.

Dated: MARCH 8, 2016 Signature ___ ----:=-:-=-=--=-~===------PAULJ.NOTO

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE: NOTICE OF ENTRY: That the within is a (certified) true copy of the of Hon. and entered in the office of the Clerk of the within named Court on

NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT:

filed '2016.

That the settlement to HON. 2016 at 9:30 A.M.

of which the within is a true copy will be presented for one of the judges of the within named Court on

Dated: Mamaroneck, New York PAUL J. NOTO, PLLC 650 Halstead Avenue- Suite 105 Mamaroneck, New York 10543

Village of Mamaroneck Zoning Board of Appeals Agenda

Documents

Transcript of Village of Mamaroneck Zoning Board of Appeals Agenda