The Mount Vernon Zoning Board of Appeals on April 15 heard testimony and public comment on an application seeking a use variance and area variances to add a second floor to an existing single‑family home located in a Commercial Business (CB) zone near Sanford Boulevard; the board declared itself lead agency under SEQRA and will wait for a required county planning review before acting on the variances.

The applicant, owner Jamir Haywood, is represented by architect Ebrahim Greenridge, who told the board the project “started 3 years ago” and that the proposal is intended to keep the property as a single‑family residence while adding a bedroom, a walk‑in closet, a full bathroom and a covered porch on a modest lot. Greenridge said the plan focuses the work on the second floor and limits first‑floor work to stair adjustments.

Board members and staff highlighted zoning and parking questions that remain unresolved. The application package says the lot frontage standard is 75 feet and lists a proposed frontage of 26.32 feet and a 65% variance (figures provided in the application materials). Board members repeatedly asked whether the property’s status as a preexisting nonconforming single‑family use in a CB zone properly covers the proposed addition and whether the change triggers off‑street parking requirements that would normally apply to residences.

Neighbors and nearby property owners raised concerns at the public hearing about the effect of the addition on light, sightlines, construction staging and drainage. Lloyd Suden, who said he is the mother of one occupant of a nearby address, told the board, “we're concerned that when you guys go up, we'll block the whole view.” Nando Svensson, who said he owns the restaurant at 151 Sanford Boulevard adjacent to the site, asked for assurances about construction access, pest control and drainage and requested a clear staging plan and schedule so activity on his property can be coordinated. Svensson said drainage already causes basement flooding at his building and asked that roof and site drains be routed away from the restaurant.

Board members suggested possible design changes to minimize rear massing visible from adjacent homes; one board member asked the architect to consider stepping back portions of the rear addition or reducing the size of the proposed bathroom to lessen the appearance of a vertical wall at the property line. Greenridge said he would “do my best” to explore changes but noted the applicant has already invested time and funds and that producing revised plans would require additional work.

City staff and board members also discussed procedure and interdepartmental review. The application was circulated to the fire department, police, water bureau, DPW and city engineers for comment, and the board noted it has received no substantive comments from those departments in the record. A board member asked staff to draft a memo to department heads asking for consistent sign‑offs on zoning referrals; staff said the city’s new unified permitting system should make such coordination easier going forward.

At the meeting the board accepted the March 18 minutes (vote recorded as 4‑0) and later voted to declare the board lead agency for SEQRA on this unlisted action, a step that begins a 30‑day notice/coordination period and triggers the required referral to the Westchester County Planning Board because the property lies within the county planning referral distance to the Bronx boundary. Because of that intergovernmental referral the board did not grant or deny the requested variances and left the public hearing open pending county review and any applicant revisions. The board said it would expect the applicant to submit a construction staging plan and contact information for neighbors prior to any work if the variance is ultimately approved.

Next steps: the board will circulate SEQRA notice and await the county planning response; applicants and staff indicated the architect may provide revised drawings or a 3‑D depiction to clarify sightline impacts for the board to review. The board also said a construction staging and access plan could be required as a condition of approval to address neighbors’ concerns about access, pest control and drainage.