Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Variance Denial topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
ZBA denies Carroll Avenue variance; board cites front‑yard parking and increased impervious coverage
Summary
The Zoning Board of Appeals voted unanimously Dec. 5 to deny area variances for a Carroll Avenue property, concluding the proposal would allow parking in the front yard and increase impervious coverage over the village limit, harming neighborhood character and physical conditions.
The Village of Mamaroneck Zoning Board of Appeals voted Dec. 5 to deny area variances for a Carroll Avenue property after members concluded the proposal would permit parking directly in the front yard and worsen impervious coverage beyond the village standard.
Board discussion focused on two central concerns: the placement of parking in the front yard directly in front of the house and a measurable increase in impervious surface coverage. The board’s draft resolution, discussed in detail at the meeting, described how the proposed changes would remove vegetated garden space and replace it with pavement, producing a paved area in front of the house used for parking.
One board member summarized the concern: using the front yard for parking “would result in the total paved area of 22.5 feet” in front of the house and would place parked vehicles adjacent to the front entrance. The board also reviewed numeric coverage figures in the application and supporting materials: the parcel already exceeds the village maximum (existing impervious coverage reported at about 64.6 percent) and the applicant’s proposal would increase coverage to roughly 66.8 percent; the board characterized any increase on an already nonconforming lot as substantial.
Members discussed alternatives and precedent, noting a nearby property that the applicant pointed to as a comparable case but concluding that the circumstances were not analogous because that other property lacks garage or rear access. The board also debated public-safety concerns related to stacking cars in front yards and emergency access, and noted the visual and physical impacts of converting vegetated areas to paved surfaces.
Following discussion on specific wording in the draft resolution, a motion to deny the requested area variances was moved, seconded and approved in a recorded vote. The board found the proposal was an undesirable change to neighborhood character and would have a substantial adverse impact on physical and environmental conditions in the area.
The denial was adopted by a roll-call vote recorded in the minutes.
