Zoning board approves second-story addition at 335 6th Avenue; contractor and engineer confirm demolition rules

The Pelham Zoning Board approved an area-variance application for 335 6th Avenue on June 26, allowing the homeowner to add a second story above an existing one-story footprint to create an additional bedroom.

The engineer of record, Michael Mesdrejak, told the board the project would not expand the building’s horizontal footprint and that the second-floor addition would follow the existing face of the house. He argued that the change would not be an undesirable alteration to the neighborhood because the one-story structure already sits 11 feet from the front property line and the proposal primarily adds vertical volume rather than additional setback intrusion.

Why it matters: The application affects neighborhood scale and demolition safety. Neighbors asked whether the project had been evaluated for demolition hazards, including asbestos and lead; the contractor, Frank Delponte (KO Construction), and the Chair confirmed that state requirements for hazardous-material removal and worker safety would apply and must be followed before any interior demolition.

Board discussion focused on alternatives and compatibility. Board members said the applicant had considered pushing the second-floor element back slightly to reduce visual bulk but that a two-foot shift would create an awkward facade; several members said the proposed design struck an acceptable balance between preserving the house’s character and providing additional living space. A neighbor raised concerns about debris and airborne hazards during demolition; the contractor said most work would be limited to interior areas and that any demolition would adhere to state removal and disposal standards.

Vote and conditions: A board member moved to approve and another seconded; the board voted in favor. The Chair reminded the applicant that building must commence within the normal permit timeline (the board mentioned a typical 60-day commencement condition) and that any asbestos or lead handling must comply with state law and be managed by qualified contractors.

Authorities and clarifications: The record includes discussion that the site is a preexisting nonconforming structure; the board discussed how vertical additions change the degree of nonconformity but do not necessarily enlarge horizontal setback intrusion. The contractor confirmed that exterior siding would generally be installed over existing surfaces and that full interior demolition would be limited and handled under state requirements.

The board approved the variance and advised the applicant to proceed with permitting and with appropriate demolition and environmental safeguards.