Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Residential Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Applicant says flood risk, utilities drove garage variance request for 216 Union Avenue
Summary
At a March 6 ZBA continuation hearing, homeowner-applicant Craig Langus said updated surveys and an impervious-surface calculation support a proposed garage and porch changes to move utilities above historic flood levels; neighbors and board members pressed on front-yard proximity and the size of the requested variance.
Craig Langus, the applicant for 216 Union Avenue, told the Village of Mamaroneck Zoning Board of Appeals on March 6 that he updated the property survey and added an impervious-surface calculation and that the proposed garage location responds to repeated flooding and the need to place utilities above potential flood levels. "When the flood happened, I lost my boiler and my furnace," Langus said, describing flooding during Hurricane Ida and his intent to move heating and electrical equipment out of the basement.
Langus said the house, built about 1900, sits on an angled lot and is rotated relative to property lines; that geometry, he said, forces a small triangular portion of the new detached/attached garage to encroach into the side-yard setback. He told the board his contractor measured the nonconforming triangular area as roughly four feet at the face and estimated the intrusion in square footage as modest; a board member later noted a variance request of about 36.8 percent.
Board members asked detailed questions about alternatives Langus had considered, including a smaller garage, moving utilities into the basement, and whether an open porch could reduce the front-yard impact. Langus said the basement is shallow and floods and that elevating critical equipment into the proposed garage or an above-grade space is the most practical mitigation. "The basement has flooding issues during the last big flood. We withstood about 6 feet of water," he said.
Several members raised the front-yard setback as the most significant concern. The chair observed that Langus’s house is already closer to the street than neighboring homes and questioned whether enlarging or moving the front element (porch) was necessary rather than a smaller entry or landing. A board member said the change would make the house noticeably more inconsistent with the street line and suggested the applicant consider alternatives or ensure findings document the property’s unique constraints.
No vote was taken on the merits at the March 6 session. The board closed the public hearing and noted it may deliberate the application at the next meeting after members inspect the property and review the draft findings. The board asked staff and applicant to supply any additional plans or calculations requested by members before a final decision.
What happens next: The ZBA closed the public hearing on March 6 but retained the application for further consideration. The board signaled members would visit the site and expect any clarifying materials before voting.
Speakers quoted (first reference): Craig Langus (applicant); Chair (ZBA).
