Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
ZBA approves variance to legalize installed emergency generator
Summary
The Bronxville Zoning Board of Appeals granted a variance allowing an already-installed emergency generator to remain within a front-yard setback, citing the lot's unusual layout, screening and limited neighborhood impact. The vote was 5-0.
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Bronxville Zoning Board of Appeals voted unanimously to grant a variance that legalizes an emergency generator installed within a front-yard setback at a single property, Chair Stuart McIntosh said during the meeting.
A project presenter told the board the lot is unusual — with three front yards and the house oriented toward Corsview Road while the rear faces a golf course — and said the generator has been treated as an accessory building. “The impact of the generator in that location…is very, very minor and won't be an issue in the future,” the presenter said, noting the unit is already screened by fence and vegetation and will include sound-absorbing materials. Board members also heard the presenter say the generator is primarily for emergencies and only runs briefly when it exercises.
Board members weighed visibility and noise concerns against the lot’s geometry. Janie Regan said she did not think the installation was a substantial intrusion, adding that “there's no neighbors behind you” and that the location was appropriate. Charlie Law and Marty Muir also supported the variance, citing limited impact; John Brown characterized the request as insubstantial. Chair McIntosh moved the variance, and the five voting board members voted in favor (5-0).
The presenter and board indicated the issue arose during permit closeout; the generator was already installed and the variance was sought to legalize the installation rather than as a prospective change. There were no public comments on the generator item. The board did not attach additional conditions beyond the variance language stated during the motion.

