ZBA approves dojo’s variance after heated discussion

By JEFF MORRIS 

An application for an addition to an existing accessory structure that was already the subject of a lengthy hearing in December came back before the Zoning Board of Appeals on Jan. 7, and resulted in an even more contentious session. 

The request by Marc Abrams and Gia Miller for a variance to permit the construction of an addition and covered porch to a preexisting, legal accessory structure had been adjourned on Dec. 4.

Abrams came out swinging at this appearance, regarding accusations that were made about his activities and plans for 37 Woodfield Road, Katonah. He said he was returning with plans redone by his architect as a result of suggestions from the board regarding a change in the covered porch. 

The majority of his remarks were in direct response to charges leveled by neighbor Gregory Dinapoli and some others at the earlier meeting. He explained he was seeking a variance to enlarge the existing art studio to create a safer space, or dojo, within which he can train in martial arts, with the expanded space allowing one or two people to “simply take a few more steps in one direction, and allow for a sword to be raised safely.” He had invited the board to come to the site and visit the studio.

Abrams noted that three out of four neighbors abutting his property support the application, while Dinapoli raised concerns that were “not only disingenuous, but sought to distract the committee from the task at hand.” Regarding the allegation that he is operating a business out of the studio, he said, “the Building Department has known about these false claims for a number of years now.”

In fact, he said, one of the building inspectors has come by multiple times to investigate, without ever validating the complaints, and the town supervisor “told me directly that what I was doing was entirely legal.”

Nonetheless, he said, Dinapoli has tried to imply that “there was some kind of hidden business related to my prior legal martial arts business.”

After providing a detailed history of his prior martial arts businesses, which he said have all been closed, Abrams addressed other issues people had raised about traffic flow. He pointed out that those who have sent letters opposing the variance do not have sight lines of the property, and have provided no documentation for claims of traffic problems. And he directly countered a complaint from a resident across the street about two cars parking in front of the house creating a hazard, submitting photos of vehicles parked in front of that person’s house for longer periods of time and blocking the road. He called the notion that somehow the two cars have created a hazard or are disrupting traffic flow in the community “absolutely absurd.”

Abrams said he would have students refute claims that the use of wooden swords creates a danger for the neighborhood. He also rejected comments made by Dinapoli about the changing character of the neighborhood, people parking their work vehicles in their driveways, and traffic flow. 

“None of those issues are relevant to my seeking a variance to allow me to train in the privacy of my property in a safer manner,” he said. “It’s almost like he believes that our neighborhood is part of a homeowners association, and he’s chair of the HOA.” 

Abrams traced the problem back to his having legally removed “sickly trees” on his property five years ago, “to begin the landscaping process that has turned what was an eyesore property into a property with beautiful gardens that people routinely stop and thank us for creating.”

The session continued with several speakers supporting Abrams. Then Dinapoli returned to again argue that Abrams is running a home business. Chair Peter Michaelis noted they were only reviewing a variance for an accessory structure, and town Attorney Christian Gates argued there had already been a determination that there was no home occupation.

Things became heated as ZBA member Howard Stern became embroiled in an argument with Dinapoli’s attorney, Jonathan Davidoff, regarding whether anybody who has a business registered at their address is actually operating a home business — an argument that then enmeshed Gates. Accusations flew about who was interrupting who, and whether either of the parties was insulting the other. 

After additional testimony from the project architect, another neighbor, questions from the board about screening to which Abrams responded, and more input from Gates, the public hearing was closed.

Michaelis proposed a resolution approving the application, with a number of conditions related to the number of participants occupying the structure at any one time or number of days per week. Gates raised concerns about including such conditions, saying they were not within the ZBA’s purview nor within the enforcement capabilities of the Building Department. He indicated such conditions were more appropriate for a special use permit and were duplicative of what is already in the town code. 

The board finally approved the basic variance application for expansion of the accessory structure.