Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-11/06/2003 SPEC i Southold Town Hall ~ 53095 Main Road Gerard P. Goehringer ~n P.O. Box 1179 !dydih A. Torrora ~ Southold. NY 11971~0959 - ~r~cent Orl~v~d6 ~b.-~t~n"~ Tel. (631) 765-1809 ~3eorge;""~' Hommfi~:.. Fax (631) 765-9064 http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING THURSDAY, NOVEMBER fi, 2003 A Special Meeting of the SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS was held at the SduthOId Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York 11971-0959, on Thursday, November 6. 2003. commencing at 6:00 p.m. Present were: Ruth D. Olive, Chairwoman Gerard P. Goehringer, Member LydiaA; Tortora Member Vincent Orlando, Member Linde Kowalsld, ZBA Confidential Secretary Absent was Member George Homing. 6:00 p.m. Chairwoman Olive called the meeting to order. AGENDA ITEM i: The Board proceeded with the first item on the Agenda as follows: I. RESOLUTIONS/DELIBERATIONS/DECISIONS: A. The following Resolution was adopted: On motion made by Member Tortora, seconded by Member Orlando, it was RESOLVED, to CALENDAR the hearing which was reopened by Resolution adopted by the BOa~rd ~/f ,Appeiils on' 9125103, for a hearing date of December 18 2003, for the purpose of ~lu~$tion~'re at~Jrt0 ;the ri~cent Notice of Pendency and Claim filed with the Supreme Court · ~bY t, he&adjacent/~an~l~ne~ Concerning this property, ZBA File #5345 (lot waiver application ~, of ZOUMAS CO~TRACTIN~G #5345). Vote of the Board: AyeS: Members Chairwoman Olive, Goehringer, Tortora, and Orlando. (Absent was Member Hoi~ning.) This Resolution was duly adopted (4-0). B. The following Resolution was adopted: On motion by Chairwoman Olive, seconded by Member Tortora, it was RESOLVED, to recalen~lar ZBA Appl. No. 5334 filed oy DEBRA VICTOROFF to January 22, 2004 at 9:30 a.m., pending submission of applicant's map with showing existing wetlands Page 2 - Mihutes M~.~eting held November. 6, 2003 S0~old ToWn Board of Appeals a~'eas. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Olive [ChairWoman), Goehringer, Torfora. and Orlando. (Abs'ent ~as M~mber ~0rnJng.) This ResOlution was duly adopted (4-0). ' ;C~, RESOLUTION (Heron Sculpture): The following Resolution was adopted On motion by . r~emb~r Tor~ora, seconded by ChairWoman Ohva, ~t was ~E~SOLVED ngs with respect to ZBA Appl. No. 4537 for the recdi'd and filing same with the Town Clerk and the ~ional findings, and those set forth n the Board's prior :TepaYtment's issuance Of the building permit and certificate of V~fe ,~f..the=BoaYd: ,~ Ayes: Members Olive (Chairwoman), Tortor=, Goehringer. (Member 0~'la~l~.~ib~ai~e~) ~At~ent~W~ M~ember Horn ng ) Th s Resolution was duly adopted (3-0). D! D S[C~SS ON: ~bers discussed the Planning Board's Memo with regard to the Dominion in Peconic. The Board indicated that no input would t~t~ to thee Planning Board in reply to their inquiries. E. DEEIB:ERAT1oNs~)EClSION App. No. 5357- OmnWo nt Commun cat ons nc The Board del.he;ra~d'att, d. rend~red its decision in this application as shown in the attached copy of the O,!linnl I-m(:i.',l.~.'13e ~ · o' a De"cision filed with the Town Clerk, fully incorporated and set ':'ur.il inlo Lltlt.~ ~(.~t OI r.l,ull(:.~. RES~LU~TiOI~RES~INDJNG FORMER ACT ON: Motion was offered by Member Goehringer, · and duly carried, to RESCIND its October 23, 2003 Resolution duo to thee r~quired:ti~o flame for compliance of Chapter 58 by the applicant, A. & S. Waggoner #5414. ahd fo redde~ a decision of approval With conditions, with the original Decision, Deliberatiods,' Findings t"d be filed with the Town Clerk, and a copy attached hereto as though fully in~drpcrated an~llsot forth herein. Agenda Item Il. DELIBERATIONS/DECISIONS ON THE FOLLOWING APPLICATIONS: The Board deliberated and rendered Decisions in the following applications, as attached, with the original Findings, Deliberations, Decisions filed with the Town Clerk. The copies attached are ~age 3 - Minutes ~ ,M~eting he, Id November 6 2003 ~ ~$~hdld TOWn Board o~Appeals referred herein as though fully incorporated and set forth in this setof Minutes. D~nied with.Grant of Alternative Relief: VIRG]NIA,.and'CHRISTOPHERCOYNE #5323. ~Hearin.q concluded 7/10/03). Request for: a non-habitable accessory building, with a p¢opOsed addition; (b) ~on-habitabie accessory building, and (c) "as built" located in an area other than the code required rear yard. 8310 Soun ; cTM 59-7~29. APl~t'oval with Conditions: ALFRED=AND.MARY MAGILL #5362. Hearinq concluded 8/21/03:(10/15 applicant sd .b~l?ted plan revi~ih~ roof design with letter of explanation mean height conf rmed s ~i~ '~'~ ),, Based on,the Budding Department s April 21, 2003 Notme of D~sapproval, a'~llCahlS~requ~e~t~ a V~rianee under 100-244B for proposed alterations to an accessory gara~e,'~b{ihg' ~ I~'~S than~35 feet from the front lot line, at 1145 F eetwood Rd CutChogue; CTM #137~4-26. DoliEerationS Without Action: JASON TAGGART #5389. Hearincl concluded 9125103. Chairwoman Oliva indicated since a full Board was not present, that it would be better to wait until November ~04 f~r attendance and participation by an {ant c pated) fu Board No action was ken,-a_dC~! this ~i~i~nda item was noted as a carryover for deliberations/possible U~i$ion bi~ ~h6 ndxt rnedting agenda of November 20, 2004. ApproVed as applied for: R. and A. COMBS #5393. Hearing concluded 10/9/03. Request for Variances under SectiOns 100-242A, 100-244, and 100-33, based on the Building Department's Notice of Disapproval- amended Ju y 17, 2003 concerning proposed additions to the dwelling with ~ide yards at l~ss than 15 on one side and 20 feet on the other side, for a tota at les~ I~han ,~ feet ',~ht~n combined; and existing location of the as-built shed at less than five (5} feet from~ tl~e 'property line. Location of Property: 6525 Indian Neck Lane, PeCobic; 'Parcel ~86-6-24. Approved as I~er revised plan with conditions: LINDA FASBAcH #5375. Hearin.q concluded 10/23/03. Based on the Building Department's May 1'2~ 2003 Notice of Disapproval, applicant requests Variances under Sectiohs 100~23~!B,i :100-242A~ and 100-244, for: (1) addition to an existing dwelling Pat:je 4 :Minutes ~ I~eting held November6, 2003 ~. · ~Sbathold ToWn Board Of Appeals with total side yards at less than 25 feet, (2) 'as built' deck addition at less than 75 feet frorh the bulkhead, (3) [bt cdverage in excess of the code limitation of 20% of the lot ~iZ~: 29705 BayShore Roa'd, Greenport; 53-6,4. Approved as al3plied with conditions: P. METTES AND L. CALLAGHAN #5413. Hearing concluded 10/23/03. Request for a Variance under Section 100-82A, based on the Building Department's July 17, 2003 Notice of DiSapprOval, for proposed additions/alterations to existing commercial building with a side yard at less than 20 feet, at 43715 C.R. 48 (aJk/a Middle Road or North Road), S0uthold; 1000-59-3-30. Approved as applied With conditions: J. ,ANN PIGNATO AND MARIA REGINA #5415. Request for a Variance under Section 100-33, based on'the Building Department's May 19, 2003 Notice of DisapprOval, for a proposed accessory garage in a yard other than the rear yard, at 28545 Main Road, OHer~t; 18~6-24.3 AbProved ~a~ al~plied for: PAUL SENNET ~402. Request for a Variance under Section 100-242A, based on the Buildin'g.,Department's June 27, 2003 Notice of Disapproval, for a proposed porch adt:lit[On at le;s~{han 35 feet from the front lot line and rear lot lines, at 450 Richmond R~ad East, S~ou~h'bld; 135-3-7. Al~broVed with cdndition: HOWARD MEINKE #5400. Request for a Variance under Section 100-244, based on the Building Departhnent's May 30, 2003 Notice of Disapproval, for approval of the "as-built" setback location of a deck and hot tub addition at less than 40 feet from the front lot line, at 2'130 Broadwaters Road, Cutchogue; 104-9-13. Ar)proved as al~131ied for: PRISCILLA REILLY #5404. Request for a Variance under Section 100- 242A, ref. 100- 244B, based on the Building Department's June 13, 2003 Notice of Disapproval for a two-story addition at less [han 10 feet on a single side yard and less than 25 feet for total side yards, after demolition of an attached garage, at 865 Old Shipyard Lane, Southold; 64-5-20. Page 5 - Minutes .M~eting hel~l~No,~ember 6, 200~ .~oLfthbld Turin Board of Appea~s Hearin.qs conc uded '10/23/03: ADi3~'Oved as aDDlied fei': PAuE~STETZ #5401. Thi~ iS a request for a Variance under Section 100-242A, ref. 100- 244B,. based .ori fife BUilding Department's June 16, 2003 Notice of. Disapproval. /~pp~lica;nt pr~)p(~ses a~ Stairw~ay and landing addition with rear yard setback at less than 3~5 f~t, at 270 North Sea' Drive, Soathold; 54-5-50. Al~lJr0ved as applied for: Rita Johes ~ This is a request for a Variance under Section 100-244B, based on ~y '11, 2003 Notice of Disapproval for a new addition which ngle side yard setback which is less than 10 feet, and total at 1335 Island View Lane, Greenport; 57-2-15. AppreVed as a~plied or. Michael at~d ,MEtvEII~n Cirrito #5417. This is a request for Variances under Sections 10,0~.242A~ (~ef.~*l~0-24~,B} ,and 100-239.4B based on the Building Department's July 15, 2~J03 'Nb{[~C~ o~D '~l~r0v~a for proposed additions/alterations at less than a single side bf 10 feet 'a~ ~$s t~ah 75 feet from the bulkhead, at 7625 Nassau Pont Road Ci~og'ue~ Agenda Itemqll. PIJ'BLi~HEARINGS (none scheduled), t~rn IV. E~(EICI~,TI~E SESS ON: Re: Zupa and Pisacano properties. Member Tortora has been requested as Special Cou'nsel to represent the ZBA in There being no other business properly coming before the Board at this time, Chairwoman Oliva de'clared the meeting adjourned. The meeting adjourned at 8:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ~'L~n d a Kowalski Attachments: Case Decisions [ i5'~ Confidential Secretary, ZBA Transcript o! Hearings Ruth D. Oiiva, ChairWoman - Approved for Filing · A~IS BOARD MEMBERS (t Southold Town Hall Gerard P. Goehringer 53095 Main Road Lydia A. Tortora ~-l~ P.O. Box 1179 George Horning ~'~,~ Southold, New York 11971-0959 Ruth D. Oliva , Chairwoman ~ ZBA Fax (631) 765-9064 Vincent Orlando Telephone (63~) 765-1809 http://southoldto~.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF NOVEMBER 6, 2003 Action in accordance with the Mav 9. 2003 Memorandum Decision of the Honorable Howard Berler. J.S.C. (Index #28776/02} re~ardino. the following: Appl. No. 5072 regarding Appeal filed by JERRY CALLIS, JOHN PETROCELLI, JOSEPH MACARI, concerning property Owned by James and Barbara Miller, at 1610 Paradise-Point Road, Southold; 1000-81-3-19.004 SEQRA DETERMINATION: The Zoning Board of Appeals has visited the property under consideration in this application and determines that this review falls under the Type II category of the State's List of Actions, without an adverse effect on the environment if the project is implemented as planned. FINDINGS OF FACT In accordance with the May 9, 2003, memorandum decision of the Honorable Howard Beder, Justice of the New York State Supreme Court, the Board hereby makes the following findings and determination concerning application number 5072 submitted by Jerry Callis, John Petrocelli, and Joseph Macari, which challenged the issuance of Building Permit No. 2789Z and Certificate of Occupancy No. Z-28096: The Supreme Court annulled this Board's prior determination deciding that the Board had not considered the dimensions of the Heron Monument in determining whether it is an accessory use under the Southold Town Zoning Code. While the Board respectfully disagrees with the decision and is pursuing an appeal of the judgment entered on July 16, 2003, it has received a written request from the attorney for James and Barbara Miller that this Board review the application based upon the prior record and in light of the Order and Judgment of Justice Berler. As a result of this request, the Board has determined to do so. The Board's prior resolution, as well as the findings, deliberations and determination adopted at our meeting held on October 3, 2002, are hereby incorporated into this resolution. Based on Justice Berler's decision, the Board hereby reconsiders the evidence previously submitted ~n connection with the application through documents, testimony, and the personal inspection of the property by the Board and makes the following additional findings of fact regarding whether the Heron Monument is an accessory use under the S0uthold Town Zoning Code: 1. The Millers' property is zoned R-80 and is approximately 3.25 acres. ~age 2 - November 6, 2003 Appl. No. 5072 - Callis & Others (v. Miller) 81-3-19.4 at Southold 2. The subject Heron Monument. is a sculpture approximately 40 feet high. 3. The principal use of the Millers' property is a single-family residence. 4, The height of the Heron Monument has not transformed it into a separate and distinct principal use. On the con'(raN, the monument remains an accessory to the principal residen'tial structure. 5..Sp~ci~cally, the Board has, considered the size of the. moJ3ument, in relation to the size ~)f t~e ~roperty and residence, as the Supreme Court directed. The Millers' propejAy, Consisting. of ove~ 130,000 square feet, 'creates its ,own environment. Their homer thePnnc~pal structure on the property, ~s substantial ~n s~ze, hawng an area of aPprOXimately 3,699 square feet with an additional detached garage of approximately 544 squa~;e feet. The Heron Monument is relatively small in c~mp,adson to the overall proper~y aJ3d improvements and is subordinate t~) the pr~nciPa 'usei 6. While tall, the Heron Monument is an artifact that, like a garden sculpture, is to be enjoyed by the occupants of the principal'use. The Hero~ Monument is not, in fact, a separata principal use. No admission is chacged to view it, and no separate access ~s provided to it. 7. While all sculptures and monuments are unique and of varying sizes and shapes, they are customarily incidental and subordinate to the main use on a lot. This 'Is particularly true in this case, with such a large piece of residential property. 8~ This monument with a height of 40 feet situated on a 3.25 acres parcel of land in the R-80 district with a substantial house is accessory, and its height does not change its accessory nature. The Board notes that describing the property as "the house with the Heron Monument" is far more appropriate than describing the property as "the Heron Monument with the house." 9. Addi'(ional support for this position can be found in the record before the Board. A~ the public heanng, held on March 21, 2002, the applicants' own expert, Theresa Elkowitz, stated that the Heron Monument was "clearly not a principal use. It must be an accessory use." 10. Because the sculpture is both a monument and an accessory use, it is exempt from the height restrictions 3ursuant to § 100-230 the Southold Zoning Code. ~PE..~t~,S BOARD MEMBERS ~~'~ ' '~ ~ Sourthold Town Hall Gerard P. Goehringer 53095 Main Road Lydia A. Tortora P.O. Box 1179 George Homing Southold, New York 11971-0959 Ruth D. Oliva , Chairwoman ZBA Fax (631) 765-9064 Vincem Orlando Telephone (631) 765-1809 http;//southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF NOVEMBER 6, 2003 Appl, No. 5393 -Ravmond and Aqnes Combs Property Location: 6525 Indian Neck Lane, Peconic; CTM #86-6-24. SEQRA DETERMINATION: The Zoning Board of Appeals has visited the property under consideration in this application and determines that this review falls under the Type II category of the State's List of Actions, without an adverse effect on the environment if the project is implemented as planned. PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: The applicant's 32,492 sq. ff. parcel has 80.22 ft. frontage along the north side 'of Indian Neck Road (a/k/a Indian Neck Lane) in Peconic. The property is improved with a one-story frame dwelling and accessory shed as shown on the January 5, 2000 survey prepared by Stanley J. Isaksen, Jr., L.S. At the northerly end of applicants' property is a tidal wetland and beach area adjacent to Richmond Creek. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Building Department's amended July 17, 2003 Notice of Disapproval, citing Sections 100-242A, 100-244, and 100-33 in its denial of a building permit to construct proposed additions to the applicants' dwelling with side yards at less than 15 on one side and 20 feet on the other side, for a total at less than 35 feet when combined; and for the existing location of the as-built shed at less than five (5) feet from the property line. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on September 25, 2003 and October 23, 2003, at which time written and oral evidence were presented. Based upon all testimony, documentation, personal inspection of the property, and other evidence, the Zoning Board finds the following facts to be true and relevant: AREA VARIANCE RELIEF REQUESTED: Applicants wish to construct alterations and an addition to the existing dwelling as shown on the applicants' survey prepared by Stanley J. Isaksen, Jr., L.S. revised September 12, 2003 showing the addition and proposed garage, and hand-sketched survey notation by Mark K. Schwarz, A.I.A confirming showing the area of proposed alterations. Additional details are also shown on the 10/1/03 (9/30/03) construction diagrams prepared by Mark K. Schwartz, A.I.A. REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: On the basis of testimony presented, materials submitted and personal inspections, the Board makes the following findings: "~ Page 2 - November 6, 2003 · ' ZBA#5393-R. andA. Combs 86-6-24 at Peconic 1. Grant of the relief requested will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The Board considered all testimony offered dudng the two public hearings. It is evidence that the home was and has been in its present located for many years (since 1~,947). The applicants tried to acquire ~dditional !and to increase the setback from the easterly property line, without success. The adp Cants propose alterat ons with reconstruction of portions of the existing one-family home which presently has two bedrooms and only one bath. Also proposed isan addition for a bathroom, laundry room and other IMng space, and garage, as shown on. the architect's recent plans. This dwelling has existed with a noncon~orm,., ng westerly, s de.. yard setback of 9.7' and e, asted, y side. yard at .2~. The setback n0nconf~rmities are preexist ng (prior ,to zen rig). t is also noted that ~e appliers wish fo.'legalize, the. setback O{ the existing one'story f~,tame shed in its. present lOCatiOn at 3~5 ~et from thee westerly ~id:e p~oPe~b7 I ne, The ciosest neighboring buildings are, adjacent.on the pameJ located ~e~t of ths proPerty The neig ,[~boring Pro~e~:~ithe ~a~St cpntains' large Yard areas a~,d I~nd~l~)ed witt~ es~blis~ed tree~ and plan'[ii-i'gs w~cl-~ provide VisUal 5u~ffers exists betwee~ {he tw0 properties. 2. ~he benefit sought cannot be achieved by some method; feasible for the applicants to pursue, other than an area variance. The board recognizes that the dwelling has existed in its present location for many ye,ars, and together~ with the fact that the surroundir~g properties and buildings are also well established and existing for many years. 3. Although the variance is the minimum necessary, the relief granted is substantial because the easterly side area for the proposed addition is a 5' reduction of the code required 15 ft. minimum, and total side yards at 19.7+- feet. The storage shed is a reduction of 1,3 feet from the code required minimum of five feet from the westerly side property line 4. The difficulty was self-created mainly because of the past placement of the home in 1947, and the storage shed, both of which have existed for many years, pnor to the current Town Code side yard setback requirements. 5. There is no evidence that the grant of variance relief wilt have an adverse effect or impact on physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. 6. Grant of the relief requested is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of alterations/additions, while preserving and protecting the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community. Page 3 - November 6, 2003 ZBA ~t5393 - R. and A. Combs 86-6-24 at Peconic RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD: In considering all of the above factors and applying the balancing test under New York Town Law 267-B, motion was offered by Member Goehringer, seconded by Member Orlando, and duly carried, to GRANT the variance as applied for, as shown on the survey prepared by Stanley J. Isaksen, J¢., ES, revised September 12, 2003 showing the addition and proposed garage, and hand-sketched survey notation by Mark K. Schwarz, AJ.A confirming showing the area of proposed alterations, and 10/1/03 (9/30/03) construction diagrams prepared by Mark K. Schwartz, A.I.A. This action does not authorize or condone any current or future use, setback or other feature or,he subject prope~rty that may violate the Zoning Code, other than such uses, setbacks and other features as are expressly addressed in this action. Vote of the Board: Ayes; Members Oliva (Chairwoman) Goehringer, Tortora, and Orlando (Vice Chairman). Absent ~er Horning. This Resolution was duly adopted ¢-o). Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman 11/ir~/03 Approved for Filing APPEALS BOARD MEMI3ERS Southold Town Hall Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman 53095 Main Road Gerard P. Goehdnger P.O. Box 1179 Lydia A. Tortora Southold, NY 11971-0959 Vir~cent Orlando Tel, (631] 765-1809 JaMes Dinizi0, Jr. (eft. '1/6/04) Fax 765-9064 George Homing (thru 1/6/04) http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF NOVEMBER 6, 2003 Appl. No. 5323 - VIRGINIA and CHRISTOPHER COYNE Property Location: 8310 Soundview Avenue, Southold; CTM 59-7-29.6. SEQRA DETERMINATION: The Zoning Board of Appeals has visited the property under consideration in this application and determines that this review falls under the Type 11 category of the State's List of Actions, without-an adverse effect on the environment if the project is implemented as planned. PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: The applicants' 'i56,358 sq. ft. parcel has 108.82 ft. frontage along Soundview Avenue in Southold, and s improved with a two-story, single-family dwelling, a one-story accessory building, a one-story shed, and gazebo as shown on the September 11, 2002 survey prepared by John C. Ehlers, L.S. The dwetling has 348 feet from the front property line along Sound View Avenue and side yards at 33 feet and 64 feet. at its closest points. The applicant acquired title to the property on September 20, 2002. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Building Department's February 11, 2003 Notice of Disapproval, citing Section 100-31A and 100-33, in its denial of a building permit for: (a) living space m a non-habitable accessory building, with a proposed addition; (b) proposed additions/alterations to ~ non-habitable accessory building, and (c) "as built" accessory shed located in an area other than the code required rear yard. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on June 19, 2003 and July 10, 2003, at which time written and oral evidence were presented. Based upon all testimony, documentation, personal inspection of the property, and other evidence, the Zoning Board finds the following facts to be true and relevant: AREA VARIANCE RELIEF REQUESTED: The applicant requests area variances: (a) to authorize a conversion to living area in an existing 408+- sq. ft. one-story accessory building for habitable occupancy by family members, (b) to authorize an '18' x 24' addition to the accessory building, and (c) to authorize the yard location of an accessory storage shed in the front yard, as built, rather than a code-required rear yard location. The applicant requests conversion of the existing 408+- sq. ft., one-story building to residential use for the applicant's family, indicating that the building is presently occupied by Mrs. Coyne's mother. ,Appl. No. 5323 -V. and C. Coyne 'CTM 59-7-29.6 at Southold The cottage is 408 square feet of floor area. The applicant also requests an 18' x 24' addition to the existing one-story building, and authorization to convert the addition as habitable space. REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: On the basis of testimony presented, materials submitted and personal inspection, the Board :makes the following findings: I. A brief statement was submitted by the applicant's attorney indicating that the small building was used many years ago, for a period of time as early as 1952. by a small group of Polish and Amedcan potato farmem who called themselves 'The Rinky Dinks' and used this as a social club or farmer's bee In 1952 (ref. st?tenlent signed by Steve J. Doroski dated 1.2J3/02). The property consisted 8f15 984 acres dur ng this time anti was shown on the County Tax Maps as Parcel 29. 2. Information of record indicates that the 408+- sq. ft., one"stow building existed as the sole building on t~e former 15.984 acre parcel. Subsequently; on June 21, 1976, a former owner (Bayley) obtained minor subdivision approval from the Town Planning Board to create four (4) lots, andthis building remained in its present location, on a newly created 3.67 acre parcel, shown as Lot #2 on the Minor Subdivision Map. 3. On May 11, 1978. a Town Building Permit was issued for a new single"family dwelling behind the detached one-stow building. It is noted that the Zoning Code prowsion in effect since 1957, imited the number of single-family dwellings to one dwelling per lot, and has been unchanged. The applicant furnished a copy of a Certificate of Occupancy #Z-9315, issued November 27, 1978 to Robert and Schiela Schur, for a newly constructed "Private One Family Dwelling." On February 20, 2003, Preexisting Certificate of Occupancy #29279 was issued by the Building Inspector for this building as an ~Accessory Non-Habitable Structure." 4. AithoL~gh there is no question that small one-stow building remained in the same yard location, without the deck and without new alectdc, plumbing and heating, since as early as 1952, no factual information was made available by the applicant to the building department to showthat the building was a preexisting, nonconformin~ dwelling. The applicant's attorney submitted an affidavit from the builder in 1978 for the new dwelling stating that the Schur family occupied the small building, and that the Building Department did not make the Schur family remove or abandon the residential cottage as a condition of issuinEI the Certificate of Occupancy for the new residence. The issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy f,~r a new dwelling does not establish a legal nonconforming use for any other building that existed .on the premises. A building permit and certificate of ocoupar~cy were also not obtained by the owner for new electric, plumbing and heating done in the one-stoW building. 5. tt is found that the applicant did not furnish sufficient information to show that the building was an authorized residential use when it existed on the 15.9-acre parcel prior to 1976. It is also found that there is no evidence, as req Jired under Section 100-241, to indicate that the residential use was legally established, and furtt~er that it was not discontinued for a pedod of two (2) years. Factually, the building had existed on 'the former 15.9-acre parcel prior tc~ 1976, and its use was not legally established as a nonconforming use at any time. Without furni.shing this evidence to the Building= Inspector, a Preexisting Certificate of Occupancy for a nonconforming residenca within this building may not be issued RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD: In considering all of the above factors and applying the balancing test under New York Town Law 267-B, motion was offered by Member Orlando, seconded by Member Tortora and duly carried, to Page 2 - November 6, 20O3 ~AppL No. 5323- V. and C. Coyne CTM 59-7-29.6 at Southold DENY the variances, as rec uested, with respect to the accessory one-story building, and to GRANT the variance requested for the yard Iocatioin of the accessory storage shed, as applied for. This action does not authorize or condone any current or future use setback or other feature of the subject property that may violate the Zoning Code, other than such uses, setbacks and other features as are expressly addressed in this action. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Olive (Chairwoman), Goehringer, Tortora, and Orlando (Vice Chairman). Absent was Member Hernia. ,T.,h.~i~ Re~lut~a~s?...~u[y adopted (4-0). Ruth D. Olive, Chairwoman Approved for Filing AP~EA~LS BOARD MEMBERS Southold Town Hall Gerard E Goehringer 53095 Main Road Lydia A. Tortora P.O. Box 1179 George Homing Southold, New York 11971-0959 Ruth D. Oliva , Chairwoman ZBA Fax (631) 765-9064 Vincent Orlando ~ Telephone 1531) 765-1809 http://southoldtown.northfoflcnet BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF NOVEMBER 6, 2003 Appl. No. 5375 - Linda Fasbach Property Location: 2905 BayShore Road, Greenport; 53-6-4. SEQRA DETERMINATION: The Zoning Board of Appeals has visited the property under consideration in this application and determines that this review falls under the Type 11 category of the State's List of Actions, without an adverse effect on the environment if the project i~'~mplemented as planned. PROPERTY FACTSIDESCRIPTION: The applicant's 8,750 sq, ft. parcel is shown on the Map of Peconic Bay Estates as Lot. #50, with 50 feet along the north side of Bay Shore Road and a lot depth of 175 feet to a wood bulkhead along Peconic Bay. The lot is improved with a 172 story frame dwelling as shown on the site map prepared by Meryl Kramer, R.A., referring to surVey dated July 5, 1978 prepared by Roderick VanTuyl, P.C. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Building Department's May 12, 2003 Notice of Disapproval, amended ~10/16/03 in its denial citing Sections 100-239.B, 100-242A, and 100-244, of a building permit application to construct: (1) an addition with total side yards at less than 25 feet, (2) an 'as built' deck addition at less than 75 feet from the bulkhead, and (3) addition and deck with a lot coverage in excess of the code limitation of 20% of the lot size. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on October 23, 2003, at which time written and oral evidence were presented. Based upon all testimony, documentation, personal inspection of the property, and other evidence, the Zoning Board finds the following facts to be true and relevant: AREA VARIANCE RELIEF REQUESTED: Applicant is requesting variances for: (1) a new one-story addition at the southwest section with a setback of 39.5 feet to the front lot line and 12.6' from the side property line, leaving a total of 15.6' for both sides; (2) an as-built deck addition at 22.75' from the bulkhead, and (3) a total lot coverage of 27.58%. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:AMENDED RELIEF: During the August 21, 2003 public hearing, the applicant was requested to furnish a breakdown of the building area clarifying the original request of 33+-% lot coverage noted in the May 12, 2,003 and July 17, 2003 Notices of Disapproval. On October 22, 2003 the applicant's architect furnished a revised breakdown of the lot coverage calculations and an October 16, 2003 amended Notice of Disapproval. confirming a lot coverage of 27.58%, or 2430 sq. ft., which was accepted by the Building Department in its October 16, 2003 amended Notice of Disapproval. REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION. DESCRIBED BELOW: Based on the testimony and record before the Board and personal inspection, the Board makes the following findings: ;Page 2 - November 6, 2003 AppL No. 5375 -Linda Fasbach CTM 53-6-4 1. Grant of the area variance will not produce an undesirable change in character of neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties, The as-built deck measures ;approximataly 13' x 30' and is. located on the watervieW side of the house at 22.75 feet ;~o~ the bul~(head. The proposed new addition measures 11'13" and faces~ Bay Shore ~.oad. 'The proposed addition will be single-story for a master bedroom. This proposed addition would increase an already non-conforming 10t coverage from 26.8% to 27.58%. 2. r some method, feasible for deck has existed for some waterfront. 3. The re~;uested area variance for the deck is substantial in relation to the code required 75 ft. bullied setback, represen,tingT0% reduction; the requested relief for the addition is substarrti¢~ representing an increase of 1% in lot coverage over the exist~ng~ and a redtletion'o~'four fee[in the total side yards, from the exis{ing 19.6 feet to 15;6 feet. 4. The difficulty was, ,self-created when the premises was acquired and the deck was built without consulting t~e code regulafipns for the as-built d~eck and an' addition designed without conformity to the zon ngl'requ ~'ements 5. There is no evidence that the g~'ant of the variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. The bulkhead separates the new'cbnstrucfion f~om the beach area on the waterside of the applicant's bulkhead. The environmental agent:les,of the Town and State have been consulted and issued determinations w th respect to applicants' requests RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD: In considering all of, the above factors and applying the balancing test under New York Town Layv 267-B. motion was offered by Member Orlando (Vice Chairman), seconded by Member Gbehringer, and du ~y carried, to GRANT the variances as applied for, as shown on the October 20, 2003 schematic design diagrams p~'eparedlby Meryl Kramer, Architect, with the condition that the lot Coveragb be [imi{ed t0r 27;58% as shown ~n the architect's breakdown date- stamped by the ZB~. October 22, 2003, and w, th the condit on that a cert ficate of occupancy ~o~'the e~xistingi~rea(s) Shall be issued before expansion. This action does not authorize or condone any current or future use, setback or other feature of the subject property that may violate the Zoning Code, other than such uses, ~age 3 - November 6, 2003 Appl. No. 5375 - Linda Fasbach CTM 53-6-4 setbacks and other features as are expressly addressed in this action. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Oliv..a.(Chairwoman) Goehringer, Tortora, and Orlando (Vice Chairman), Absent was Member~o~ning. Thi~esq~ was duly adopted (4-0). RuthD. O va Charwoman 11//5d03 3:_~,.r~. Approved fo~; Filing · APP}ZALS BOARD MEMBERS ~N,.~.,~ Soufil'old Town Hall Gerard P. Goehringer; ~q~'l 53095 Main Road Lydia A. Tortora ~l P.O. Box 1179 George Homing ~?,o~/,~.~ Southold, New York 11971-0959 Ruth D, Oliva , Chairwoman ~q'O./' ZBA Fax (631) 765-9064 Vincent Orlando '~ Telephone (631) 765-1809 http://southoldtown.northfork,net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION " MEETING OF NOVEMBER 6 2003 AppL NO. 5414 - Rita Jones Property Location: 1335 Island View Lane, Greenport; 57-2-15 SEQRA DETERMINATION: The Zoning Board of Appeals has visited the property under consideration in this application and determines that this review falls under the Type II category of the State's List of Actions, without an adverse effect on the environment if the project is implemented as planned. PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: The applicant's 14,140 sq. ft. parcel is located on the south side of a private road (Island View Lane) in Greenport, and is improved with a one-story dwelling with deck and accessory shed. as shown onthe survey prepared by John T. Metzger, L.S. dated September 25, 2002. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Building Department's July 11, 2003 Notice of Disapproval, citing Section 100-244B, in its denial under Code Section 100-244B. concerning a building permit application to extend an addition which will be less than 10 feet on a single side yard setback and less than 25 feet for both (total) side yards. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on October 23, 2003, at which time written and oral evidence were presented. Based upon all testimony, documentation, personal inspection of the property, and other evidence, the Zoning Board finds the following facts to be true and relevant: AREA VARIANCE RELIEF REQUESTED: Applicant wishes to build an 8'8" x 10'7¼" . addition, at a minimum of 7.4 feet on the westerly side and at 30.9 feet for total side yard. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: It is noted that under ZBA #5253, the applicant also requested a 10' x 18' addition with the same 7.4 ft. side yard setback as shown on a plan prepared by Environment East: nc. dated 10/3/02. This application is a request to lengthen the proposed addition without reducing the 7.4 ft. setback. REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: On the basis of testimony presented, materials submitted and personal inspections, the Board makes the following findings: 1. Grant of the relief requested will no~ produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The increase in the non- Page 2 - NoVember 6, 2003 AppL No. 5414 - Rita Jones 57-2-15 conformity of the westedy side yard setback is a result of the applicant's plan to expand the comer of the house, which has existed in its present nonconforming location for many years. The 7.4 ft. setback rot this one-story addition will be maintained without reduction. 2. The benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance. The lot has s narrow width, being Jess th,an 50 feet in the area of the applicant's princ pa bu ding, which greatly constra ns the apg. icant s ab ty to do any construction without seeking a variance. 3. The variance granted herein ~s ~ot substantial and represents a reduction of 2.3 feet from the code requirement. The lot coverage for all building~ area will remain substantiall.y less than the code's limitation of 20%. 4. 'the difficulty was self-created when the addition was planned after the house was built ir) its present location, and planned without conforming to the current Town Code requirements. 5. No evidence, concerns or objections have been submitted to indicate that the grant of the relief requested will have an adverse effect or impact on physical or environmental conditions, in the neighborhood or district. The new construction will be contained at the northwest, landward side of the dwelling, and the tidal wetlands at the southerly portion of the property will be undisturbed 6. Grant of the vadance is the minimum action necessary and adeq Jate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of an addition, while preserving and protecting the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community. RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD: In considering all of the above factors and applying the balahcing test under New York Town Law 267-B, motion was offered by Member Tot[ora, seconded by Member Orlando, and duly carried, to GRANT the variance as applied .for, as shown on the 7/7/03 revised plan prepared by Environment East, Inc. and hand-sketched drawing (copy of survey) with a ZBA date stamp of July 22, 2003. This action does not authorize or condone any current or future use, setback or other feature of the subject property that may violate the Zoning Code, other than such uses, Page 3 - November 6, 2003 Appl. No. 5414 - Rita Jones 57-2-15 setbacks and other features as are expressly addressed in this action. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Oliva IChairwoman) Goehdnger, Tortom, and Orlando (Vice Chairman). Absent w..a~ Member Homing. This Resolution was duly © Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman 11/i ~'/03 Approved for Filing ~PPEAI~S ~OARD MEMBERS v Southold Town Hall P. Ooehringe~ ~ P.O. Box 1179 53095 Main Road Lydia'A. Tortora George Homing Southold, New York 11971-0959 Ruth D. Olive , Chairwoman ZBA Fax (631) 765~9064 Vincent Orlando Telephone (631) 765-1809 http://southoldmwnmor th fork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF NOVEMBER 6, 2003 Appl. No. 5404 -, Priscilla Reillv (by Pamela and Stephen Schider) Property Location: 865 Old Shipyard Lane. Southold: 64.5-20. SEQRA DETERMINATION: The Zoning Board of Appeals has visited the property under consideration in this application and determines that this review falls under the Type category of the State's List of Actions, without an adverse effect on the environment if the project is implemented as planned PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: The applicant's 16,596 sq, ft. pamel is shown on the Map of Founders Estates as Lot 106 and has 75 it. frontage along the east side of Old Shipyard Lane in Southold. The property is improved with a 1-1/2 stoW frame house with ga[age as shown on the March 18, 1998 survey prepared by Anthony W. Lewandowstd, L.S. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Building Department's June 13, 2003 Notice of Disapproval, citing Sectibns 100-242A and 100-244B, in its denial of a building permit to construct a two*stow addition at less than 10 feet on a single side yard and less than 25 feet for total side yards, after demolition of the existing attached garage. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on October 23, 200,3., at which time written and oral evidence were presenteo. Based upon all testimony, documentation, personal inspection of the property, and other evidence, the Zoning Board finds the following facts to ae true and relevant: AREA VARIANCE RELIEF REQUESTED: Applicant wishes to remove the existing attached garage at the north side of the house and to construct s new 11' x 21'4" two- story addition as shown on the site plan with floor and elevation drawings prepared May 31,,2003 by Condon Engineering, P.S. for an 8 ft. setback from the northerly side property line. at its closest point. REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: On the basis of testimony presented, materials submitted and personal inspections, the Board makes the following findings: 1. Grant of the relief requested will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. During me hearing, testimony indicated that it was the owners intention m remove the existing garage with loft, anc replace it with a two-story addition to the dwelling. The existing garage witt' loft is ~Page 2- November 6, 206¢~- Ap?. No. §404 - P, Reilly 64;;5-20 at Southold approximately 1-¼ story height, and will be removed. A new two-story addition with new garage will be built, maintaining the same 8 ft. setback from the noChedy (side) property with a roof line that blends with the existing qouse. 2~ The ber~eflt sought by the appiicanL capnot be achieved by some method, feasible for tl~e al~Piicar~t to pursue, other: i;han an are~..~ variance.. The dwelling 'presently has a garage with s preex st ng, n0nconforr~ ng S~te;:~/ard' setback 'at 8 ft.' fr(~r~ ';~he north lot line. 3. The relief requested is not substantial, representing a reduction of two feet from the code required 10 feet on the north side yard. 4. The difficulty was self-created in that the house with attached garage was built prior to zoning garage did not conform to the setback requirements of the code. The location of the new addition With garage will conform to the same 8 ft. setback that has existed for more than 60 years. 5. There is no evidence that the grant of the relief requested will have an adverse effect -- or impact on physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. The relief requested is similar to many of the setbacks existing in the neighborhood. The existing garage has been in its original location for more than 60 years or so, with a single established side yard setback at 8 feet. 6. Grant of the relief requested is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of an addition with new garage, while preserving and protecting the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community. RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD: in considering all of the above factors and applying the balancing test under New York Town Law 267-B, motion was offered by Member Goehringer, seconded oy Member Orlando (Vice Chairman), and duly carried, to GRANT the vadance as applied for, as shown on the site plan with floor elevation drawings prepared May 31, 2003 by Condon Engineering, P.S. This action does not authorize or condone any current or future use, setback or other feature of the subject property that may violate the Zoning Code, bther than such uses, setbacks and' other features as are expressly addressed in this action. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Member Olive (Chairwoman), Member Orlando (Vice Chairman Gerard. P. Goehringer ~ii~r~~e~ 53095 P.O. Box Main1179 Road Lydia A. Tortora ~ George Homing ~,~'~' Southold, New York 11971-0959 Ruth D. Oliva , Ghairwoman ,~ ZBA Fax (631) 765-9064 Vincent Orlando ~ Telephone (631) 765-1809 http://sotttholdtown .nor tlffork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF NOVEMBER 6, 2003 AppL Noo 5362 - ALFRED AND MARY MAGILL Property Location: 1145 Fleetwood Rd, Cutchogue; CTM 137-4-26. SEQRA DETERMINATION: The Zoning Board of Appeals has visited the property under consideration in this application and determines that this review falls under the Type II category of the State's List of Actions, without an adverse effect on the environment if the project is implemented as planned. PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: The applicants' 15,081.065 sq. ft. parcel has 49.72 ft. frontage along Fleetwood Road, and lot depth of 264.05 feet (north side) and 320.36 feet (south side) to the high water line along Eugene's Creek, in Cutchogue, as shown on the April 3, 2001 survey prepared by Stanley J. Isaksen, Jr., L.S. The depth of the upland area is substantially less, having a depth of only 110.87 feet along the northerly side of the property between the survey monument at the road and survey monument at the concrete wall. An updated survey dated February 27, 2003 shows proposed new dwelling construction, areas, and an accessory garage is existing in the front yard near Fleetwood~ Road. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Building Department's Apdl 21, 2003 Notice of Disapproval, citing Section 100-244B, in its denial of a building permit to construct alterations to an accessory garage existing at less than 35 feet from the front lot line. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on October 23, 2003, at Which time written and oral evidence were presented. Based upon all testimony, documentation, personal inspection of the property, and other evidence, the Zoning Board finds the following facts to be true and relevant: AREA VARIANCE RELIEF REQUESTED: Although the Notice of Disapproval notes that the applicant proposes alterations to an existing garage, applicant has applied for a variance to substantially remove the existing 20.5' x 28' accessory garage, rebuilding it of the same size and footprint at 3~6 feet from the northerly side property line and with variable front yard setbacks at 18.5 feet and 14 feet, at the closest points. The new garage is proposed at 22 feet to the peak and is intended for storage purposes. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:AMENDED RELIEF: During the August 21, 2003 public hearing, the applicant was requested to prepare a possible alternative design that would not exceed 22 ft. elevation from the existing grade to the top of the ridge. The applicant ,Page 2- November 6, 2003 Appl. No. 536'2 - AlfredMagill 137-4-26 at Cutchogue consulted his architect, and on October 15, 2003 submitted a letter with revised plan showing a revised elevation with a maximum 15'11" mean height, and maximum 20'6" to the ridge from existing grade, designed by the architect, with the same roof that complements the new home. The applicant also confirmed that the purpose of the accessory garage is for storage, and that an apartment is not proposed in this request. REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: On the basis of testimony presented, materials submitted and personal inspections, the Board makes the following findings: 1. Grant of the. alternative relief will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the n~ighborhood or a detdmant to nearby properties. The applica[~t desires to substantially rebuild the existing garage which is located with variable front yard setbacks at 14 feet and 18 feet. Adjacent to the garage is a. sanitary system which serves the awr~er~'s residence: The applicant has indicated that the present garage is in ooor condition, padicular!y the back wail and the roof. The applicant plans to rebuild the 20'6' x 28,' accessory garage on the existing footprint, raising the roof for additional storage purpo~,es, ap,d, ,.,h~a_~_s accepted the Board's condition that the mean height be limited to 1Ell1, or'20 6 to the top of the ridge, as an alternative~to~ the. original plan. 2. The benefit sought by the applicant canner be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance. The existing ga.rage has been one- story in.beigl~t and, ip its present n~nconforming, location for more thar~ 35 years and is in nee~ of eztebsive repairS, It wil] not be possible to locate a garage at the code required minimum of 35 fe~t ~'romthe front lot~line due tO the location of the existing dwelling and size Of the property. 3. Although the relief granted is the minimum necessary, the variance granted herein is substantial because the setbacks of an accessory building on a waterfront parcel is required to be either located in a rear yard or when located in a front yard, not less than 35 feet from the front lot line. The relief requested is a reduction of 21 feet from the minii~um 35 ft. code requirement. 4. The difficulty was self-created when substantial reconstruction of the garage in a nonconforming footprint was planned ~: 5. There is no evidence that the grant of the alternative relief will have an adverse effect or impact on physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. The ' applicant has submitted a Tidal Wetland letter of non-jurisdiction dated January 22, 2003 from the State concerning their environmental review, and Permit #5689 dated January 22, 2003 from the Town Trustees concerning certain dwelling construction activities at the property. Page 3 - November 6, 2003 AppL No. 5362-Alfred Magill 137-4-26, at Cut~hogue 6. Grant of the alternative relief is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of garage reconstruction, while preserving and protecting the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community. RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD: In considering all of the above factors and applying the balancing test under New York Town Law 267-B, motion was offered by Member Tortora, secon.ded by Members Oliva (Chairwoman) and Goehdnger, and duly carried, to DENY the relief in applicant's original request, and to GRANT alternative retief, as shown on the Plan (Sheet tiS) prepared by Charles M. Thomas, Architect dated October 2003 and survey prepared April 3, 2001 by Stanley J. Isaksen, Jr., L.S., updated February 27, 2003, with the following CONDITIONS: 1. That the garage be accessory and incidental to the owner's residence for storage and garage purposes, and not be used for sleeping purposes. 2. That the mean height of the accessory garage not exceed 15'11", and the overall height to the top of the ddge not to exceed 20'6". This ac'don does not authorize or condone any current or future use, setback or other feature of the subject property that may violate the Zoning Code, other than such uses, setbacks and other features as are expressly addressed in this action. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Oliva (Chairwoman) Goehringer, Tortora, and Orlando (Vice Chairman). Absent yva~ Member Horning. This Resolution was duly F{uth D. Oliva, Chairwoman 11//~03 Approved for Filing 'APP~&LS BOARD MEMBERS ._~%~ Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road Gerard P. Ooehringer ~ Lydia A. Tortora ~ P.O. Box 1179 ~ ~"'.s,,, ~, Southold, New York 11971-0959 George Homing Rulh D. Oliva , Chairwoman ~ '~'~0~'~'~J~ ZBAFax (631) 765-9064 V'mcent Orlando '~ Telephone (63I) 765-1809 http://sourholdtown.norttlfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF NOVEMBER 6, 2003 Appl. No. 5400 -Howard Meinke Property Location: 2130 Broadwaters Road, Cutchogue; 104-9-13. SEQRA DETERMINATION: The Zoning Board of Appeals has vlsi;red the property under consideration in this application and determines that this review falls under the Type II category of the State's List of Actions, without an adverse effect on the environment if the project is implemented as planned. PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: The applicant's 31,422 sq. ft. parcel has 230+- ft. frontage along the northerly property line, an unopened access easement referred to as "Crabbers Road" and 74.28 feet along Broadwaters Road. The property consists of Lots 264 and part of 265 on the Amended Map A of Nassau Point filed in the Suffolk County Clerk's Office on August 16, 1922 as Map No. 156. The lot is improved with a single- family one,story frame house with as-built deck and hot tub, as shown on the May 13, 1986 survey, revised June 20. 2003, by Peconic Surveyors, P.C. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Building Department's May 30, 2003 Notice of Disapproval, citing Section 100-244B, in its denial of a building permit application for an "as-built" deck and hot tub addition at less than 40 feet from the front lot line. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on October 23, 2003, at which time written and oral evidence were presented. Based upon all testimony, documentation, personal inspection of the property, and other evidence, the Zoning Board finds the following facts to be true and relevant: AREA VARIANCE RELIEF REQUESTED: The applicant is requesting a variance for the as-built deck-hot tub addition, presently 14.1 feet from the northerly front line facing Crabbers Road (an unopened right-of-way), shown on the May 13, 1986 survey, revised June 20, 2003 by Peconic Surveyors, P.C. REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: On the basis of testimony presented, materials submitted and personal inspections, the Board makes the following findings: 1. Grant of the relief requested will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The "as built" upper deck measures approximately 20 feet x 15 feet, and the attached lower deck-hot tub area measures approximately 12 feet x 12 feet, located on the northeast side of the house. Page 2 - November 6, 2003 APpL No. 5400 - Howard Meinke 104-9-13 at Nassau Point The deck construction faces a paper road, which is undevelooed and referred to as "Crabbers Road". The applicant has a driveway over Crabbers Road for access to his adjacent land on the opposite side of the paper road. 2. The benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by some method, feasible for applicant to pursue, other than an area variance. The applicant has two front yards as noted on the June 20, 2003 survey prepared by Peconic Surveyors inc. This right-of- way easement referred to as Crabbers Road is not developed, and may never be developed. The deck construction is located 14.1 feet at the closest point to the front linealong Crabbers Road. and the paper width is~al~proximatety 22 feet wide. The width +' of the paper easement aHows,a visual setback rof a greater distance (37 -) from the adjacent properS/, ~1~o owned by the applicant 3. Although the relief requested is substantial in relation to the 40 ft. front yard code requirement, the reJief granted ,is the minimum necessary, and is based on the fact that the: right-of,way 'referred to as Crabbers Road has not been developed or used as a roadway, g~ng a visUal buffer greater than the actual 14.1 ff. setback. 4. Although the house was built i~ its present location more than 30 years ago, the difficulty was self-created when the applicant built the new construction without seeking req.u~red permits. 5. There isno e~vidence that the grant of the relief requested will have an adverse effect or ~pact on physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. The applicant is also required to obtain review determinations from the State and local environmental agencies with respect to the adjacent wetland areas. 6. Grant of the relief requested is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of the hot-tub/deck addition, while preserving and protecting [he character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community. RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD: In considering all of the above factors and applying the balancing test under New York Town Law 267-B, motion was offered by Member Orlando (Vice Chairman), seconded by Member Goehringer, and duly carried, to GRANT the variance as applied for, as shown on the May 13, 1986 survey, revised June 20, 2003 by Peconic Surveyors, P.C., SUBJECT to the condition that the hot-tub/deck addition shall remain open to the sky. This action does not authorize or condone any current or future use, setback or other Page 3 - November 6, 2003 AppL No. 5400 - Howard Meinke 104-9-13 st Nassau Point feature of the subject property that may violate the Zoning Code, other than such uses, setbacks and other features as are expressly addressed in this action. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Oliva (Chairwoman) Goehdr~ger, Tortora, and Orlando (Vice Chairman). Absent wa/s~Member Horning. This Resolution was duly adopted (4-0). . ~ /~ ~ Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman 11/ 103 Approved for Filing ~APP.EALS I$OARD MEMBERS ~~~'~. Southold Town Hall Gerard P. Goehringer: ~ 53095 Main Road Lydia A. Tortora P.O. Box 1179 George Homing Southold, New York 11971-0959 Ruth D. Oliva , Chairwoman ZBA Fax (631) 765-9064 Vincent Orlando Telephone (631) 765-1809 http://southoldtown.nor thfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF NOVEMBER 6, 2003 Appl. No. 5413 - P. Metres and L. Callaahan Property Location: 43715 C.R. 48 (a/ida Middle Road or North Road), Southold. CTM 1000-59-3-30. SEQRA DETERMINATION: The Zoning Board of Appeals has visited the property under consideration in this application and determines that this review falls under the Type I1 category of the State's List of Actions, without an adverse effect on the enwronment if the project is implemented as planned. PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: The applicants' 22,709.11 sq. ft. parcel is located on the corner of Hortons Lane and Middle Road (a/ida C.R. 48) in Southold. The property is improved with a one-story building with an existing restaurant business use in this Limited Business (LB) zone district. The existing building with deck is shown on the survey prepared March 14, 2003 by Stanley J. Isaksen, Jr. and is approximately 28 feet from the southerly front property line along Middle Road and approximately 23 feet from the arc Of the curve along Horton's Lane, at 7.5+- feet from the northerly property line (to a corner cfa deck), and 68+- feet from the westerly property line, at its closest points. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Building Department's July 17, 2003 Notice of Disapproval, citing Section 100-244B, in its denial of a building permit under Section 100-82A, for proposed additions/alterations to an existing commercial building with a side yard at less than 20 feet. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on October 23, 2003, at which time written and oral evidence were presented. Based upon all testimony, documentation, personal inspection of the property, and other evidence, the Zoning Board finds the following facts to be true and relevant: AREA VARIANCE RELIEF REQUESTED: Applicants wish to construct to place a walk- n cooler addition at the northerly side of the existing restaurant, after removing the ex~sting stoop and wood deck, and constructing a new concrete stairs to basement with a roof, as shown on the site plan prepared July 15, 2003, and revised 7/15/03 by Samuels & Steelman, Architects. The property is located in the Limited Business (LB) Zone District. REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: On the basis of testimony presented, materials submitted and personal inspections, the Board makes the following findings: Page 2 - November 6, 2003 Appl. No, 5413 - P. Metres and L. Callaghn 59-3-30 at Southo[d 1. Grant of the vanance relief will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhoo~t or a detriment to nearby properties. Applicants indicated a need for a ~valk- n coo er attached to the renovated bui dng,. which wil~ reduce the side. yard with a ft setbackl after replacement of the stairs to t~e basement and removal of the deck. At the hearing, applicantS indicated that this is the only location on site that the Wa[K-i~ cooler could be screened from view and also be accessible. Evergreens are proposed as a screening buffer on both the north and east sides of the cooler, and the cooler will not e~end beyond .the established, front building line facing HortQp Lane, and the deck at the r/Orth Side' of the, building wi be removed, and t~e fen(~e 'will be rej~iaced for additional screening,adjacent'to the hoOse on the north stale. 2. The benefit SoUght by,the applicant cannot be achieved bysome method, feasible for the apP,!ic~nt tQ PU~Ue0 other than: an a~ea variance. The parcel has two front yards facing a, [oWn 'street. and county highway mute. There is no reasonable alternative if the strucl~ure we,re.placed, on the ;other s de of the bud ng, 60 to 80 feet aWay from the budding, and n p a n's~gh~'fron~ the dr veway and parking area 3. /~lthough the, relief granted is the minimum necessary, the variance requested is substantiali representtn9 a 65% reduction, partially in tile side yard, from the 20 ft. minimum c~3de requirement to Seven feet at its cl(3sest point 4. The difficulty is self-created based on the property size and nonconformity of the building setbacks. 5. There is no evidence that the relief granted will have an adverse effect or impact on physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. 6, Grant of the relief requested is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of a walk,in cooler addition, while preserving and p~otecting the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community. RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD: In considering all of the above factors and applying the balancing test under New York Town Law 267-B, motion was offered by Member Goehringer, seconded by Member Orlando, and duly carried, to GRANT the variance as applied for, as shown on the site map prepared July 15, 2003, and revised 7/15/03 by Samuels & Steelman, Architects, with the CONDITION that the screening buffer be maintained in good condition at all Page 3 - November 6, 2003 AppL No. 5413 - P. Mettee and L. Caliaghn 59-3-30 at Southold times along the north and east sides of the proposed northerly addition. This action does not authorize or condone any current or future use, setback or other feature of the subject property that may violate the Zoning Code, other than such uses, setbacks and other features as are expressly addressed in this action. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Oliva (Chairwoman) Goehdnger, Tortora, and Orlando' (Vice Chairman). (Member Homing of Fishers Island was absent.) This Resolution Was duiy adopted (4-0). ~'~ ~ ,.,C'\ ('-~C~ Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman 11/{5/03 Approved for Filing · APPEALS I~OARD MEMBERS  Southold Town Hall ~Gerard P. Goehringer 53095 Main Road ~'~ ~ Lydia A Tortora i~j . P.O. Box 1179 ~, George Homing Southold, New York i1971-0959 ~ Ru~h D. Olive , Chairwoman ~ ZBA Fax (631) 765-9064 Vince2nt Orlando ~ Telephone (631) 765-1809 http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD FINDINGS, O£1-1[tl-'RATION$ AND DI:TI::RMINATION MI~£TIIqG OF NOVEMBt~R 6, 2003 Appl. hiD, $351 - Omninoint Communications. Inc. Propertyt.ocatiom '12585 5ound Avenue, Mattituok; 1000~'14'1-3~38.'1 Date of Public Hearing: August 2'1, 2003 In the Matter of Omnipoint Communications, Inc., based on the Building InspectOr's determination rendered in the April '1, 2003 Notice of Disapproval and for an interpretation of the Code of the Town of $outhold, Ch. '100, Article XVI, Section ~00- ~62C(3);, pertaining: to the location of a telecommunications tower "300 feet from an~ lanclraark property or tiistrict listed t~)~ federal, state or town agencies" in the LI l,ight Industrial I)istricL FINDINGS OF FACT BASIS OF AI~P£AI,: The Appellant, Omnipoint Communications Inc., is appealing the Building inspector's April ~, 2003 Notice of Disapproval for an interpretation. The April ~, 2003 Notice of Disapproval denied an application for a building permit to construct a telecommunications tower for the following reason: The proposed telecommunications tower on this 3.872 acre parcel in the I_ight industrial District is not permitted pursuant to Article XVI. Section ~ 00-~ 62 which states: "No wireless communications facility shall t)e usec erected or altered in the Town of Southold except as follows: (3) Wireless communication facilities on telecommunication towers are a permitted use, provided that the height of the tower above grade does not exceed ~00 feet above the existing grade and provided that the base of the tower is located at least ~00 feet from the nearest dwelling unit and 300 feet from any landmark property or district listed by federal, state or town agencies. The cell tower is proposed to be located +/-'i 37 feet from adjacent lot (SGTM#'1000-'14'1-3-35) and ~-/-~58 feet from adjacent lot (SCTM tt'1000~4~-3~39), both of which are historical properties isted on the Society for the Preservation of Long Island Antiquities inventory of Southold Historic ?reperties. REI-I£F RI~QIJI~$TEO: Applicant maintains that the building inspector erred in interpreting ~00-~62C(3) to require a minimum 300 ft. distance from the tower to any landmark property or district listed by federal, state or town a§enc~es. Applicant maintains that the only issue for interpretation is whether the list of landmark properties or districts to which reference is made Section ~00-162C(3) may be interpreted to include properties found on the Society for the Preservation of I_ong Island Antiquities Inventory of Southold Historic Properties, which list is expressly referenced in Section 56-7(A) of the Town Code, rather than it being a federal, state or town agency list. The Applicant requests the Board of Appeals to reverse the inspector's determination on this basis. Page,2 - November 6, 2003 Interpretation/'i00-1620(3) Omnipoint Communications 141-3-38.1 WHEREAS, The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on 8/21/03, at which time written and oral evidence was presented. Based upon all testimony, docur0entation, personal inspection of the property, and other evidence, the Zoning Board finds the following facts to be true and relevant: PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: The subject property is a 3,82-acre parcel located on the north side Of Sound Avenue, Mattituck, SCTM 1000-141-3-38.1, now or formerly referred to as Penny Lumber. The property is zoned Light Industrial (LI). APPLICABLE CODE PROVISIONS: WHEREAS, the following sections of Chapter 100 (Zoning) are pertinent to this request: Section 100-1620(3): C. In Industrial Districts including LI and LIO, a wireless communication facility is subject to site plan approval and must meet the following requirements: (3) Wireless communication facilities on telecommunication towers are a permitted use, provided that the height of the tower above grade does not exceed I00 feet above the existing grade and provided that the base of the tower is located at least 100 feet from the nearest dwelling unit and 300 feet from any landmark property or district listed by federal, state or town agencies. ACTION OF THE BOARD: WHEREAS, the board has further carefully considered the following evidence and testimony: 1. The question presented to the board is whether or not the Building Inspector erred when noting Section 100-1620(3) as the reason that the base of the tower must be located at least 100 feet from the nearest dwelling unit and 300 feet from any landmark propertv or district listed by federal, state or town aaenc~es, more specifically CTM Parcels 1000-140-3-35 and 1000- 140-3-39. 2. The applicant's reasons are set forth in both oral and written argument in the record. The applicant's basic argument is that: (a) Chapter 56 (Landmark Preservation] Section 56-7(A) expressly refers to the Society for the Preservation of Long Island Antiquities Inventory of Southold Historic Properties (referred to as the S.P.L.I.A. list), and does not apply to this application because it was not invoked into Chapter 100 (Zoning) Section 100-1620(3) as the Town Legislature may have intended, that (b) only town properties listed pursuant to the Town's Landmark Designation process may be considered for the purposes of Section 100- 1620(3), and the applicant's property, CTM 1000-141-3-38.1, is not listed as a landmark site, that (c) the two properties noted in the Building Inspector's Notice of Disapproval are not listed on a federal, state or town agency list. 3. The board agrees. Page~3 - November 6, 2003 Interpretation/10~-162C(3) Ornnipoint Communications 141-3-38.1 4. It is further noted that the Board of Appeals is without authority to modify the Code under any circumstances. BOARD RESOLUTION; Based on the above clear language of the Town Code sections, the board' finds that the Building, Inspector's Notice of Disapproval was not propedy issued. NOW, on motion by Member Odando, seconded by Member Tortora, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Appeals Interprets Article XVI, Section 100-'162C(3) to mean that Section 56-7 does not apply to this application because the S.P.L.I.A. list was not invoked as a list into Section 100-~162C(3), as Town Legislature may have intended, and Reverses the Building Inspector's April 1, 2003 Notice of Disapproval. This action does nol authorize or condone any current or future use, setback or other feature of the subject property that may violate the Zoning Code. other than such uses, setbacks and other features as are expressly addressed in this action. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Oliva (Chairwoman), Goehdnger, Tortora, and Orlando (Vice Chairman). Absentwas Member Homing. T~is.~s~.n was duly adopted (4-0). Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman 111/,:;Z'/03 Approved for Filing · S,O D nMS S Southold TownHall Gerard P. Goehringe~ 53095 Main Road C Lydia A. Tortora P.O. Box 1179 George Homing Southold, New York 11971-0959 Ruth D. Oliva , Chairwoman ZBA Fax (631) 765-9064 Vincent Orlando Telephone (631) 765-1809 http://southoldtowmnoxthfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF NOVEMBER 6, 2003 Appl; No. 5415 - & Ann Piqnato and Maria Reqin§ Properly Location: 28545 Main Road, Ode~tf18-6=24.3 SEQRA DETERMINATION';, The Zonin, g Board of Appeals has visited;the property under CO~sJderati0q Lq~thiS Fpp i¢~itio~, and.~letermines that this review fall~ Under the Type II category of the 'state':s List: of Actibhs, without an adverse effect on the enwronment if the project is implemented as planned. ROPERTY.FAC'P, SlDESCRIPTION. The apphcant s 1.79-acre lot ts located on the east sid, b pf Browb'S~ Hill Road, a,<private road in Orient. The property ~s shown on a former Sdb¢!vfsion Map rhade for I~ward b Young as Pict #2. Ttie property is improved with a i-1~2¢ s~0r~'fra~.e, dwellln¢ With garage and deck and swimm ng pool as shown on the Augt~st'31', 1987'su.rvey prepared by Peconic Surveyors, revsed J~ y 1, 2003. - . ~ $.:OFAp~I~A~IONi Braiding Departments May 19 2003 Not,ca of Disapproval, ¢iffdglS~ect[0n 100~3, n its denial of a building permit to construct a proposed accessory garage4n a yard other than the rear yard. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zonir)g Board of Appeals held a public headng on this application on October 23, 2003, at which time written and oral evidence were presente& Based upon all testimony, documentation, personal inspection of the property, and other evidence, the Zoning Board finds the following facts to be true and relevant: AREA VARIANCE RELIEF REQUESTED: Applicant wishes to construct a 32' x 24' accessbry garage at 10 feet from the north property line (facing a 25' right-of-way easement) and 75 feet from the easterly property line (50 ft. from a proposed new 25 ft. righter:way), shown on the October 29. 2003 survey prepared by Peconic Surveyors. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:AMENDED RELIEF: During the October 23, 2003 public hearing, the appl!cant was requested to increase the setbacks from the northerly. pr, ope~y line for a possible alternative plan that would be more conforming to the code's requirement. By letter dated October 31 2003, the applicant's attorney confirmed th'~t the setback for the proposed accessory structure is ~ncreased from 10 f~et to 15 feet. REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: On the basis of testimony presented, materials submitted and personal inspections, the Board makes the following findings: Page 2 -November 6, 2003 ::: ~ ° Appl. No. 5415 ~M. Regina and J. Pignato 18-6-24.3 at Orient 1. Grant of the vadance will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The applicants moved an existing 12' x 19' nonconforming shed structure which was located at the extreme northeast corner of the property, and are proposing a n~ew 32 ft. '× 24 ff. garage oCated 15 feet off the northerly front property Iiae 75-¢- :fe'et:~ff ~e east property line, and'50 feet f~bm the PexrOposed right-of-way (front p~:operty line). The mean height of the g?age will not ceed 15. {eet, as r{oted,:Jn thb AugUst ,15 2002 plans prepared ,by Penny Lumber. Screening,w, ill be pro~/ided'With natSi'al &ft. high evergreen-type shrubs and contint~ously mainta ne8 the fu length on the non~h (front) .~ide of the gar~,ge. 2. The benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pt~rsue, a,the~ than an ,area variarlc~,~, Approximately ?'5 per ,cent ,of the applican~%'prop~rty, is surr°ur~,dgd by r~dways'a~d right~;~)f-way, with ~bis in ml[3(~, this yard under the,c~rrent code i~ bot designated a t'ear yard; and arb shown as 'f¢0nt yard ~)n'the October 29, 2003 SdP/ey by, peC°n c Surveyors, P ~ 3. The vadanc, e granted here~n is minimal and the garage,,would meet,t,he required~ rear yard setbac~k,s~ for.,an, a'b~b~s¢7 building under,~,the¢cu~r~ent CO~e if,th~ ~roadwaYs~ an8 rights-of-way did no~,surr~)u~d~the property. 4. The difficulty was self-created when the garage was planned with all [he logistical difficulties noted above. 5., There is no evidence that the grant of the variance will have an adverse effect or impact on physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. 6. Grant of the relief requested is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of a garage, while preserving and protecting the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community. RESOLUTION CE THE,BOARE):. In considering all of,the above factors and applying the balancing 'test under New York Town Law 267-B, motion was offered by Member Orlando, seconded by Member Tortora, and duly carried, to GRANT the variance with a minimum 15 ft. setback from the north front lot line, as amende~d, and described on the August 15, 2002 construction plan prepared by Renny L';um'ber, subject to the following CONDITIONS: 1, The only utility will be electric; 2. ~4o p!ur~bing or heat is permitted; no bathroom will be permitted. 3. The natural, screening of 8 ft. evergreen-type shrubs will be maintained the '~"~-~ full length on the north side of the garage.).~_~ Page 3 - November 6, 2003 Appl. No. 5415 - M. Regina and J. Pignato 18-6-24.3 at Orient ~,, . C This action does not authorize or condone any current or future use, setback or other feature of the subject property that may violate the Zoning Code, other than such uses, setbacks and oti~er features as are expressly addressed in 'this action. Vote of the Board: Ayes; Members Oliva (Chairwoman) Goehringer, Tortora, and Orlando (Vice Chairman). Absent~¢~ Member Hor~esolution was duly adopted (4-0). Ruth D. Oliva, ChairWoman 11/]~/03 Approved for Filing ~¢PPEADS BOARD MEMBERS Southold Town Hall Gerard P. Goehringer, 53095 Main Road Lydia A. Tortora ~ ~-_ 1 · P,O. Box 1179 George Homing ~-~,.~ Southol& New York 11971-0959 Ruth D. Oliva , Chairwoman ~ ZBA Fax (631) 765-9064 Vincent Orlando Tetephone (631) 765-1809 http://soutlmldtow n.nor thforlcxae* BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF NOVEMBER 6. 2003 AppL No. 5402 - Paul Sonnet Property Location: 450 Richmond Road East, Southold; 135-3-7. SEQRA DETERMINATION: The Zoning Board of Appeals has visited the property under consideration in this application and determines that this review fails under the Type II category of the State's List of Actions, without an adverse effect on the enwronment if the project is implemented as planned. PROPERTY FACTS~DESCRIPTION: The applicant's 9,339 sq. ft. lot has approximately 40 ft. frontage along a private road, lat depth of 49.77 feet, and overall width of 191.15 feet to a tie line along the mean high water mark of Arshamomaque Pond, in Southoid. The property is improved with a one-story frame cottage with covered porch and brick patio as shOWn on the August 1. 2002 survey prepared by Peconic Surveyors, P.C., amended October 9, 2003. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Building Department's June 27, 2003 Notice of Disapproval, citing Sections 100-242A and 100-244 in its denial of a building permit to construct a porch addition at less than 35 feet from the front lot line and less than 35 feet from the rear lot line. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on OCtober 23, 2003, at which time written and oral evidence were presented. Based upo~ all testimony, documentation, personal inspection of the property, and other ev/dence, the Zoning Board finds the following facts to be true and relevant: AREA VARIANCE RELIEF REQUESTED: Applicant wishes to construct a 12.5' x 18.6' porch addition at 16.4 feet from the front lot line facing a private road and 11.7 feet from the rear lot line, REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: On the basis of testimony presented, materials submitted and personal inspections, the Board makes the following findings: 1. Grant of the relief requested will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The applicant's one-story Page 2 - November 6, 2003 Appl. No. 5402 - Paul Sennett 135.-3-7 at Sou[hold dwelling is preexisting at 11.4 feet from the front lot line facing a private road, and 3.5 feet at its closest point to the rear properly line. The lot is only 50 feet deep with a width of 191.15 feet to Arshamomaque Pond, which provides for an oversized side yard and undersized front and rear yard areas. The dwelling is in an older described summer community with undersized lots and cottages, 90% of which are preexisting and also contain similar setbacks. 2. The benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance. The proposed porch is centered beb,veen the. front and rear property lines, proposed at the side of the dwelling. This is the only yard area available for an extension 3. Although the relief requested is the minimum necessary, the amount of relief granted is substantial because the code requires a minimum 35 ff. front and rear yard, and the reductibn is 18.6 feet on the front and 23.3 feet on the rear. Applicant proposes to remove the existing 7.4' x 14.4' covered porch for a new porch. 4. The difficulty is not self-created and is based on the nonconforming size of the property and preexisting setbacks as established, before the addition was planned. 5. There is no evidence that the grant of the relief requested will have an adverse effect or impact on physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. The area of new construction is above the 10 ft. natural contour of the land and is 98+- feet from the edge of wetlands, and the existing covered porch will be removed for a newly designed porch. 6. Grant of the relief requested is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of a porch, while preserving and protecting the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community. RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD: In considering all of the above factors and applying the balandng test under New York Town Law 267-B, motion was offered by Member Goehringer, seconded by Member Orlando (Vice Chairman), and duly carried, to GRANT the variance as applied for, as shown on the August 1, 2002 survey prepared by Peconic Surveyors, P.C., amended October 9, 2003. This action does not authorize or condone any current or future use, setback or other feature of the subject property that may violate the Zoning Code, other than such uses, I~age 3 - November 6, 2003 Appl. No. 5402- Paul Sennett 35.-3-7 at Southold setbacks and other features as are expressly addressed in this action. Vote of the Board; Ayes: Members Oliva (Chairwoman) Goehringer, Tortora, and Orlando O/ice Chairman). Absent w~a~ Member Homing. r~This Resolution was duly Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman 1 Approved for Filing ~ gr~ .South01d Town Hall Gerard P. Goehringe~ ~'~ll 53095 Main Road Lydia A. Tortora ¢ ~ ~i P.O. Box 1179 George Homing ~e~. ~t~ Southold, New York 11971-0959 Ruth D. Oliva , Ghairwoman xxo.-,o,l a ZBA Fax (631) 765-9064 V'mcent Orlando '~ Telephone (631) 765-1809 http://southoldtown.uor thfor~r.ner BOARD OF APPEALS RECE.VED TOWN OF SOUTHOLD FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OE.iNoVEMBER 6, 2003 ~ZBA'5417- Michael and MaP/Elten,Cirrito ' rt ~1 e rkt Pr0pedy Location: 7625 Nassau Point Road~ Cu.~hogqe; 118~-4. SEQRA DETERMINATION: T~e Zoning-Boa~d of Appeals has visited~the pr~operty under consideration in this:application and determines that this review falls under the Type ca!egory, of:the State's. List of Actions, without an adverse effect on the environment if the project is implemented as planned. PROPERTY FACTS/DESCPJPTION: The applicants' 40,098 sql. ft parcel s shown as Lot 58 on the amended Map A of Nassau Point filed August 16, 1922in the Suffolk County Cl~k'e office.. The,property has 100.33 feet along the'easterly side of Nassau Point Road a~ s i~pr0Ved w t~i a one-story frame dwelii~g an accessory pool house and sw mmmg pool, as shown, on the .May 9; 2003 suv:ey.prepared by _ohn C. Eh!ers, L.S. BASIS' OF APPLICATION:, Building Depar[ment's July 15, 2003 Notice of Disapproval, citing Section 100~242A (~ef. 100-244B) and 100-239.4B in its denial of a building permit tc~ construct an proposed additions/alterations at less than a single side yard of 10 feet and less than 75 feetfrom the bulkhead. · FINDINGS OF FACT The Zen ng,Boa~d of Appea s he d a public hearing on this application on October 23, t2e0s03, at whiph .,time written and oral evidence were presented. Based upon all tirnony, d0bu~entation, personal inspection of the property, and other evidence, the Zoning Board finds the following facts to be true and relevant: AREA' ~ARIA'~IOE RELIEF REQUESTED: Applicant wishes to construct proposed porch~ with steps, proposed 1~ and 2"d floor addition, proposed 2"° floor addition over existing,1%floor,;and alterations to the existing dwelling as shown on the detailed site plan p~par~d Ju~e 2~, 2003 Dy Robert I. Brown, R A REASONS FOR ,BOARD' Ac:r ON: On the basis of testimony presented, materials ~ubmitted and~ personal insDections, the Board makes the following findings: 1. Gr~nt Of the relief requ, ested will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the'neighborh00d'or a detriment to nearby properties. The applicant indicated that they ~sire!~o, {e~,Onstrubt a second-story over the northery half of the r home n the same seib~;~:a~ea' ~,i~0ut ih~reasing the existing setbacks of the footprint. As Pag e2 - November 6, 20~ ,, ZEtA 5'417-·Michael and Mary E len Cii:r~b 1~18~-4 atCu[chogue indicated, the dwelling'has nonconforming_setbacks in the southerly side yard at 4'5" feet and in the r.~ar waterside at 58.4 feet at its closest points to the property lines. The , serif%ack to tf~e bulkhead for the new construction w~ll be 50+- feet from the bulkhead, '~. ~vhic~h ~ :a~n 'ncrease in nonCodformit',y when ~cc;mpare'd to: the 3& ft,:'setb~ck ~f the~ne- ~' ~toW ~b~dCi'bfthe.hoUse in its pr~e;i;t,4dca:ti~n. ' ',2: The-benefit S0Light by the ·applicant cahnot be achie~e¢~ by so'm.e method:, feas ble for ~ ~th~ applicabt: {o'~ur~sue' Other than an area variali~;I The; ho..m,.~ Was '~bdilt With ; :'honbonfoi-ming; setbaCks;- and. the,:!new dwelling, c6ns~bctiod Will ~'ehcompas¢ ?he northerly half of the existing footprint area Which :Will:,"§ub§ta'ntiall~ ,meet ~he, 80de requirement on. a single, s, ide ~ard; and utilizes the footpr~'~ wh, ich contain? the greatest 3. Alth(~ugh, ~,e-yaria~igranted ]s the m'nlmUr~ n'6e~ar~ the dlffieuty was self- ,created when t~o aod|,lo,p, was planqed after the home ~'¢,~s bbilft ~n its present Ioc~ition without :;ordorming to lhoicurrent TUet~ Code' requirem¢~ ¢ 4. No evidence has, been submitted to indicate concerns or objections in the area or that the g'raht~df3the J'elibf~,r~quested W, have an adverg-~ effect or mpact on p:qys ca or environmental conditions ~n the neighborhood or d~stnc~ 5. Grant of !he relief requested is the minimum action ne(es~ary a,nd ~dequate to enable the applicabt to enjoy t~e benefit of new addition~, while' ,preserwng: and protecting the character o~' the nei~Chborl~ood arid.the'health, ~'af~ty arbl ~eJfare Of t~e '~ommunity. RESOLUTION iDF',~HE ~BOARD: In considering all of td~9~a~oVe ~acters '~nd applying the balancing ta§t Under ~New York Town Law 267-B ¢~t~ was 5ffeicecl b~, Member Goehnnger, seconded,By Member Orlando, and duly carqed; to ~ "- - GRANT the variance as applied for as shown ~qr} ,t.b~ Juae 25 2003 by Robed I. Brown RA. ':, ~ This action ,dOes not aett~onze or condone any currer,t or future (,se, selback or other feature of tl~e subject property that may violat~ ;tho Zoriing: Cbde. o,:her tha,q sucl~ Uses, setbacks and other,features as are expressly Vote of.the~ Board: Aye;s: Members Oliva Tortora and Orlando (V~,e. Chairma~n), Absent)A~ts Member ~ was duly adopted (4-0);;; .' ':, '* /' ] -- "AI3PEALS03OARD MEMBERS -' ~:- ~- - .~ Gera~d P. Goehrmger ~'~ ~1~ 53095 Main Road Lydia A. Tortom t~ ~ P.O. Box 1179 George Homing v~.~..~ Southold, New York 11971-0959 Ruth D. Oliva , Ghairwoman ~"t/J a'~01TM ZBA Fax (631) 765-9064 Vincent Orlando '~ Telephone (631) 765-1809 http:/, southoldtown.nortlffork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD RFC~IVED FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION ~ ·., MEETING OF NOVEMBER 6, 2003 '~'; 1 8 ~.003 L~¢w' AppL No. 5401- Paul PropertyLocaton' 270 No~th Sea Drve. Southod; 54-5-50. · .(J~L_,, .¢_ . rl~tk SEQRA ~ETERI~IiNATIoN: The Zoning Board of Appeals has visited the prope, rty, under consideration in this application and determines that this review falls under the Type II ~ategory ~of th~ State;s· List of Actions, without an adverse ~ffect onthe ,er~vironmeUt if h:e pr0je~fis ~plemef!ted.a~ panned PROP, EF~?f~¢ FA,GTS/DESCRIPT!ON: The applicant s 1-2,500 ~q~.~f,t. lot j~.i~p, r0ved~wilh a singiezfamily, tw0-strYry fra~ne house w th deck and garage.as sh0wn;or~.tlhe~:October:28, 2002 survey, revised November 12, 2002, by Joseph A. Ingegno, L.S. BASIS .-,F ~ P,-,CA, ,..,,~. L~,,~ n_q ~..artm~ [ o ~u,,e ~ ~20~u.~u[,,.~ ,~, ~o,~}4~, ,.~al ct ng ,Secqons~ t00-242 apd 100-244 n ts den al of a bud no~;o,erm t. concern ne a bu diqg perm tapp c~t~on for a new sta rway and and ng add ton at ess than 35 feet from the mar.yard. FtNDINGS OF FACT ZOrlihO 'of Appeals held a public headng on this application on October 23, The 21)03; a.t ~hc;5 .tree wrtten and ora evdence were presented. Based upon a te~monY docOme0tation, personal inspection of the property, and other evidence the Zom~ng Board fl~Ss the following facts to be true and relevant: AR~A ~A~iA~E RELIEF REQUESTED: Applicant wishes to construct a 4' x 7'6" land~ng and".sta~ ;rw~ay· with an overall length of 21 fee~ with a rear yard setback of 39.9 feet. REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: On the basis of testimony presented materials submitted and personal inspections, the Board makes the following findings: 1: 6rant of' the relief will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhobd or a detriment to nearby properties. The applicant indicated that his family has ne er had a rear door to their home· The addition is 4' x 7'6" landing plus stairway at,the rear Of the home for access purposes. 2. The benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved ay some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance. The home is 34.9 feet from the rear property line, and with the landing, the setback will be 30.9 feet. 200~3 Page 2 - November 6 AppL No. 5401 - Paul Stetz 54-5~50 at Southold <~ ~.~,,.' '- 3:.~_AIthough. the relief granted: .s the, m n mum necessa, ry the. Iand ng resu ts in a 4 ft. ,.reduction of the 35 ft. code requ~ren?er~t. The relief requested is not~ substantial. ? :4. The:¢ ~icul~y was self-created ~,that the addition wa~;de~'i~ed:~aft~r the house was built,, a~d ~e ~act that the house is 34 9 feet 34 9 feet from t~ rear property line in its present ocat on . ~,5~,:l~;d~e~d,ence ~aS~$'dbmitt:ed to. indicate wettand or envi~: ,dtqn~, ,'n~ljy ~ensiti~e;~areas or their:the grant df the .relief re~ueste~t will have an ad~/ersei[:effa~¢0r~ii~Caa~ 5d-~'hVsli:al or env, ron nenta! corfdi[ions'in the n~ghborheed.,0r distr; pt.. ¢; !aPY ;~r; area is surro.mdinq by a seasonal resid~ihtial commLin homes .in nonco¢florm lg' 0Ls. ,~ - - 6. Grant of the relief CeqttcSted is the minimum action necessar:, and ~.dec. ualo to oqab e the aDP re. ant- [o enl v' m be'-efit, of a !and,'''~ an,~ · *, ,, -', proteCbng,the, ch~a~t, er :~. t~e nerghborhood and-the he~.'-~::;, sa.~¢~.,' ;:~n,': vvc!farc of the 'community'. ~ ~. !~ ~ :. ' ' RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD: In considering all of the above factors and applying the balancing test under New York Town: Law 267-B, motion was offered by Member eoehdnger, seconded b:y,:Member Orlando (Vice Chairman), and ~duly~icarded GRANT th.e. vada~qce as applied for, as shown on the ~te maC, aqd COnstruction ~diagra~ pi-i~'par~d!rby Warren' A. Sambach; Sr. dated May 21 This ~actio~ does not authorize or condone any current or futu:re use~ setba, ck or other ~eature of the. subject p~0petty that may violate the Z0nin~ ~0de,.~th~- tC n .eh uses setbacks and other features as are express y addressed m th~s acbOn':~ * ' Vote of the Beard: Ayes: Members Oliva (Chairwoman) Goehringer, Tortora, and 'Orlando (Vice Chairman). Absent was Member Hornne.:' Th s Resolution was duly adopted (~0). ~ ¢ · Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman 1~! /03 AppFoved for Filing APP~EALS BOARD MEMBERS ~~ Southold Town Hall Gerard P. Goehringe~ 53095 Main Road Lydia A. Tortora P.O. Box 1179 George Homing Southold. New York 11971-0959 Ruth D. Ol~va , Chaimtoman ZBA Fax (631) 765-9064 V'mcem Orlando Telephone (631) 765-1809 http://southoldtown.nor thfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD FINDINGS. DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF NOVEMBER 6, 2003 Appl. No. 5410 - A. and S. Waclqoner Property Location: 1695 Wickham Avenue, Mattituck; 1000-140-1-1. SEQRA DETERMINATION: The Zoning Board of Appeals has visited the property under consideration in this application and determines that this review falls under the Type II category of the State's List of Actions, without an adverse effect on the environment if the project is implemented as planned. PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: The applicants' 28,276 sq. ft. parcel has 290' frontage along the west side of Wickham Avenue in Mattituck, shown and described on the July 23, 2003 survey prepared by Joseph A. Ingegno, L.S. The property is improved with a one-story frame house with garage shown at 46+- feet from the front line along Wickham Avenue and 34.6 feet from the rear property line, and a separate one-story frame building at 65,$ feet from a tie line along the apparent high water line of Mattituck Creek. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Building Department's May 30, 2003 Notice of Disapproval, citing Sections 100-242A and 100-244B, in its denial of a building permit application for a new addition and alterations at less than 40 feet from the rear property line. It is noted, however, that Section 100-244B requires a 50 ft. rear yard setback on lots containing at least 20,000 sq. ft. and less than 39,999 sq. ft. (instead of the 40 feet noted in the May 30, 2003 Notice of Dis.approval). FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on [his application on October 23, 2003. at which time written and oral evidence were presented. Based upon all testimony, documentation, personal inspection of the property, and other evidence, the Zoning Board finds the following facts to be true and relevant: AREA VARIANCE RELIEF REQUESTED: Applicants wish to construct a 24'6" x 24' second story addition over the existing garage attached to this single-family dwelling, which is presently 34.6 feet from the rear property line. REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: On the basis of testimony presented, materials submitted and personal inspections, the Board makes the following findings: 1. The applicant has proposed to construct a 24.6' x24' second-floor addition directly above an existing garage attached to the single-family residence. The existing dwelling Page 2 '- November 6, 2003 AppL No. 5410 - A. and S. Waggoner 140-1-1 at Mattituck and garage have existed for over 30 years in its present location at 34.6 feet from the rear property line. The property has substantial frontage along Wickham Avenue, and contains a tidal wetland areas abutting Mattituck Creek. The granting of this variance will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood, or be a detriment to nearby properties, because there will be no increase in the original dimensions of the building footprint, and the existing rear yard setback will not be changed. 2. The benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by some other method feasible for the applicant to pursue,: other than an area variance, because a large portion of the applicant's pamel lies within a designated 100 year flood plain, the lot has a building ~:~)ntaining a non-conforming rear yard setback of 34.6 feet. 3. The requested vadance is not substantial because there will be no change to the exist'rog building footprint. Total lot coverage will remain at less than 20 percent. 4. The grant of a variance will not have an aaverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the r~eighborhood, or district because the building expansion will be upwards, only, with no, s~gnificant increase to the basic dimensions of this building. The applicant has submitted letters of non-jurisdiction from the NYS DEC, and the Southold Town Board of Trustees concerning tidal wetland regutations. 5. The difficulty for the applicant is not self-created because the building has been existing for many years with nor>conforming rear yard setback, which will no! ~)e changed with the second-story addition. 6. The relief offered to this applicant is the minimum determined necessary for this applicant to enjoy the benefit of a second-story addition, while at the same time protecting and preserwng the character of the neighborhood, as well as the health, safety, and welfare of the surroundihg community. RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD: In considering all of the above factors and applying the balancing test under New York Town Law 267-B, motion was offered by Member Geahringer, seconded by Chairwoman Oliva, and duly carried, to GRANT the variance as applied for, as shown on the plan prepared by Total Design Concepts dated September 2t, 2002 and October 8, 2002, and shown on the July 23, 2003 survey prepared by Joseph A. Ingegno, ES., SUBJECT to the following CONDITIONS: 1. This building shall continue its use only as a single-family dwelling. I~,age 3 - November 6, 2003 A~pl. No. 5410-A. and S. Waggoner 140-1-1 at Matfituck 2. The addition shall be constructed as specified on the applicants' plans submitted with this application. 3. The nonconforming rear yard setback shall not be reduced to less than the existing 34.6 feet. This action does net authorize or condone any current or future use, setback or other feature of the subject property that may violate the Zoning Code, other than such uses, setbacks and other features as are expressly addressed in this action. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Oliva (Chairwoman), Tortora, Goehringer, and Orlando. Absent was Member HornirC'~f'~s~ Res~uti~y adopted (4-0). 11/,,¢/03 - Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman Approved for Filing RECEIVED ~ J;~,~ ?,~ o,~old To~vn Clerk