HomeMy WebLinkAbout7884 BOARD MEMBERS ��0� S0(/j Southold Town Hall
Leslie Kanes Weisman, Chairperson h0 1p 53095 Main Road •P.O. Box 1179
Southold,NY 11971-0959
Patricia Acampora Office Location:
Eric Dantes �p� Town Annex/First Floor,
Robert Lehnert,Jr. ��'. 54375 Main Road(at Youngs Avenue)
Nicholas Planamento COU Southold,NY 11971
http://southoldtownny.gov RECEIVED
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS pta G 2'
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD AUG "5 =
Tel. (631) 765-1809 9W_
Southold Town Clerk
FINDINGS,DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION
MEETING OF JULY 25,2024
ZBA FILE: #7884
NAME OF APPLICANT: Mary and James Huettenmoser
PROPERTY LOCATION: 2235 Cedar Lane,East Marion,NY SCTM No. 1000-37-4-7
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 further steps under SEQRA.
SUFFOLK COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE CODE: This application was referred as required under the
Suffolk County Administrative Code Sections A 14-14 to 25, and the Suffolk County Department of
Planning issued its reply dated December 22, 2023, stating that this application is considered a matter for
local determination as there appears to be no significant county-wide or inter-community impact.
LWRP DETERMINATION: This application was referred for review under Chapter 268, Waterfront
Consistency review of the Town of Southold Town Code and the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program
(LWRP) Policy Standards. The LWRP Coordinator issued a recommendation dated February 26, 2024.
Based upon the information provided on the LWRP Consistency Assessment Form submitted to this
department,as well as the records available,it is recommended that the proposed action is INCONSISTENT
with LWRP policy standards and therefore is INCONSISTENT with the LWRP.
Policy]. Foster a pattern of development in the Town of Southold that enhances the community character,
preserves open space, makes efficient use of infrastructure, makes beneficial use of coastal location and
minimizes adverse effects of development.
The setbacks and exceedance of the building height of 35'proposed does not enhance community
character and sets a precedent on construction in the neighborhood and within the community. The action
is not consistent with this policy.
Policy 4. Minimize the loss of life, structures, and natural resources from flooding.
The proposed 33.40 percent lot coverage on the parcel is contrary to preventing loss of structure
near Hazards. The structures within these areas are subject to repetitive loss from storm surge-induced
Page 2, July 25, 2024
#7884, Huettemnoser
SCTM No. 1000-37-4-7
events and should be avoided and/or minimized. Setbacks should be maximized.
According to the applicant's representative, there was no objection from either the New York State
Department of Environmental Conservation or the Southold Board of Trustees as no building will take
place within their jurisdiction. The LWRP Standards for height of structure has been adjusted in order to
be considered Consistent with LWRP policy.
The applicant has reduced the number of variances requested, and reduced the size of the dwelling at the
request of the Board in an effort to reduce adverse impacts; and with the alternative relief, denial and
conditions imposed herein, the Zoning Board determines that the proposed action is now CONSISTENT
with LWRP policy standards and therefore CONSISTENT with the LWRP.
PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: The subject property is a nonconforming 12,799 square foot
(buildable area 12,606 square foot) parcel located in a Residential R-40 Zoning District. The northerly
property line measures 105.83 feet and the easterly property line measures 36.41 feet, then 18.76 feet
southeasterly, then 30.78 feet southeasterly, then drops 10.91 feet southwesterly, then 22.76 fee
southeasterly and adjacent to Spring Pond, the southerly property line measures 138.33 feet, and the
westerly property line measures 100.00 feet and is adjacent to Cedar Lane. The parcel is improved with a
one-story frame dwelling with an attached wood deck in the rear of the dwelling along with a masonry
block patio northeast of the wood deck as shown on the survey map prepared by Nathan Taft Corwin III,
LS,and last revised June 7,2024.
BASIS OF APPLICATION: Request for Variances from Article XXIII,Sections 280-124;Article XXXVI,
Section280-207; and the Building Inspector's November 8, 2023 Notice of Disapproval based on an
application for a permit to demolish an existing single-family dwelling and construct a new two-story
single-family dwelling; 1) located less than the code required minimum side yard setback of 10 feet; 2)
more than the code permitted maximum lot coverage of 20%; 3) gross floor area exceeding the permitted
maximum square footage for a lot containing up to 20,000 square feet in area; located at: 2235 Cedar Lane
(Adj.to Spring Pond),East Marion,NY. SCTM#1000-37-4-7.
AMENDED APPLICATIONS/RELIEF REQUESTED : The Amended Notice of Disapproval dated June
11,2024 lists variances required for 1)side yard setback of 7.8 feet where the code requires a minimum of
10 feet, 2) lot coverage of 30.8% where the code permitted maximum is 20% and 3) Gross Floor Area at
4,016. sq. ft. instead of the permitted maximum of 2,425.75 sq. ft. all based on the last revised survey of
June 7, 2024, prepared by Nathan Taft Corwin, III, LS, and Architectural Plans (Elevations) prepared by
James Vincent DeLuca, last revised June 7,2024. It should be noted that the proposed Gross Floor Area is
1,590.25 sq. ft. over the maximum permitted and was not reduced sufficiently as was requested by the
Board in the prior hearing.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: At the Public Hearing on March 7,2024,the applicant requested seven
variances to demolish an existing single-family dwelling and construct a new two-story single-family
dwelling which would result in insufficient front yard setback, side yard setback and combined side yard
setback, exceeding building height, excessive lot coverage and gross floor area, as well as the proposed
building extending outside the sky plane. At that hearing the Board asked the applicant to amend the
application to reduce the seven variances requested and to make the proposal more conforming to the Town
Code. At the second hearing on April 4, 2024 the amended plan, which eliminated four of the original
variances,was heard.
Page 3, July 25, 2024
#7884, Huettenmoser
SCTM No. 1000-37-4-7
Neighbors appearing before the Board during the public hearings gave testimony and submitted a petition
signed by 12 neighbors objecting to the proposed application as applied for, informing the Board that the
majority of homes in the neighborhood are under 2,200 sq.ft.and the proposed dwelling will be over-sized
and out of character with the scale of others homes. Additionally,the neighbors testified that the house was
already raised to accommodate the functioning basement. The applicant concurred about the raising of the
house for the basement recreation room but also testified that the bottom floor/basement walkout level on
the waterside of the dwelling will now only be used as Boat Storage and not habitable space.
FINDINGS OF FACT/REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION:
The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on July 11,2024 at which time
written and oral evidence were presented. Based upon all testimony, documentation, personal inspection
of the property and surrounding neighborhood, and other evidence,the Zoning Board finds the following
facts to be true and relevant and makes the following findings:
1.Town Law V67-b(3)(b)(1). Grant of the requested relief for gross floor area will produce an undesirable
change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. Although many of the
original cottages in the neighborhood have been upgraded and enlarged, none have requested the size
increase proposed by the applicant. Proposed gross floor area and proposed lot coverage are excessive for
the character of the neighborhood. The Code was enacted to prevent applicants from building excessively
large homes that do not fit with the character of the neighborhood. Since the recent enactment of this
section of the Code, if applicants are seeking gross floor area in excess of the statutory allowable limit,the
Board may look to other homes in the immediate area as a comparison of gross floor area. The applicant
did state that other neighbors "appeared" to be over the gross floor area, but conceded not to the extent
requested by this application. Since the enactment of this legislation, the Zoning Board has rendered
decisions granting variances for gross floor area where they found the restriction placed undue hardship on
applicants. In the Matters of Christopher Lazos, Appeal #7809, Nichols Demitrack, Appeal #7867, and
Lauren and Russell Antonucci,Appeal#7906,the Board granted gross floor area relief for homes that were
some of the smallest in the neighborhood and by granting such relief brought their homes more in to
conformity with the character of the neighborhood. In the cases decided,the ZBA has found the benefit to
the applicant outweighed the detriment,if any,to the neighbors. In this particular case,the gross floor area
was excessive and applicant did not alter their floor area sufficiently after the first hearing when the Board
suggested same. The project has single car garages on both sides of the home that count as gross floor area
and count to the excess lot coverage. The Code lot coverage requirements are in place to prevent
overbuilding on parcels,especially small parcels as this. It is for all the above reasons the Board finds that
this request is too substantial to justify, as it could have been configured or reduced in a way that would
balance the benefit to the applicant against the detriment to the neighbors.
Additionally,the applicant requested side yard relief. Grant of the requested relief as AMENDED for the
side yard setback,however,will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or
a detriment to nearby properties. The side yard setback will remain the same as currently exists.
2. Town Law V67-b(3)(b)(2). The benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method,
feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than the area variances as amended. The original proposal was
amended and scaled down slightly for the gross floor area. This Board believes there could be further
adjustments to this current proposal which would be more in keeping with the character of the
neighborhood. A reduction in the amended lot coverage of 30.8%over the allowable 20%and the reduction
of gross floor area from 4,016 sq. ft.,which is over the code permitted size by 1,590.25 square feet,would
Page 4, July 25, 2024
#7884, Huettenmoser
SCTM No. 1000-37-4-7
still allow the applicant to make improvements to their existing dwelling without adverse impacts to the
character of the existing neighborhood.
3. Town Law 4267-b(3)(b)(3). The variances requested herein are substantial, representing 22% relief
from the code for the side yard setback,representing 54%relief for the lot coverage,and representing 39.6%
relief for the excessive gross floor area However,the proposed side yard setback will maintain the currently
existing side yard setback and has not changed from the original footprint. While the Board acknowledges
prior decisions in the neighborhood, such actions were primarily for side yard and lot coverage relief and
parcels remained in conformity with the character of the neighborhood.
4. Town Law 4267-b(3)(b)(4). Evidence has been submitted to suggest that variances in this residential
community will have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood.
The Board finds that the proposal would create precedent for increased density in this waterfront
community,negatively impacting physical and environmental conditions.
5. Town Law 4267-b(3)(b)(5). The difficulty has been self-created. 'The applicant purchased the parcel
after the Zoning Code was in effect and it is presumed that the applicant had actual or constructive
knowledge of the limitations on the use of the parcel under the Zoning Code in effect prior to or at the time
of purchase. Additionally, applicant had the opportunity to reduce the massing of the project but did not
produce significant change.
6. Town Law 4267-b. Grant of amended and alternative relief is the minimum action necessary and
adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of a new two-story dwelling 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 Acampora, seconded by Member
Weisman(Chairperson),and duly carried,to
DENY THE VARIANCES as AMENDED for the lot coverage and the Gross Floor area and
GRANT ALTERNATIVE Relief for lot coverage of 23.2% (the existing lot coverage) and
GRANT the side yard setback as applied for and as AMENDED,as shown on the survey map
prepared by Nathan Taft Corwin III, LS and dated June 7, 2024, and site plan drawings prepared
by James Vincent DeLuca, Architect and dated June 7, 2024.
SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. The new onsite Wastewater Treatment Septic system (OWTS) on the subject property must be
approved by the Suffolk County Department of Health Services.
2. The one-story attached garages shall remain non-conditioned,non-habitable space and be used for
storage only.
3. A minimum of two on-site parking spaces shall be provided,as required by code.
4. The walk out basement level shall be used only for non-habitable unconditioned storage.
This approval shall not be deemed effective until the required conditions have been met.At the
discretion of the Board of Appeals,failure to comply with the above conditions may render this
decision null and void
Page 5, July 25, 2024
#7884, Huettenmoser
SCTM No. 1000-37-4-7
That the above conditions be written into the Building Inspector's Certificate of Occupancy, when
issued.
The Board reserves the right to substitute a similar design that is de minimis in nature for an alteration
that does not increase the degree of nonconformity.
IMPORTANT LIMITS ON THE APPROVAL(S)GRANTED HEREIN
Please Read Carefully
Any deviation from the survey,site plan and/or architectural drawings cited in this decision,or work
exceeding the scope of the relief granted herein, will result in delays and/or a possible denial by the
Building Department of a building permit and/or the issuance of a Stop Work Order, and may require
a new application and public hearing before the Zoning Board of Appeals.
Any deviation from the variance(s) granted herein as shown on the architectural drawings, site plan
and/or survey cited above, such as alterations, extensions, demolitions, or demolitions exceeding the
scope of the relief granted herein, are not authorized under this application when involving
nonconformities under the zoning code. 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.
TIME LIMITS ON THIS APPROVAL: Pursuant to Chapter 280-146(B)of the Code of the Town
of Southold any variance granted by the Board of Appeals shall become null and void where a
Certificate of Occupancy has not been procured,and/or a subdivision map has not been filed with
the Suffolk County Clerk,within three(3)years from the date such variance was granted. The
Board of Appeals may,upon written request prior to the date of expiration,grant an extension not
to exceed three(3)consecutive one(1)year terms.IT IS THE PROPERTY OWNER'S
RESPONSIBILITY TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH THE CODE REQUIRED TIME
FRAME DESCRIBED HEREIN.Failure to comply in a timely manner may result in the denial by
the Building Department of a Certificate of Occupancy,nullify the approved variance relief,and
require a new variance application with public hearing before the Board of Appeals
Vote of the Board: Ayes:Members Weisman(Chairperson),Dantes,Planamento,Acampora and Lehnert.(5-0)
t
eshe Kanes Weisman, Chairperson
Approved for filing g/ 2,,—/2024