Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout#7498 Loria public correspondence received 5-22-25.pdf Fuentes, Kim From: Carroll, Peter <peter.carroll@oliverwyman.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2025 3:52 PM f { To: Fuentes, Kim 2 '02�3 Subject: New Construction at 1090 First St - New Suffolk I write as a resident of New Suffolk to support the application for variances on the 1090 First Street Lot. I have been prompted to do so by a message sent out by the New Suffolk Civic Association that appears to be a rallying cry for opposition, which I think is strongly mis- placed and smacks of "I'm alright now, you can pull up the ladder". I feel it is fundamentally unfair for property owners to object to the development options of other property owners without extreme cause, not just on marginal or aesthetic bases. And from the Town's perspective it is also unfair to progressively tighten the code and - - in effect - - slice way an owner's property rights. Everyone knows that Kelo was wrongly decided by the US Supreme Court and will eventually (and hopefully soon) be overturned. Kelo was a gross misstep but the salami-slicing of rights via ever-tightening codes is a reflection of the same basic unfairness. I also think the Civic Association's encouragement to comment was prejudiced by the use of the adjective `tiny' to describe the lot in question, which is no `tinier' than several nearby lots which already have houses. Do they want to pull those down/. Better not ask that question. I am sure the current owner has paid property taxes on this lot over many years and only now seeks to build a residence. My impression is that neighboring houses would face similar potential limitations and restrictions if they were to be built anew. Again, this seems fundamentally unfair. Owner of Lot X has a small two-storey house on a small lot that does not meet new setback guidelines; owners of Lots Y and Z already have houses on very similar lots. And Lot X is denied? Peter Carroll i Westermann, Donna From: eisenstat@aol.com Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2025 5:17 PM To: Sakarellos, Elizabeth;Westermann, Donna �G� /"' Subject: Fw:#7498 LORIA 1000-117-7-31 MAY 2 2 2025 Zoning Boarry ----- Forwarded Message----- From: eisenstat@aol.com <eisenstat@aol.com> To: kim.fuentes@town.southold.ny.us <kim.fuentes@town.southold.ny.us> Cc: Doris Brautigan <dbrautigan@mac.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2025 at 04:32:59 PM EDT Subject:#7498 LORIA 1000-117-7-31 Dear Miss Fuentes, My wife Doris Brautigan and I are full-time residents at 1305 Third Street in New Suffolk. The updated proposed project continues to violate the required setbacks,- the lot does not permit an as-of-right solution, and there is nothing in the design, as a three-story profile, that offers any mitigation to the criteria. As an architect, I am well aware of the appropriate use of variances to zoning regulations in response to special circumstances at certain lots. In this case, I believe the design solution is severely detrimental to the town character, and the setback violations exasperate an unwelcome solution. Given the substantial community opposition to this project, the property may best be served by Southold purchasing the property from Mr. Loria and maintaining it as open space. We highly recommend that this application be denied. Sincerely, Robert Eisenstat, FAIA F Westermann, Donna From: joni friedman <pedrogft@yahoo.com> � Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2025 6:17 PM MAY 22 To: Westermann, Donna Zoning Subject: 1090 First St. in New Suffolk variances hoard of gpPeal To the Southold Zoning Board of Appeals, My family moved to New Suffolk in 1994. Without consideration for the physical, environmental and emotional impact on our small hamlet,variances have been granted to builders and owners to build, reconfigure and construct oversized homes which have forever obscured all of our precious views and open spaces have become fewer.These variances are shortsighted on their long term impact on the community and selfish manifestations on their part of the applicants. Phil Loria is asking the ZBA to approve variances to enable him to build an oversized 3 bedroom, 3 1/2 bath house on a tiny, .14 acre, waterfront lot on 1090 First St. in New Suffolk. It requires 2 variances in order to be built. The application before the Zoning Board is now asking for variance relief from the building code: The building code requires a 35 foot STREET SETBACK,yet the proposed house is only 13.2 feet from the street, therefore the percentage of relief that the owner is asking for is 62.3%. The building code requires a 35 ft REAR YARD SETBACK, the house plan allows for only 32.9 feet. The HEIGHT of the proposed house is 33 feet 1 1/4 inches.The LENGTH of the proposed house is 53 Ft LONG. From the outside, it will look like a 3 story house since the house would be built on pilings which would be covered by siding with 2 floors of living space above. It is only a few feet shorter than the big house next door to it. I'm writing today to ask you to please consider that granting approval for this project will destroy the historic view of the waterfront, strain the fragile resources and create a horrible precedent for future projects. Why have codes and laws to protect us from these overreaches if they are so easily exploited?Why are people's overreaching needs to build beyond the zoned allowances considered above the existing residents? We are the tax payers,the neighbors and the guardians of our community and need our local government to protect our rights. Sincerely, Joni Friedman New Suffolk, NY ATTENTION:This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails. 1 MAY 2 2 2025 1 By way of introduction,I reside in New Suffolk on Old Harbor Rd. I live in the house that I grew up in. The property backs up to New Suffolk Rd and to Old Harbor. I live across the street from what I refer to as Grathwohl's farmhouse. I remember the time when there was a tree company doing tree work at my house. The guy said to me at the time `don't cut those branches down,you will see the farmhouse across the street'. I said— 'I love looking at that farmhouse across the street. I have memories of one of the Grathwohl sons coming over every spring to plow behind our back yard so that my parents could plant a large vegetable garden. More recently I used to look out my kitchen window and see one of the Grathwohl's old barns. It was a little worse for wear and it had an old rusty tractor next to it. I loved that view. Then, a giant house was built across the street next to the farmhouse. The owners built the house, lived there for a while and then moved away. I am still trying to hide that view with trees, branches,whatever... Across the street on Old Harbor was property belonging to the Baxters. During my growing up years, the home as well as the adjacent property was owned by Bette Benbow (nee Baxter). I'll never forget Bette's generosity when she rezoned the property so that it was one piece, therefore mitigating against another house being built there. I have been eternally grateful to her for doing that. When I was a kid, I used to go to the PO with my father. I remember Ruth Houston, Postmistress. Then of course there was Ben Smolenski. Who could forget Benny. I also remember Art Kenniff who used to own the boatyard. I am also eternally grateful to the Waterfront Fund for working so hard to keep the waterfront vista for us to enjoy. Ever time I go to the PO I look out onto the water of Peconic Bay. I appreciate that vista so much. I also hung out at the Harbor Inn which was owned by my friend, Linda's father, Mickey. That is where I learned to play pool. To this day, my favorite kind of bar is an `old man's bar'. I remember Cal Grathwohl and others who used to sit in there. I remember the Galley Ho with Rob White's picture of Walt hanging on the wall. I remember when Capt. Marty used to own the fishing station. In my early years during the summer,I waitressed at the Cutchogue Diner. Capt. Marty and his son were regulars. Capt. Marty's fishing station was a staple of New Suffolk. Again, the beautiful vista when driving on Front Street is to be enjoyed. Allowing a house (except for something like the Sugar Shack) to be built on this property would be very sad and very `un-New Suffolk-like. Whenever I meet someone new and they ask me where I live and I say `New Suffolk'. Their response is always `I love New Suffolk. I know that you cannot bring me back to my youth and childhood YC-pp'ing New Suffolk as New Suffolk is the next best thing. MAY %I $M Sincerely, 9 ROAllf)OFPWeAI6 Jeri Glander Fuentes Kim 1;*Ll'w9 , -1 q(l� From: Michael Pecorino <mikepeck19@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2025 1:37 PM M�� �� To: Fuentes, Kim Subject: [SPAM] - 1090 First Street New Suffolk,NY Application j`®®FAP1pE.4� I reside at 6390 New Suffolk Road in New Suffolk. I am writing to address the applicant's request for a variance to construct a home on the vacant site at 1090 First Street, New Suffolk. I have no opposition to the plans as submitted and feel it is better than the current use . Thank you Mike Pecorino 6390 New Suffolk Road ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails. I Fuentes, Kim From: Todd Fogarty <fogartytodd@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2025 7:50 PM To: Fuentes, Kim; Todd Fogarty Subject: [SPAM] - Letter of Opposition re:Application #7498 by Philip Loria May 21, 2025 Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals MAY 2 2 Town Hall Annex Building 7®NG�0ARD®FAppEAG 54375 Route 25 Southold, NY 11971 Re: Application #7498 by Philip Loria Dear Members of the Southold Town Zoning Board, I am writing to urge you to not approve the setback variance for the above referenced property. As a resident of New Suffolk since 2011, 1 have always felt that the character of the waterfront is one of the qualities that makes New Suffolk special. Contrary to what is claimed in the request for variance, this house will produce an undesirable change to the CHARACTER of the neighborhood and a detriment to nearby properties. A house that would be more than 33 feet high, virtually abutting the street (just 8-feet to the stoop, and only 13 feet to the house, instead of the required 35!) would be completely out of context and tower over passers by. (If a similar house was set back by 35 feet, it would not feel nearly as out of scale). The application claims that the house will not be a detriment to the neighborhood because two neighboring houses (1200 First Street and 1230 First Street) are also closer to the street than 35 feet. a. You should know that 1200 First Streetis widely considered a blight on the street, and is a perfect example of when variances should not be granted. Not only is this house a visual assault, but its mechanical systems can be heard from the street day and night. This visual and noise pollution will only worsen if a similar building is built next door. Additionally, the proposed house will be more than twice as wide as 1200 First Street, blocking light and airflow. The detriment to the neighborhood cannot be overstated! 1 b. In the case of 1230 First Street, it is a one-story, ground-level cottage that the current owners seem to have restored exactly as it was. If Mr. Loria would like to build something on his undersized lot, a house like 1230 First Street would be much more in character and would probably not provoke the ire of local residents. Mr. Loria owns other properties on the North Fork and has owned other properties in New Suffolk— properties that would support the type of house he wishes to build. There is no need to build a gigantic house on this undersized lot, except to turn a profit at the expense of our neighborhood. In promoting his case, Mr. Loria, 78, has stated that he wishes to live in the house. It's hard to believe that is the truth. Indeed, when he first designed the house in 2020, he did so as part of a marketing package to sell the property. Instead of open pilings, Mr. Loria has designed this house with "break-away" siding covering all of the walls around the ground floor of the house. In the event the "break-away" is triggered, more than 1,000 square feet of this siding could be flying or floating around the neighborhood and in the bay, close to cars driving down the street, and almost certainly washing into the bay where residents swim and boat. Appropriate setbacks would mitigate this potential safety issue. I don't know why Mr. Loria is so intent on ruining our neighborhood, but I urge you to enforce the building codes as written and to not grant this variance. Most sincerely, Todd Fogarty 735 Jackson Street New Suffolk, NY z Fuentes, Kim From: Arlene Castellano <arlene.castellano@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 4:47 PM To: Fuentes, Kim Subject: Loria - 1090 First Street New Suffolk - 1000-117-07-31 - #7498 r May 19, 2025 Arlene and Frank Castellano 1275 First Street New Suffolk,NY 11956 l �i � ��f� � 7_ORIgS6 Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals 54375 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971 To the Members of the Zoning Board of Appeals: I have reviewed the latest revised plans submitted by Phil Loria regarding 1090 First Street,New Suffolk SCTM# 1000-117-07-31. This application has been pending for four years and this is the third iteration of plans Mr. Loria has been permitted to submit to the ZBA. In what appears to be a strategy of over-asking, Mr. Loria's various concessions over the years, including this most recent one, have left him with a proposed house that exceeds front and rear yard setbacks and reaches the absolute maximum height and maximum width permitted under the code. The house, which is meant to be a retirement home for a couple, requires a septic system in a flood zone that can accommodate seven sinks, four toilets, two bathtubs, one shower, two refrigerators, and one washer/dryer. It is grossly noncompliant with the Trustees wetland setbacks of 100 feet for a residence, 100 feet for a sanitary leaching pool, and 75 feet for a septic tank. Mr. Loria is, and always was, asking permission to build the largest and tallest house he possibly can. A reduction in the size of an elevated front stoop and rear balcony does not change the size or location of this proposed house, nor does it do anything to minimize the environmental impact it will have on the Peconic Bay. Mr. Loria's hardship is self-created. His family purchased this vacant lot when Southold zoning code was in effect and they would have been aware at the time of purchase that the lot was not large enough to accommodate a house under the code. Because there was never a house on the property, Mr. Loria, unlike his neighbors, does not benefit from the leniency provided to pre-existing structures on non-conforming lots. It is well established that the house to the north of Mr. Loria's property, (1200 First Street) is one of the prime examples in Southold town of a house that was built outside of the character of the neighborhood and to the detriment of its neighbors. To reference this house in pursuit of a similar project and claim that there would be no adverse effects to the environment or neighbors is ridiculous. Southold Town has made strides to rein in big houses, address coastal resiliency, and protect the health of the wetlands. The approval of this application would, without question, set back those efforts. Thank you for your consideration, Arlene and Frank Castellano Fuentes, Kim M `REIRMW' -i l4q� From: Marilyn Rivkin <marivkin@gmail.com> MAY 2 2 M25 Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2025 2:47 AM To: Fuentes, Kim Subject: Objection to Proposed home at 1090 First Street I would like to voice my objection to the new construction proposed at 1090 First Street in New Suffolk. The home would be built on a tiny .14 acre lot, yet it would overrun the lot and the feel of the neighborhood in many ways: • The building code requires a 35-foot STREET SETBACK, yet the proposed house is only 13.2 feet from the street • The building code requires a 35-foot REAR YARD SETBACK, the house plan allows for only 32.9 feet. • The HEIGHT of the proposed house is 33 feet 1-1/4 inches. The LENGTH of the proposed house is 53 feet. • Although the house is considered 2 stories by the Town, it will be built on pilings and appear to be 3 stories, as the first floor pilings will be covered by siding. Please do not grant variances that permit this inappropriate construction. Thank you. Marilyn Aloi Rivkin 3000 Moores Lane ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails. i Fuentes, Kim From: Amerika Williamson <amerikaaw@yahoo.com> 14 Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2025 9:14 PM 40SW To: Fuentes, Kim Subject: Comments on proposed house at 1090 First Street in New Suffolk AY 2 2 Dear Kim Fuentes and the zoning board of appeals, ®R�Il�6f34rt���4_ ' 'PA1y5 I'm a neighbor and home owner in New Suffolk, NY and I'm emailing to comment on the proposed plans for construction at 1090 First Street in New Suffolk. I'm concerned about the height of the proposed property. The proposal will block the sky and views of the bay. The height alarms us and we've already seen the mistake that was allowed when the modern house went up on New Suffolk Avenue. This will be another eyesore blocking our beautiful surroundings and landscape. If they must build, please don't allow a second story which looks like a third story. The proportions are out of character and block the views for neighbors and visitors. We didn't protect the views in New Suffolk when we allowed the modern house built at 13350 New Suffolk Avenue in Cutchogue. It destroyed the views from Grathwohl Road, West creek and Kimogenor Point in New Suffolk. We moved from Kimogenor Point because of the giant house. It forever ruined our view from 305 Kimogenor Point Road. New Suffolk has exceptional architecture and charm and we hope the zoning board will preserve it. Please consider the size and the protect the view and natural vistas enjoyed by the community. Thank you, Amerika Williamson ATTENTION:This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails. i Fuentes, Kim From: Andrew Tor9 ove <andrewtorgove@yahoo.com> �� Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2025 4:43 PM MAY`9;2 7+725 To: Fuentes, Kim Subject: 1090 First St New SuffolkAG�3t?�4t1 �:�i�� p I am writing to state my extreme opposition to granting any variances to allow the proposed building of a house at 1090 First St New Suffolk NY. I can't imagine what possible reasons there could be for allowing such huge variances to a project that will have such a huge negative repercussion to the community. I have lived in New Suffolk for over 30 years. The open vistas to the bay are a large part of the beauty and peace of our town. As a community we all fought like hell to keep out a planned large boat storage facility by banding together and buying the land as a non profit - to keep the towns vistas open to the bay. This huge house - that will appear from the street as though it was a 3 story house - will destroy a large portion of open space leading to the bay. Please do not grant the proposed variances to allow this mistake to go forward. Thank you very much for your time and work you put in. Andrew Torgove PO Box 231 7300 New Suffolk Rd New Suffolk NY 11956 Cell: (718) 986-7096 ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails. 1 Fuentes, Kim MAY 2 2 From: Siobhan O'Neill <siobhan.onei11622@gmaiI.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2025 3:30 PM To: Fuentes, Kim Subject: LORIA APPLICATION #7498 BEFORE THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Hi - I am writing to record my objection to the Board approving the Loria request for variance in the above application. I am not variance opposed, I'm not anti-anything that is reasonable but the percentage of variance requested is so completely out of the range of what is typically acceptable, that I hope the Board can see that the only recourse is to deny this request and suggest that a more reasonable request be submitted. Thank you for your time S. O'Neill - Jackson Street, New Suffolk ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails. i Fuentes, Kim From: Nicolas de Croisset <ncroisset@gmail.com> r Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2025 1:55 PM To: Fuentes, Kim ` Subject: 1090 First Street 2T.� Dear Mrs. Fuentes, As a resident and owner of the hamlet of New Suffolk, I would like to write my objection to the proposed structure on 1090 First Street.The structure proposed on a tiny 0.14 lot looks out of place and doesn't fit with the surrounding area.Any effort to improve or minimize impact would be appreciated. Thankyou. Nicolas de Croisset ATTENTION:This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails. i Fuentes, Kim From: Joanne Vitiello <jojov910@icloud.com> '{;►11�.° Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2025 1:39 PM To: Fuentes, Kim Subject: 1090 First St. New Suffolk / Hello Kim. I am writing in regards to the property in New Suffolk at 1090 First St. I expect my opinion probably doesn't matter, but I will express it anyway after being contacted by neighbors, friends who care and are making others aware about something I did not know was happening on First Street. It's obvious that change is happening and our tiny hamlet as it is becoming bigger, showier, and very different from the place I chose to live in. Now, the country feel is disappearing as are the natural water views that make this a beautiful place to live. I have lived here for 15 years, taken hundreds of walks, and found much peace, comfort, and joy in this remarkable place. My family and friends have cherished the water views and country feel. Allowing bigger, behemoth structures, catering to the wealthy, and forgetting about the beauty of the North Fork is the beginning of my family looking for another place to live. We talk about the possibility of New England because it Is open. Nature is preserved. Communities are close. I thought I had that here. If you walk the streets of New Suffolk, there is construction on almost every street. On Oak Road where we live, one house took a year to revamp. Another is expected to be redone soon. A third is in progress of work. Quiet is gone. Nature is disturbed. Why is the zoning board allowing this? Walk to Grathwol, to Jackson, to almost any block and there is work going on. Houses are showpieces, not homes. We are slowly becoming the South Fork. Yes. We have a choice to stay or go, but laws, regulations, and respect for the people who live here should matter. It seems that money talks and good old fashioned values don't matter. I am asking, with much respect, that the property changes at 1090 not be allowed and instead, the requests of the current taxpayers and community be considered. I am asking the board to preserve the character and peace of the beautiful North Fork and New Suffolk in this case. If you have any questions or would like to speak with me, I can be reached at 631-901-2916. Sincerely, Jo Anne Vitiello Sent from my iPhone ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails. 1 Fuentes, Kim From: HM D <traucohm@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2025 1:33 PM MAY 2 2 P-1 a To: Fuentes, Kim Subject: 100 Front Street New Suffolk ZONIVGA0, r.)O-APP m Dear Zoning Board„ The height of the proposed structure will greatly alter the so far quaint attractive on Front street. It will only give a few individuals the view of the bay, but the private All resident of New Suffolk from it. I strongly oppose the construction in its current form. Thank you for your considering this matter. Helene Munson New Suffolk ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails. 1 Fuentes, Kim From: Judith <jmg930@optonline.net> Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2025 9:55 AM To: Fuentes, Kim Subject: New house proposal I do not agree that a new house be built on First Street in New Suffolk, and would reject any application for it. Sincerely, I MAY 2 Judith Goldman 930 Jackson Street ����� �� New Suffolk, NY Sent from my Wad ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails. 1 Fuentes, Kim From: Suzanne Fox <suziefox35@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2025 10:29 AM To: Fuentes, Kim Subject: Proposed House at 1090 First St., New Suffolk Attachments: ZBA Letter 5-22-25.pdf DearZBA, Attached is a letter asking you to deny the application for variances for a proposed house at 1090 First Street in New Suffolk. Suzanne Fox New Suffolk ATTENTION:This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails. i May 22, 2025 Zoning Board ofAppeals MAY Town Hail Annex Building !"f 54375 Main Road " C9 Southold NY 11971 Dear Zoning Board of Appeals, ]am a third-generation summer resident of New Suffolk,and I am writing to ask you to deny the variances requested for the proposed house at 1090 First Street in New Suffolk. The proposed house would have the appearance of a three-story building and would block the view across Cutchogue Harbor. It would not be in keeping with the character and maritime heritage of our tiny hamlet. Sincerely, O"-p, � - Suzanne Fox 975 Kimogenor Point New Suffolk NY 11956 Fuentes, Kim From: Gail Marchbein <gmarchbein@optonline.net> Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2025 9:02 AM To: Fuentes, Kim Subject: Proposed house on 1 st Street We live at 15305 New Suffolk Avenue. I do not think the proposed new construction should be allowed. Sincerely Gail Marchbein Sent from my iPhone ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails. � RA Fuentes, Kim From: Roberta Jaklevic <gramstand@aol.com> Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2025 12:52 PM TOMPGF50 RDOFA as To: Fuentes, Kim 11 7 Subject: proposal to construct building at first street in New Suffolk This is in reference to the proposal to the ZBA to construct a 2 story dwelling on First Street in New Suffolk, N.Y. I am not in favor of this proposal because it is not in compliance with regulations as to set backs from the street and if the 2 story dwelling is built on pilings it will be over the limit for height. In addition it will block the neighbors views and everyone else on First Street. Don't let another eyesore be constructed on that site. New Suffolk is my home and I grew up here and some of the stuff that has been allowed is ruing my sweet home. Please consider doing the right thing and following the rules. I like Phil Loria but not enough to support what I consider is not a good proposal for our little village. Thank you. Roberta Jaklevic, 900 Old Harbor Road, New Suffolk, N.Y. May 22, 2025 ATTENTION:This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails. I Fuentes, Kim From: DIANA SCHWATKA <dschwatka@aol.com> MAY r Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2025 11:44 AM To: Fuentes, Kim lQLS Cc: Nicolas At Work; Linda Auriemma; Barbara Schnitzler -ILK Subject: [SPAM] - ZBA meeting on 1090 First Street New Suffolk Dear Members of the Southold ZBA. I am writing to you about the proposed residence at 1090 First Street. Askingfor variances in a small hamlet like New Suffolk is always something to be considered very seriously.The proposal for 1090 First Ave is particularly concerning, because it is so close to the bay. Not only will this oversized structure block views for the community visiting our tiny town center, but new septic in that area can endanger the wild life in the bay, especially the oysters growing nearby. I think any residence there is a bad idea. Certainly one requiring variances one of which is not insignificant, is a real blight on a waterfront that the community has worked so hard to protect. Yours respectfully, Mark and Diana Schwatka 520 George Road I MAY 2 Z 2925 Diana Schwatka Julia B. Fee Sotheby's MGDDARDOFXypF�tS 914 450 2295 (cell) Find Listings at. djanaschwatka,�uliabfee�com Community_S__n o m Community y Snapshot Ma marnneck Communityfi ATTENTION:This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails. i i 4W Fuentes, Kim Received From: Susan Noonan <susannoonanl @gmail.com> MAY 2 2 2025 Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2025 1:37 PM To: Fuentes, Kim; Susan Noonan Zoning Board of ArjPeal` Subject: [SPAM] - LORIA APPLICATION #7498 BEFORE THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Attachments: cidl F3FE5AB-485B-4F81-A50B-9A4E011 F4FE3 jpeg Dear Kim, I am a resident of New Suffolk. I am opposed to the expanded size of the house Loria wants to build on our waterfront. I have no issue with a small house on the small lot but this is not what he wants to build. There is a proposal before the Zoning Board of Appeals to build a 3 bedroom, 3 1/2 bath house on a tiny, .14 acre,waterfront lot on First Street in New Suffolk. It requires 2 variances in order to be built.The application before the Zoning Board is now asking for variance relief from the building code: The building code requires a 35 foot STREET SETBACK, yet the proposed house is only 13.2 feet from the street , therefore the percentage of relief that the owner is asking for is 62.3% The building code requires a 35 ft REAR YARD SETBACK, the house plan allows for only 32.9 feet. The HEIGHT of the proposed house is 33 feet 1 1/4 inches. The LENGTH of the proposed house is 53 Ft LONG. From the outside, it will look like a 3 story house since the house would be built on pilings, which would be covered by siding with 2 floors of living space above. It is only a few feet shorter than the big house next door to it. This is why I care about this pending decision. Siting a 53 ft long x over 33 ft high building 13.2 feet from the street, as requested in this variance, is too tall,too close. Although the house is considered 2 stories by the Town, it will be built on pilings and appear to be 3 stories as the first floor pilings will be covered by siding. The house will alter the character and scale of the tiny New Suffolk hamlet The house will block views of Peconic Bay from First Street This house could not be built as designed in the current code.The application was applied for in 2020,therefore, the old/prior building codes apply. Thank you for your consideration. Best, Susan Susan A. Noonan i c 917 513 5303 5u M9_o,na gmail.com ATTENTION:This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails. 2 Fuentes, Kim From: George Krug <krug.george@gmail.com> F(ece°\1 Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2025 2:15 PM MAY 2 2 ZO25 To: Fuentes, Kim; Fuentes, Kim Attachments: Lorapp A Comments r li ation #7498 Comments.pdf, IMG_8671 jpg ZON�'g Bard °t appeals Dear Kim, Please accept the attached letter containing our comments to the ZBA on the Loria application #7498. Also attached is a scan of a document that is referenced in our letter. Please confirm receipt at your earliest convenience. Best regards, George Krug Lynn Krug mobile: 917-440-4902 ATTENTION:This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails. i Ift Received May 22, 2025 Town of Southold Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) MAY 2 2 2025 Via Email to Kim Fuentes Zoning 6oaro c)i Appeals George&Lynn Krug 1175 2"d Street New Suffolk, NY 11956 Subject: Loria Application#7498 Dear members of the ZBA, regarding the Loria application#7498 for a project at 1090 1st Street, New Suffolk: Despite adjustments that were made to the plan to decrease non-compliance with setback rules,the applicant is still asking for an excessive two-thirds relief from the regulation. This would place the building's front steps just 8 feet from the street-barely the width of an automobile. This just underscores that the lot is non-compliant. We wish to emphasize that on the "Applicant Narrative" form the applicant states that this situation is of his own making- he was aware of the non-compliance when he took possession of the property. As you know,this project was deemed inconsistent with Local Waterfront Revitalization Program Policy Standards, per the March 27, 2025 letter(copy attached) directed to the ZBA from Mark Terry,Assistant Town Planning Director. Aren't projects like this the kind of thing that the LWRP was created to prevent? Why have those policies in place only to override them? Further,though a waiver was granted,the septic system approval is still unresolved. Again,there is no place on the property that would meet existing code requirements,further underscoring the unsuitability of this lot for the proposed construction. Allowing this to move forward would create a precedent that we would all regret. An open waterfront is the most important facet of the character of New Suffolk,and the structure just to the north of the applicant's lot stands out as a singular exception as it too runs counter to the character of the community. Unfortunately,such exceptions then become reference points for future requests. This is how community character is eroded-it happens one project at a time,one variance at a time. The changes compound on each other until the community is irrevocably changed, and the result would be that the protections offered by our codes have failed to prevent it. In this case,the two adjacent homes would form a 35-foot-high wall between 1st Street and the shoreline. Such a situation has never been part of the community character of New Suffolk. We respectfully ask that you reject the application for its egregious intrusion into the required setbacks, its inconsistency with the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program Policy Standards, and the harm to community character that would result both from its construction and from the precedent that it would set since granting such generous relief from code requirements would encourage future similar development. Yours truly, Lynn Krug George Krug MAY 2 2 20 zon;n�j 'aoa;ccz lb eo o uzrd3 a5u� w 5 m 1 Ai A q oCDS Tn °fl4 y o ° N _ b � rL OP. u V p7a w d ° a�i `f'� � •`ter �w � �?'�"•T•.'y-' ��•Lo c�� a e b p ° o y Z Z V ii. o ,gyp ° Epp c f* GO N rosd -' � a' Ted e c v ov F 11 41 rL C U •m c U � � � m� � � � � p � � a`i y= d p'•� q � Q rI N w- }i b^ L � G 4 O m O N � N•G h E� o v pv c �r � q,Lor� e r N � �'o o u Q u u c� Qn � I ' a Fuentes, Kim From: Carroll, Peter <peter.carroll@oliverwyman.com> Sent: Y 2 2 2025 Wednesday, May 21, 2025 3:52 PM MAY 91 9 To: MA Fuentes, Kim Subject: AP� Construction at 1090 First St - New Suffolk ZONINGBOARDC)FAPPEALr, I write as a resident of New Suffolk to support the application for variances on the 1090 First Street Lot. I have been prompted to do so by a message sent out by the New Suffolk Civic Association that appears to be a rallying cry for opposition, which I think is strongly mis- placed and smacks of "I'm alright now, you can pull up the ladder". I feel it is fundamentally unfair for property owners to object to the development options of other property owners without extreme cause, not just on marginal or aesthetic bases. And from the Town's perspective it is also unfair to progressively tighten the code and - - in effect - - slice way an owner's property rights. Everyone knows that Kelo was wrongly decided by the US Supreme Court and will eventually (and hopefully soon) be overturned. Kelo was a gross misstep but the salami-slicing of rights via ever-tightening codes is a reflection of the same basic unfairness. I also think the Civic Association's encouragement to comment was prejudiced by the use of the adjective `tiny' to describe the lot in question, which is no `tinier' than several nearby lots which already have houses. Do they want to pull those down/. Better not ask that question. I am sure the current owner has paid property taxes on this lot over many years and only now seeks to build a residence. My impression is that neighboring houses would face similar potential limitations and restrictions if they were to be built anew. Again, this seems fundamentally unfair. Owner of Lot X has a small two-storey house on a small lot that does not meet new setback guidelines; owners of Lots Y and Z already have houses on very similar lots. And Lot X is denied? Peter Carroll i