HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-02/12/2004
.
~ . I .'10
. "'
- ~
. .
~ APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Southold Town Hall
Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman 53095 Main Road
.. Gerard P. Goehringer P.O. Box 1179
Lydia A. Tortora Southold, NY 11971-0959
Vincent Orlando Tel. (631) 765-1809
James Dinizio, Jr. Fax (631) 765-9064
http://southoldtown.northfork.net
BOARD OF APPEALS
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION
MEETING OF FEBRUARY 12, 2004
Appl. No. 5462 - EDWIN and LAURIE REEVES
Property Location: 495 Maple Lane, Orient; CTM 17-2-3.1
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 applicant's 89,140 sq. ft. parcel has frontage along three
rights-of-way: (a) 380.35 feet along the southerly property line and 25-ft. wide right-of-way, (b)
283.51 feet along the easterly lot line and 25 ft. wide right-of-way; (c) 448.79 Iin. ft. along the
northerly property line and 25 ft. wide right-af-way. The parcel is improved with a two-story frame
e house with deck, accessory swimming pool, accessory covered concrete patio, and accessory
garage, as shown on the August 22, 2003 survey prepared by Peconic Surveyors, P.C.
BASIS OF APPLICATION: Building Department's July 3, 2003, Notice of Disapproval, amended
September 23, 2003, citing Section 100-30A.4 (ref. 100-33) in its denial of a building permit
application concerning the location of a garage proposed in a yard other than the code-required rear
yard.
FINDINGS OF FACT
The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on January 22, 2004, 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 36' x 34' accessory
garage at 50+- feet from the northerly front lot line, 40+- feet from the closest edge of the northerly
right-of-way, 147+- feet from the easterly lot line, 133+- feet from the southerly lot line, as shown on
the August 22, 2003 map prepared by Peconic Surveyors, P.C
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Before the close of the January 22, 2004 public hearing, the Board indicated that the code
limitation is 18 feel for an average height, and that the proposed average height meets this requirement as designed with
an average height of 18 feet, as shown on the October 27, 2003 construction diagrams prepared by Eileen Santora,
Residential Designer, was an area that could be modified by the Board in its deliberations and decision. Any other plan
for an alternalive lower heighl would be more in keeping. The applicants' conceptual diagram submitted February 6, 2004
e lowers the mean height to 15.5 feet, which is also acceptable.
,
- Pa~ 2 - February 12, 2004
Appl. No. 5462 - Edwin and Laurie Reeves
CTM 17-2-3.1 at Orient
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 area variance will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the
neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The garage will be in a front yard, near center
between the westerly and easterly lot lines, at 40+- feet from the closest edge of the right-of-way or
front setback line, and 50+- feet to the applicant's deeded property line bordering this unimproved 25
ft. wide right-of-way. The proposed garage is at least 133 feet from the south, west and east
property lines as shown on the August 22,2003 map prepared by Peconic Surveyors, P.C. The 36'
x 34' garage will be a barn-style, detached from the house. After the applicants reconsidered their
initial plan with a floor elevation 59 feet (above MSL), the applicants offered information from their
engineer to indicate changes were possible in the garage plan to reduce the floor elevation to only
55 feet, and indicated they would accept alternative relief, by reducing the mean height from 18 feet
to not less than 15.5 ft., and reducing the height to the top of the ridge from 24 feet to 21 feet.
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 property is surrounded on three sides by
private rights-of-way. A swimming pool and sanitary system are located in the rear yard, which rear
yard would also be required for the location of an accessory garage.
3. The relief granted is substantial. Although there are three front yard areas that encompass a
major portion of applicant's land, the code requirement is to locate an accessory building in the rear
yard. The rear yard was determined by the Building Department to be westerly of applicant's
dwelling, where the swimming pool and sanitary system exist.
4. The difficulty was created with the location of three (3) rights-of-way which border this large
parcel and the topography of the land.
5. No evidence has been submitted to suggest that a variance in this residential community will
have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood. The
accessory garage will provide for additional indoor storage (for the owners' boats, vehicles and/or
other personal items) instead of outside storage. The alternative i;lverage height at 15.5 feet, with a
maximum of 21 feet to the top of the ridge, will alleviate the line of sight concerns to property located
south of the applicants' property.
6. Grant of the alternative relief is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the
applicant to enjoy the benefit of an accessory garage, while preserving and protecting the character
of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community.
-" --.-
I
-
. : Pag~ 3 - February 12, 2004
Appl. No. 5462 - Edwin and Laurie Reeves
CTM 17-2-3.1 at Orient
e
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 Dinizio, seconded by
Member Orlando, and duly carried, to
DENY the requested height at 24 ft. to the top of the ridge, and to
GRANT ALTERNATIVE RELIEF to locate the accessory garage in the front yard area, as
shown on the August 22, 2003 map prepared by Peconic Surveyors, P.C., SUBJECT TO
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. That the height to the top of the ridge from grade not exceed 21 feet;
2. That the average height from grade not exceed 15.5 feet.
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, selbacks and other features as are expressly
-- addressed in this action.
Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Oliva (Chairwoman), Horning, and Orlando. (Member Tortora
abstained. (Member Goehringer was~ent.) Th~es~~as duly adopted (3-0).
~. ClI.
Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman 3/3/04
Approved for Filing
-e
I
I
.
*
~. APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Southold Town Hall
Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman 53095 Main Road
Gerard P. Goehringer P.O. Box 1179
e Lydia A. Tortora Southold, NY 11971-0959
Vincent Orlando Tel. (631) 765-1809
James Dinizio, Jr. Fax (631) 765-9064
http://soulholdtown.northfork.net
BOARD OF APPEALS
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION
MEETING OF FEBRUARY 12, 2004
Appl. No. 5468 - RICHARD and DOROTHY POGGI
Property Location: 1740 Village Lane, Orient; Parcel 24-2-18.
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' property consists of 4,485 sq. ft. in area with
43 ft. along Village Lane, in Orient. The property is improved with a single-family, two-story frame
house and accessory building, as shown on the March 29, 1999 survey prepared by Anthony
Lewandoy..'ski, L.S.
e BASIS OF APPLICATION: Building Department's December 10, 2003 Notice of Disapproval,
amended January 12, 2004, citing Sections 100-244A and 100-244 in its denial of a building permit
application concerning a cantilevered bay window addition at the second floor of the existing
dwelling which will have a total side yard area of less than 25 feet. Also noted in the Building
Department's Notice of Disapproval is increase by an additional 28.5 square feet.
FINDINGS OF FACT
The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on January 22, 2004, 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 3' x 9.5' dormer extension
at the second floor of the existing dwelling.
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 area variance will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the
neighborhood or detriment to nearby properties. The applicant proposes to extend the existing
dormer at the second floor to match the height of the existing ridge, as shown on the sketch
prepared by Architect Frank W. Uellendahl signed 12/10/03. The 3 ft. dormer extension will be 12+-
e feet from grade, measuring 9.5 ft. wide. The extension will be cantilevered at the northerly side of
. .
Page 2 - February 12, 2004
Appl. No. 5468 - R. and D. Poggi
CTM 24-2-18
the house, to allow for a bay window and built-in floor area, with direct sunlight into the dark master
suite area.
2. The benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by some method, feasible for the
applicant to pursue, other than an area variance for this 28.5 sq. ft. upper level dormer. Structural
improvements to this home would not be possible without a variance process, due to existing 6-inch
and 19.5 ft. nonconforming setbacks of the house.
3. The area variances are minimal, representing a 3 ft. reduction in the code's required 25 ft. total
side yards and the single side yard. The existing single side setback is shown at 6 inches,
measured from the northerly wall of the house, which does not change. The lot coverage will
increase by 28.5 sq. ft. for this 3 ft. extension at the second floor.
4. The difficulty is related to the existing 6-inch and 19.5 ft. setbacks of the house, which are
nonconforming under the current code requirements.
5. No evidence has been submitted to suggest that a variance in this residential community will
have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood.
6. Grant of the relief is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy
the benefit of a small dormer extension, 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 Orlando, seconded by
Chairwoman Oliva, and duly carried, to
GRANT the variance as applied for, as shown on the diagrams and copy of the March 29,
1999 survey modified by Architect Frank W. UellendahI12110/03.
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), Orlando, and Dinizio. (Member Tortora
abstained.) (Member Goehringer was a en!.) This Resolution was duly adopted (3-0).
.
Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman 3/4/04
Approved for Filing
.._----~--_. ---" -.--