The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutZBA-03/10/2005 Special (2) . APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman Gerard P. Goehringer Vincent Orlando James Dinizio, Jr. Michael A. Simon Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road. P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 Office Location: Town Annex /First Roor, North Fork Bank 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) Southold, NY 11971 http://southoldtown.northfork.net RECEIV;:O BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809. Fax (631) 765-9064 JUN 5 2006 MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING THURSDAY, MARCH 10, 2005 Soutlicld Tc.v;n Clerk A Special Meeting of the SOUTH OLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS was held at the South old Town Annex (NFB) Building, 54375 Main Road, Southold, New York 11971-0959, on Thursday March 10, 2005 commencing at 6:05 p.m. Present were: Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman/Member Gerard P. Goehringer/Member Vincent Orlando/Member James Dinizio, Jr.lMember Michael A. SimonI Member Linda Kowalski, ZBA Assistant and Secretary 6:05 p.m. Chairwoman Oliva called the meeting to order. The Board proceeded with the first item on the Agenda as follows: DELIBERATIONS/DECISIONS: The Board deliberated on the following applications. The originals of each of the following applications were decided, with the original determinations filed with the Southold Town Clerk: Approvals with Conditions: ZBA File 5669 - Robert Heintges ZBA File 5656 - Michael and Karen Catapano (Mr. & Mrs. V. Pust, Owners) Denial with Grant of Alternate Relief: ZBA File 5652 - Jon and Kathleen Marino ZBA File 5646 - T. and M. Kostoulas ZBA File 5660 - Alfred and Gloria Giardiello ZBA File 5657 - Edward F. Jensen ZBA File 5667 - Richard Schetman ZBA File 5666 - Elizabeth Welch and Mercelo Guidoli Approved as Applied: ZBA File 5665 - Gregory Wallace and Linda Walters ZBA File 5658 - Peter Warns Page 2 - Minutes Meeting held March 10, 2005 . Southold Town Board of Appeals Approved as Applied (continued) ZBA File 5662 - JKJ North Fork Realty, Inc. ZBA File 5654 - William Archer ZBA File 5675 - Francis A. Kestler, DDS ZBA File 5671 - Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC (Site Owner: A. Junge) ZBA File 5586 - Curtis and Susan Rand ZBA File 5664 - D. Ryan and S. Kramer ZBA File 5661 - Whitney B. Armstrong Other Action: ZBA File 5659 - Dorothy W. Faucon - Grant with reversal. ZBA File 5673 - CDR Mattituck, Inc. - Reversal. RESOLUTIONS/OTHER ACTION: A. Motion was offered by Chairwoman Oliva, seconded by Member Goehringer and duly carried to authorize advertisinq of applications in complete form for public hearinqs to be held on Thursday. March 31.2005 commencinq at 9:30 AM. 9:30 AM BERNARD SPRINGSTEEL and MARCIA POLLAK #5674. Request for a Variance under Section 100-244, based on the Building Inspector's January 4,2005 Notice of Disapproval concerning an addition proposed at less than 40 feet from the front lot line, at 1620 Koke Drive, Southold; CTM 87-5-19.3. 9:35 AM GREGORY B. and BARBARA WOOD #5677. Request for a Variance under Section 100-244, based on the Building Department's January 10, 2005 Notice of Disapproval concerning an application for a building permit to build a new dwelling at less than 50 feet from the rear lot line, after demolish the existing building, at 840 Marlene Lane, Mattituck; CTM 143-2-20.1. 9:40 AM FOSTER REEVE and VALERIE H. KRAMER #5678. Request for Variances under Sections 100-30A.3 and 100-244, based on the Building Department's December 22, 2004 Notice of Disapproval, amended February 3, 2005, concerning a building permit application for an as- built deck and proposed two-story addition to the dwelling, at less than 50 ft. from rear lot line, at 626 Front Street, Greenport; CTM 48-1-2. 9:45 AM ROMANELLI REALTY/BURTS RELIABLE #5679. Request for a Variance under Section 100-142, based on the Building Department's December 15, 2004 Notice of Disapproval, concerning a building permit application for additions proposed at less than 20 feet on a single side yard, at 1515 Youngs Avenue, Southold; CTM 60-1-6. Zone District: Light Industrial. 9:50 AM W. BRUCE and MARY ANN BOLLMAN #5680. Request for Variances under Section 100-244, based on the Building Department's February 3, 2005 Notice of Disapproval, concerning an application for a building permit to substantially remove (demolish) and construct a new single- family dwelling: (1) at less than 10 feet on a single side, (2) at less than 25 feet combined side yards, (3) with lot coverage exceeding the code limitation of 20 percent. Location of Property: 1755 Trumans Path, East Marion; CTM 31-13-4. 10:00 AM ROBERTA ELWELL #5681. Request for a Variance under Sections 100-30A.3 and 100-242A, based on the Building Department's December 10, 2004 Notice of Disapproval concerning a building permit application for additions with alterations, which new construction will Page 3 - Minutes Meeting held March 10,2005 Southold Town Board of Appeals RESOLUTION; continued increase the degree of nonconformance when located less than 50 feet from the front lot line, at 2020 Montauk Avenue, Fishers Island; CTM 20-9-1.2. 10:05 AM JOHN and JOY GALLAGHER #5682. Request for Variances under Sections 100- 242A and 100-244, based on the Building Department's January 21, 2005 Notice of Disapproval concerning a building permit application to construct additions which will increase the degree of nonconformance when located (a) less than 10 feet on a single side, and (b) less than 25 feet for the combined side yards, at 730 Bayview Drive, East Marion; CTM 37-5-5. 10:10 AM JANET HEALY #5683. Request for a Variance under Sections 100-242A and 100- 244, based on the Building Department's December 13, 2004 Notice of Disapproval, concerning a building permit application for a sunroom addition which will increase degree of nonconformance when located less than 50 feet from rear lot line, at 195 Matthews Lane, Cutchogue; CTM 84-1- 15. 10:15 AM DAYS MAN and NANNIE P. MORRIS #5684. Request for a Lot Waiver under Section 100-26, to unmerge County Tax Map Ref. #1000-48-3-24 from the adjacent County Tax Map #1000-48-3-7.1. Based on the Building Department's January 19, 2005 Notice of Disapproval, both lots are merged under Section 100-25. Location of Property: 245 Brown Street and 390 Linnet Street, Greenport. 10:25 AM ROBERT K. SCRIPPS #5685. Request for a Variance under Sections 100-242A and 100-244, based on the Building Department's December 13, 2004 Notice of Disapproval, concerning a building permit application for a dormer addition which has been deemed to be an increase in the degree of nonconformance at less than 15 fl. on a single side yard, at 2745 Pine Tree Road, Cutchogue; CTM 104-3-6. 10:35 AM TIMOTHY STEELE #5618. Request for Variances under Sections 1 00-31A(2)(c) and 100-242A, based on the Building Department's April 23, 2003 Notice of Disapproval, amended January 28, 2005, concerning a building permit application for: (a) an as-built accessory shed (building #3-storage container) partly located in a front and side yard rather than a rear yard, (b) an accessory shed (building #4-storage container) partly located in a side yard, (c) famn/barn (building #1) does not conform to the 75 fl. minimum principal building rear yard setback, (d) additions with alterations to a nonconforming accessory garage, for the reason that the garage (building #2) is not entirely in a rear yard, and is extended into a front yard. Location of Property: 13795 Oregon Road (right-of-way at north side of property), Cutchogue; CTM 83-2-10.16. 10:50 AM DONNA COOK #5638 (Carryover from 1/20/05). 1 :00 PM MARKO ANTICEV #5633 (Carryover from 1/20/05). 1 :15 PM WILLIAM AND JANICE CLAUDIO #5655 (Carryover from 3/3/05). 1 :25 PM J. PAPADOPOULES #5687. Request for a Variance under Section 100-244, based on the Building Inspector's February 22, 2005 Notice of Disapproval concerning a building permit application for an addition at less than the code required 35 fl. rear yard setback, at 500 Miriam Road, Mattituck; CTM 99-2-9. 1 :35 PM MAURICE and PATRICIA SCANNELL #5688. Request for a Special Exception under Article III, Section 100-30A.2B to establish a Bed and Breakfast use as an accessory use incidental to the owner's residence, with up to three (3) guest bedrooms for lodging and serving of breakfast to not more than six (6) casual, B & B guests (transient roomers). Location of Property: 5405 Rocky Point Road, East Marion; CTM 21-1-6. Page 4 - Minutes Meellng held March 10. 2005 Southold Town Board of Appeals RESOLUTION: continued: 1 :45 PM DAVID and BARBARA DASH #5672. Request for Variances under Sections 100-242A and 100-244, based on the Building Department's September 24, 2004 Notice of Disapproval, amended December 23, 2004, concerning proposed additions/alteretions which will increase the degree of nonconformance: (1) at less than 40 feet from the front property line and (2) at less than 35 feetfor both side yards, at 595 North Parish Drive, Southold: CTM 71-1-6. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Oliva (Chairwoman), Goehringer. Orlando, Dinizio and Simon. The Resolution was duly adopted (5-0). . . . Brief reviews of pending files and general discussion by Board Members followed. . . . There being no other business property coming before the Board at this time, Chairwoman Oliva declared the meeting adjoumed. The meeting adjoumed at 9:00 pm. Respectfully submitted, ~iffs?f~ - Included by Reference: Flied ZBA Decisions (1"1) ~f0J'&~Q Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman Approved for Filing RECEIVeD .. ~ / :,~ fl;J ~7}~ Soullivid TL\';n Clerk .. " APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman Gerard P. Goehringer Vincent Orlando James Dinizio, Jr. Michael A. Simon Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road. P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 Office Location: Town Annex /First Floor, North Fork Bank 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) Southold, NY 11971 http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809. Fax (631) 765-9064 FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF MARCH 10, 2005 ZB Ref. 5669 - ROBERT HEINTGES and MARY McLEOD Property Location: 275 Strohson Road, Cutchogue CTM 103-10-13 SEQRA DETERMINATION: The Zoning Board of Appeais 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' 36,147 sq. ft. parcel is vacant land with 154.21 feet along the north side of Strohson Road in Cutchogue. The applicants' home is located across the street at 280 Strohson Road. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Building Department's December 16, 2004 Notice of Disapproval, citing Sections 100-30A.1 and Section 100-31A in its denial of a building permit to construct a small storage shed. The reason stated by the Building Department is that Code Section 100-31A permits a dwelling, and no dwelling exists. A storage shed is not listed in the code as a permitted primary use. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on March 3, 2005 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: VARIANCE RELIEF REQUESTED: The applicants wish to construct an 8' x 12' shed, 10 ft. in height, on this vacant lot, as accessory storage (accessory to their residence across the street) to keep their garden tools. The shed will be at least 110 feet from the southerly (front) line, and at least 40 feet from the easterly (side) 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 variance will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The Board views this application as a use variance, in that the applicant is requesting a use for storage, accessory to their home across the street, although the use is nonconforming on a vacant lot, since the lot does not contain a primary Page 2 - March 10,2005 ZB Ref. 5669 - R. Heintges and M. McLeod elM 10: 103-10-13 ~ . , dwelling. The applicant was requested and furnished a survey of the primary residence on the south side of Strohson Road, a site adjacent to the storage building. The applicant states that there is no area on the waterfront parcel where his residence is because it is small and may lead to a crowding of yard areas and other variances. The shed is only 96 sq. ft. and will be located near the center of the lot, screened behind an area of trees. Behind the shed is the owner's garden of grape vines. 2. The benefit sought by the applicants cannot be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicants to pursue, other than an area variance. The applicants are unable to locate the shed on their residential lot across the street due to the size of the lot and the dwelling that exists. The applicants wish to place a small shed for storage of their garden tools on this vacant land, and the code permits sheds only as an accessory to the residence, as the primary building, on the same lot. 3. The variance granted herein is substantial. Placement of an accessory building on a vacant lot is a non-permitted use under the current provisions of the code. 4. The difficulty has been self-created and is related to the need for storage of garden tools, on a lot that is vacant lot and not permitted without a residence under the Town 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 requested relief is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of a small garden tool shed, 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 by Member Orlando, and duly carried, to GRANT the variance as applied for, as shown on applicant's diagrams and hand-drawn survey (original survey prepared April 30, 1987 by Roderick VanTuyl, P.C.), SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. The building shall not be permanently affixed to a cement foundation, so that it may be severed from the land and moved to a conforming yard, if and when a dwelling is constructed, or relocate to another site The structure must meet all building code requirements for an accessory storage building, including an application to, and issuance of a building permit from the Building Department, after inspection, if meeting all codes, issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 2. This authorization shall not exceed a period of ten years from the date of filing this decision with the Town Clerk, at which time it shall expire and the building department authorizations, issued upon reliance of these conditions, shall become null and void. If the structure has not been moved to a conforming site, or if a primary building has not been erected that meets the codes, the fee owner of this lot must remove or demolish the structure within 30 days of the expiration of this variance. Page 3 - March 10,2005 " 'ZB Ref. 5669 - R. Heintges and M. McLeod CTM ID: 103-10-13 3. There shall be no sleeping or habitable areas, and the building shall be used only for storage of the garden tools and equipment related to the owner's garden (grape vines or similar garden) on this property. 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, Goehringer, Dinizio, and Simon. This Resolution was duly adopted (5-~ ~, &~ Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman 4/14/05 Approved for Filing ~ APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman Gerard P. Goehringer Vincent Orlando James Dinizio, Jr. Michael A. Simon Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road. P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 Office Location: Town Annex /First Roor, North Fork Bank 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) Southold, NY 11971 ~ http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809. Fax (631) 765-9064 FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF MARCH 10,2005 ZBA No. 5656 - MICHAEL AND KAREN CATAPANO (Owners: V. and E. Pust) Property Location: 33705 C.R. 48, Peconic; CTM 74-2-12.2 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' 4.998-acre parcel has 369.64 feet along C.R. 48 (a/k1a Middle Road or North Road) and 594.15 feet along the westerly side line in Peconic. The property is improved with a two-story, single-family dwelling situated 100 feet from the front lot line, almost center between the side property lines, as shown on the March 16, 1993 survey, amended October 23, 1986 by Roderick VanTuyl, P.C. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Building Department's December 1, 2004 Notice of Disapproval, amended December 29,2004, citing Code Section 100-31A2(b) in its denial of an application to operate a goat farm and building permit application to construct a 7500 sq. ft. building for the purpose of a barn, storage, (goat) cheese processing facility, (goat) milking room, and construction of a farm stand. The reason stated in the disapproval is that 10 acres or more is required under Section 100-31A2(b) for "the keeping, breeding, raising and training of horses, domestic animals and fowl (except ducks) on lots of 10 acres or more" for a goat farm in located in the AC District. Also noted in the Disapproval is Chapter 47-3B concerning the proposed farm stand construction, indicating a requirement of at least five tillable acres of land (excluding any house or agricultural buildings) if the farm stand owner can establish ownership or lease of at least five tillable acres of land in the Town of Southold." FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on March 3, 2005, 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: RELIEF REQUESTED: By application dated January 6, 2005, amended February 17, 2005, the applicants requested an Interpretation as to whether or not 'goats' are defined as "livestock", or are they defined as "domestic animals," for consideration of the applicability of Section 1 00-31 A2(b), and requested a Reversal of the Building Department's December 29, 2004 amended Notice of Disapproval, based on Section 100- 31A2(b). The Applicants are in contract to purchase this property, and propose to relocate their existing goat farm facility on C.R. 48 in Mattituck, to this parcel. In conjunction with their residence on this 4.998 acre parcel, Page 2 - March 10, 2005 ZBA No. 5656 - S. and K. Catapano CTM 74-2-12.2 ~ '. the applicants propose to keep, raise and breed (100) goats by the applicants. In addition to a large pasture for the goats, a 7500 sq. ft. steel farm building, 14 feet high, is proposed north/northeast of the existing dwelling at least 300 feet from the road. The barn will also be used for cheese making, a milking parlor, and for storage. The proposed retail area was reduced to a 10ft. by 10ft. farm stand structure, 10 feet in height, after removing the (600 sq. ft.) retail area from the steel barn area. The 100 sq. ft. farm stand is proposed to sell their dairy products that are made on the goat farm, and the structure will be located at least 250 feet from the road, with a 150' x 50' parking area adjacent to the farm stand for parking of vehicles by customers and others. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION/AMENDED RELIEF: During the March 3, 2005 public hearing, the applicants confirmed they had 68 goats at their existing facility in Mattituck. The applicants were requested, and they agreed in this application to reduce the number of goats to 90, and to accept conditions, including but not limited to setback restrictions which buffer adjacent lands from the pasture and other outdoor goat activity areas. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS: In considering the request for Interpretation, the Board agrees that 'goats' are defined as "livestock" and fall under an agricultural farm activity, and are not domestic animals cited under Section 100-31A2(b). Therefore, the 10-acre requirement for a principal use does not apply under Section 100-31A2(b), and an area variance is granted to allow both the house (code requirement of 80,000 sq. ft.) and the goat farm under Chapter 47-3B, on this 4.998 acre parcel. 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 is proposed the keeping, breeding and raising of goats in conjunction with their residence on this 4.998 acre parcel. The Code requires 80,000 sq. ft. for a single- family residence. and 5 acres of tillable acres of land. By a strict reading of the code. a farm for the purpose of keeping, breeding, raising and training of horses, domestic animals and fowl (except ducks), is required on a lot with a minimum of 10 acres, with or without a principal building. Under Code Section 100-30A1 & 2, a principal building or primary use may be a dwelling or agricultural operations. Under Section 100-31C (8), horses and domestic animals other than household pets, are permitted as an Accessory use, provided that such animals shall not be housed within forty (40) feet of any lot line. (It is noted that under Appeal No. 5441 (Grim), it was determined that keeping of horses for personal use when dedicated to a prinCipal or primary use, such as the applicant's agricultural operations on five (5) tillable acres, is permitted.) In this determination, the permitted agricultural operation is a goat farm facility instead of a horse farm, which requires 5 acres of land, plus 80,000 sq. ft. for the residence. The applicants' property is 4.998 acres, inclusive. 2. The benefit sought by the applicant, as applied for, cannot be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance from the code requirement pertaining to the keeping of goats on five acres, plus 80,000 sq. ft. for the house. 3. The variance granted herein is substantial, resulting in a reduction in the required land area from seven (7) acres to 4.998 acres. The applicants have shown that most of the 4.998 acres will be dedicated to the goat farm in conjunction with their residence in the dwelling, permitted uses in this Agricultural-Conservation Zone District. .. Page 3 - March 10, 2005 ZBA No. 5656 - S. and K. Catapano crM 74-2-12.2 ., 4. The difficulty has been self-created because the application did not show conformity to the code's minimum land area requirement of five (5) acres for a permitted agricultural operation and 80,000 sq. ft. for a single-family use in this Agricultural-Conservation Zone District. 5. No evidence has been submitted to suggest that a variance in this community of mixed agricultural and residential uses will have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood. 6. Grant of this relief is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicants to enjoy the benefit of a goat farm in conjunction with their residence, 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 Member Dinizio, and duly carried, to INTERPRET, that goats are livestock under Section 100-221 E, and not domestic animals, and a goat farm is a permitted agricultural operation, and to REVERSE the first reason of the Building Inspector in its Notice of Disapproval dated December 29, 2004, to confirm that ten (10) acres of land is not required under Section 100-31A2(b) for keeping, breeding and raising of goats, a permitted agricultural operation; and to GRANT the variance as applied for, as shown on the site diagram prepared by the applicants with a date stamp of January 6, 2005, SUBJECT to the following CONDITIONS: 1. All fencing shall be at least 20 feet from all property lines; 2. Spoils shall be at least 70 feet from all property lines; 3. The maximum number of goats permitted is 90. 4. The proposed 50x150 ft. parking area shall be on applicants' site, without any backing out onto the shoulder or road. 5. There shall be no goat or lamb petting pens or any other goat activity outside the designated fenced areas mentioned above or in the future. 6. The farm stand structure shall be in front of/adjacent to the steel barn, as proposed. 7. The Board reserves the right to view and inspect the premises for the purpose of reviewing the above conditions, before or after issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 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), Goehringer, Orlando, Dinizio, and Simon. This Resolution was duly adopted (5-0). n ~)fJc]~ Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman 4/ ~ /05 Approved for Filing J' , APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman Gerard P. Goehringer Vincent Orlando James Dinizio, Jr. Michael A. Simon Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road' P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 Office Location: Town Annex /First Floor, North Fork Bank 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) Southold, NY 11971 . http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809' Fax (631) 765-9064 FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF MARCH 10, 2005 Appl. No. 5652 - JON and KATHLEEN MARINO Property Location: 10105 Soundview Avenue, Southold; CTM 54-8-5. 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 property is 10,018 sq. ft. in area with 80.14 feet along the north side of Sound View Avenue in Southold. The property is improved with a one- story, single-family dwelling with wood deck and accessory garage, all as shown on the November 20, 2002 survey prepared by Peconic Surveyors, P.C. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Building Department's December 3, 2004 Notice of Disapproval, citing Section 100-244B, in its denial of a building permit to construct a proposed porch addition and second-story addition, which new construction will be less than 35 feet from the front lot line and which'will increase the lot coverage from the maximum permitted 20% to 21 %. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on January 20, 2005 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 applicants wish to construct a porch addition extending seven (7) feet in front of their home at 23'1" at its closest point to the front lot line and seven (7) feet into the westerly side yard. The applicants also wish to construct a second-story addition over the existing first floor of the dwelling, maintaining the existing 30 ft. setback, at its closest point, to the front lot line. The lot coverage originally requested is 21 % of the total lot area, inclusive of existing and proposed building area (exclusive of stairs). REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: Based on the testimony and record before the Board and personal inspection, the Board makes the following findings: 1. Grant of the alternative relief will not produce an undesirable change in character of neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The alternative relief granted for the front porch will measure 5 feet by 28 feet and 7 ft. x 8 ft. at the side of the dwelling. The 5 ft. porch at the front , , Page 2 - March 10,2005 ZB Ref. 5652 - J. and K. Marino elM ID: 54-8-5 . of the house will run parallel with the front property line with a setback at 25 ft. 1 in. at its closest point to the front line at Sound View Avenue. The alternative relief is consistent with other homes in the neighborhood, some with a front porch. The alternative relief will increase the front setback to become more conforming, and will bring the lot coverage more into conformity with the code requirement. The porch, as alternatively granted, will have no adverse effects on the surrounding properties and will enhance the appearance of the residence. 2. The benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by some method, feasible for applicant to pursue, other than an area variance. The code requires a 35-foot front yard minimum setback for new construction, and without a variance the applicant would not be able to construct a front porch. Because the measurement is 49 feet from the actual road due to the utility easement, the porch will appear more conforming. 3. The requested area variance is substantial and represents a 30% reduction in the current 35 ft. minimum code requirement. 4. The difficulty has been self-created when the applicant designed an extension to increase the degree of the existing 30.1 ft. front yard nonconforming setback. 5. No evidence has been submitted to suggest that the alternative relief will have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental condition in the neighborhood. 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 Goehringer, and duly carried, to DENY the setback variance for the porch extension as applied, and to GRANT alternative relief for a reduced porch extending five (5) feet from the front side of the dwelling, instead of seven (7) feet, 28 feet long, at a distance 25'1" from the front lot line, of a design similar to that shown on the schematic diagram hand-drawn by Jon Marino dated 10/1/04, and to GRANT the setback variance for the second-story addition over the existing first floor area maintaining the existing setback, as shown on the applicant's schematic diagram and shown on the site map (sketched-in survey originally prepared by Peconic Surveyors, P.C. dated November 20, 2002, amended April 30, 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, setbacks and other features as are expressly addressed in this action. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Oliva (Chairwoman), Orlando, Goehringer, and Simon. Nay: Member Dinizio. This Resolution waSdi:lly adopt~ (4?t). Q \L.. ' ":'QJ (,':d , ~ II ">t' Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman 3/ /05 Approved for Filing I!: -, . .. APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman Gerard P. Goehringer Vincent Orlando James Dinizio, Jr. Michael A. Simon Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road' P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 Office Location: Town Annex /First Floor, North Fork Bank 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) Southold, NY 11971 http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOA~D OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809 . Fax (631) 765-9064 FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF MARCH 10, 2005 ZB Ref. 5646 - ANTHONY AND MARIA KOSTOULAS Property Location: 1035 Aquaview Avenue, East Marion CTM 21-2-13 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 environment if the project is implemented as planned. PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: The applicants' 10,872 sq. ft. parcel has 60 feet along the - north side of Aquaview Avenue, East Marion, and is improved with a two-story frame house as shown on the November 2, 2004 survey, amended November 18, 2004 by John T. Metzger, L.S. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Building Department's September 2, 2004 Notice of Disapproval, amended December 7, 2004, citing Sections 100-242A and 100-244B, in its denial of a building permit to construct additions with alterations to the existing single-family dwelling. The reasons stated for disapproving the application are that the addition as proposed at less than 10 feet on a single side yard and less than 25 feet total side yards, which will be an increase in the degree of the existing nonconformance. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on January 20, 2005 and March 3, 2005, 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 applicants wish to construct a 5' x 30' porch addition, and to extend a 3 ft. (wrap) at both corners, after removing the existing masonry entry porch. The side yards are proposed at 3.6' and 8.7' for a total of 12.3' for both side setbacks, as shown on the diagram date-stamped 11/30/04, with lot coverage calculations, and survey revised November 18, 2004 prepared by Peconic Surveyors, P.C. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The lot coverage has been recalculated and included in this review determination, at a total of 20.33% (without the 64 sq. ft. brick platform and 35 sq. ft. platfonm on stairs). . . -, , Page 2 - March 10, 2005 ZB Ref. No. 5646 - A. and M. Kostoulas elM ID: 21.-2-13 , REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: On the basis of testimony presented, materials submitted and personal inspections, the Board makes the following findings: 1.' Grant of alternative relief will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The alternative relief increases both side yards from their original request from 3.6 feet to 8.9 feet on the west side and from 8.7 feet on the east side to 13.5 feet, while allowing a two-story porch addition to be placed at the front of their home, with 20.3% lot coverage 2. The benefit sought by the applicants cannot be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicants to pursue, other than an area variance, and is related to the dimensions of the lot with a narrow width, varying between 40.16 feet at the north end to 60 feet wide at the southerly end adjacent to the road, and with the layout and location of the dwelling in an existing nonconforming footprint. 3. The alternative relief granted is substantial. The code requires a minimum of 25 feet for both side yards and lot coverage not exceeding 20%. The alternative relief for the porch addition, after removing the proposed extended 3 ft. wraps at both ends, results in setbacks at 13.5+- feet at the south/east side, 8.9 feet at the south/west side, for a total of 22.4+- feet for both yards at the southerly corners, and lot coverage at 20.3. 4. The difficulty has been self-created. For the record, the Board has considered relief under Appeals 4248 and 4098 concerning this property and allowing side yard relief for extended decks from the existing glass sliding doors that overlook the rear yard toward the waterfront (sound). The applicants are aware of the code's limitations on the side yard setbacks and lot coverage maximum for new construction. 5. No evidence has been submitted to suggest that alternative relief (area variance) in this residential community will have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood. 6. Grant of alternative relief is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicants to enjoy the benefit of a porch 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 balancing test under New York Town Law 267-B, motion was offered by Member Goehringer, seconded by Chairwoman Oliva, and duly carried, to DENY the relief requested, and to GRANT alternative relief for an open two-story ft. x porch addition and 6x6' step entry at the front of the existing dwelling, after removina both ends of the porch addition that wrap (removing these encroachments into both side yards, with porch construction open on three sides, as proposed and shown on the rough diagrams #7 and #8, prepared by Regi Welle, R.A. and date stamped by . Page 3 - March 10,2005 , ZB Ref. No. 5646 - A. and M. Kostoulas CTM 10: 21.-2-13 ZBA November 30, 2004, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall provide the Board with a new survey, or map updated by a licensed surveyor, prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, confirming the lot coverage details for all raised decks, shed and other building areas (accessory and principal structures) as required by code, including the proposed addition shown on the 11/2/04 survey prepared by Peconic Surveyors, P.C.; 2. The lot coverage shall not exceed the 20.3% for the building area (re-calculated using the information shown on the 11/2/04 survey, including the proposed 30.3 ft. by 5 ft. porch with 6 ft. x 6 ft. entry stoop at the front of the house). This action does not authorize or condone any current or future use, setback or other feature of the subject properly 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, Goehringer, Dinizio, and Simon. This Resolution was duly adopted (5a . n.~,,&, ~~ Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman 4/~ /05 Approved for Filing APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman Gerard P. Goehringer Vincent Orlando James Dinizio, Jr. Michael A. Simon Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road. P.O. Box 1179 Sonthold, NY 11971-0959 Office Location: Town Annex IFirst Floor, North Fork Bank 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) Southold, NY 11971 http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809. Fax (631) 765-9064 FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF MARCH 10,2005 ZB Ref. 5660 - ALFRED J. and GLORIA GIARDIELLO Property Location: 165 Walnut Place, Mattituck CTM 142-1-14 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' 7,160 sq. ft. parcel has 50.87 feet along Walnut Avenue in Mattituck, and is improved with a 16' x 35' dwelling structure, referred to in Pre- C/O #17261 issued 9/88 and the new survey prepared by Young & Young June 1, 2004. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Building Department's November 3, 2004 Notice of Disapproval, citing Section 100-244 in its denial of a building permit to construct a new dwelling at less than 35 feet from the front property line, after demolishing the existing dwelling. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on March 3, 2005 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 applicants wish to construct a new two-story dwelling, 25 feet wide by 52 feet deep (including the rear deck), along the existing nonconforming location footprint, 13 feet from the front lot line, and with one nonconforming side yard to remain at 12.74 feet, after demolishing the existing dwelling. The applicants also request lot coverage at 27% to include the dwelling, plus 300 sq. ft. deck, existing 197 sq. ft. frame shed, 452.4 sq. ft. swimming pool, for a total of 1949.4 sq. ft. REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: On the basis of testimony presented, materials submitted and personal inspections, the Board makes the following findings: 1. Grant of alternative relief will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The applicants' proposed new construction is for a single-family, two-story dwelling measuring 52 feet in depth (46 feet plus 12 ft. wood deck). The alternative relief with respect to the setback will increase from its existing 13 ft. nonconforming Page 2 - March 10, 2005 ZB Ref. 5660 - A. and G. Giardiello eTM ID: 142-1-14 location, to 20 feet, with more conformity to the code's 35 ft. front yard requirement. The alternative relief with respect to the lot coverage will also bring the construction into more conformity to the code's 20% lot coverage limitation, from the requested 27% to 21.2%, for all buildings. The side yards will be 12.74 and 12.69, instead of the code required 15 ft. and 10 ft, although the total will be conforming at 25 feet. 2. The grant of alternative relief will provide a benefit that cannot be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than area variances. The preexisting dwelling is nonconforming in its original footprint 13 feet from the front lot line along Walnut Street. The lot is only 7,160 sq. ft., and reduction in strict standard of the code is inevitable. 3. The relief granted is substantial, reflecting a reduction of 15 feet from the code required 35 ft. front yard setback, and 1,2% increase over the code restriction for a maximum lot coverage of 20%. 4. The difficulty was self-created and is related to applicant's desire to build a new dwelling that does not conform to the zoning 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 requested relief is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of a single-family 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 Orlando, seconded by Member Simon, and duly carried, to DENY the relief as applied for, and to GRANT alternative relief with a minimum front yard setback of 20 feet, with a maximum lot coverage of 21.2%, and second side yard at a minimum of 12.74 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, setbacks and other features as are expressly addressed in this action. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Oliva (Chairwoman), Orlando, Goehringer, Dinizio, and Simon. This Resolution was duly adopted (5-~ - flG~ Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman 4/7/05 Approved for Filing . APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman Gerard P. Goehringer Vincent Orlando James Dinizio, Jr. Michael A. Simon Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road. PO. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 Office Location: Town Annex /First Floor, North Fork Bank 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) Southold, NY 11971 http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809' Fax (631) 765-9064 FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF MARCH 10, 2005 ZB Ref. 5657 - EDWARD JENSEN Property Location: 440 Sunset Way, Southold, CTM 91-1-8 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 14,195 sq. ft. parcel has 100 feet along Sunset Way, and is improved with a one-story frame, single-family dwelling as shown on the July 30, 2004 survey prepared by J. Ehlers. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Building Department's November 9,2004 Notice of Disapproval, citing Section 100-244B, in its denial of a building permit to construct a porch addition. The reason stated in the disapproval is that the required front yard setback is 35 feet, and the survey indicates a front yard setback of 21 feet. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on March 3, 2005 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 wishes to construct an 8 ft. by 28 ft. wide, two- story porch, with open (or unenclosed) construction design, at the east (front) side of his home, resulting in a proposed setback of 21 feet, after removing the existing brick stoop. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:AMENDED RELIEF: During the March 3, 2005 public hearing, the applicant was requested, and agreed, to increase the setback to 24 feet, as an alternative that is more conforming to the code's front setback requirement of 35 feet. REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: On the basis of testimony presented, materials submitted and personal inspections, the Board makes the following findings: 1. Grant of alternative relief, reducing the depth of the proposed porch, from 8 feet to 5 feet, will increase the setback by three feet, instead of the requested 21 feet. The alternative will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The dwelling is set back Page 2 - March 10,2005 ZB Ref. 5657 - Edward Jensen eTM ID: 91-1-8 . 29 feet, and the brick stoop to be replaced is presently set back at 22+- feet from the front lot line. The front porch will serve to soften the appearance of the second-story addition proposed over the existing footprint, and the side yards will not be changed. 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 house as it exists is only 29 feet from the front property line. 3. The relief granted is substantial, representing nearly 32% reduction from the code required 35 feet. 4. The difficulty has been self-created and is related to the nonconforming location of the existing dwelling and the need to expand and make improvements to the dwelling in a nonconforming location. 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 requested relief is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of an addition with alterations, 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 Dinizio, seconded by Member Orlando, and duly carried, to DENY the relief as applied, and to GRANT alternative relief for a 5 ft. by 28 ft. two-story open porch, set back not closer than 24 feet to the front property line, and that the step area leading up to the porch must be constructed on the side. 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, Goehringer, Dinizio, and Simon. This Resolution was duly adopted (5-0). ~~.~ Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman 4/.!f /05 Approved for Filing ".' . . ,..;.,. '" " , APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman Gerard P. Goehringer Vincent Orlando James Dinizio, Jr. Michael A. Simon Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road' P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 Office Location: Town Annex /First Floor, North Fork Bank 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) Southold, NY 11971 hUp:/ /southoJdtown. northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809' Fax (631) 765-9064 FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF MARCH 10, 2005 ZB Ref. 5667 - RICHARD SCHETMAN Property Location: 38910 Main Road, Orient; CTM 15-8-30 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 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 67,654 sq. ft. parcel has 215.10 feet along the south side of the Main Road and 301.72 feet along the easterly side of a private road. The lot is improved with a two-story, single-family frame dwelling and accessory structures, all as shown on the December 12, 2002 survey, updated December 17, 2004 by Joseph A. Ingegno, Land Surveyor. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Building Department's November 23, 2004 Notice of Disapproval, conceming new construction, a part of which is proposed as an unheated for an enclosed porch, and part that will add a new heated bedroom area. The reason stated for disapproval by the Building Inspector is that the porch addition creates a non-conforming building, which is either an accessory building exceeding the 18 ft. height limitation and located in a nonconforming front yard, a non- permitted yard under Section 100-33, or it is designed as a second dwelling unit, a non-permitted use under Section 100-131 A. The new porch construction is unheated and separates the proposed new (heated) bedroom area from the remaining heated areas of the existing dwelling. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on March 3, 2005 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 proposes a new garage, attached to this single-family dwelling only by an enclosed, unheated porch area, rather than as heated space, and then adding bedroom floor space, as shown on the December 13, 2004 preliminary first floor and second floor plan A3-R (date stamped received by ZBA January 10, 2005), the December 13, 2004 A1-R site plan, and the December 13, 2004 diagram A2-R of exterior elevations. REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: On the basis of testimony presented, materials submitted and personal inspections, the Board makes the following findings: 'Page 2 - March 10, 2005 ZB Ret.' 5667 - Richard Schetman elM 10: 15-8-30 " ~'" 1. Grant of alternative relief will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The applicants propose a new two-story addition for use as a two-car garage with storage on ground floor, and bedroom space on the second floor, linked by an unheated screened porch. The new construction will be 39.3 feet from the front lot adjacent to the private road (on the west side), at its closest point. The dimensions of the two-story construction is proposed at 43'3" by 21'3", attached by a 5.7' by 19.2' single-story screened porch. The alternative granted requires construction of an L-shaped area with radiant heated space, at least 5.7' x 8' in size, and limiting the height of all construction to a maximum of 20 feet from the grade shown on the 12/17/04 survey (prepared by J. Ingegno) for the building. 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 has frontage along two roads, defined under the code to be front yards, and the code requires a minimum front yard setback of 50 feet. 3. The variance granted herein is not substantial. The relief is minimal and provides for a height limitation of 20.5 feet from grade, instead of the code limitation for an accessory structure of 18 feet from grade. 4. The difficulty was self-created and is related to applicant's needs to design an addition in the front yard. 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 requested relief is the minimum action necessary and adequate 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 balancing test under New York Town Law 267-B, motion was offered by Member Orlando, seconded by Member Goehringer, and duly carried, to GRANT the variance as applied for, as shown on the December 13, 2004 preliminary first floor and second floor plan A3-R (date stamped received by ZBA January 10, 2005), the December 13, 2004 A1-R site plan, and the December 13, 2004 diagram A2-R of exterior elevations, for use only as a single-family dwelling (and not as a second dwelling unit), with the following CONDITIONS, and 1. That the plans be revised to show an L-shaped area with radiant heated space, at least 5.7' x 8' in size, and limiting the height of all construction to a maximum of 20.5 feet from the grade shown on the 12/17/04 survey (prepared by J. Ingegno) for the building; and 2. That a second kitchen or second dwelling unit is not permitted; 3. That prior to issuance of any certificate of occupancy, an inspection by the '" . I f'age-3 - March 10, 2005 ZB Ret.' 5667 - Richard Schetman CTM 10: 15-8-30 Zoning Board of Appeals shall be made with a written record confirming that the above conditions have been followed. 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, Goehringer, Dinizio, and Simon. This Resolution was duly adopted (5-~ 0), LQ~ Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman<< f,(q105 Approved for Filing APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman Gerard P. Goehringer Vincent Orlando James Dinizio, Jr. Michael A. Simon Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road' P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 Office Location: Town Annex IFirst Floor, North Fork Bank 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) Southold, NY 11971 . .. http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809' Fax (631) 765-9064 FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF MARCH 10, 2005 ZB Ref. 5666 - ELIZABETH WELCH and MERCELO GUIDOLl Property Location: 230 Vincent Street, Orient; CTM 25-3-14. 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 10,044 sq. ft. parcel has 88.45 feet along the east side of Vincent Street, and is improved with a two-story, single-family dwelling and one-story detached garage, as shown on the August 13, 2002 survey prepared by Pat T. Seccafico. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Building Department's October 5, 2004 Notice of Disapproval, amended December 28, 2004, citing Sections 100-242A and 100-244 in its denial of a building permit to construct a proposed porch addition. The reasons stated by the Building Department are that the new construction will increase the degree of nonconformance with a front yard setback at less than 35 feet and lot coverage exceeding the code limitation of 20 percent. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on March 3, 2005 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 wishes to construct a new 8.5 ft. wraparound open porch with new steps, after removing the existing front stoop, at the front of the existing dwelling. The existing front yard setback is 29.9 feet to the front stoop. The proposed setback is 17 from the front lot line, at its closest point, and lot coverage increase to 21.7%, as shown on the survey revised December 20, 2004 and construction plan dated December 16, 2004, prepared by Metz Design. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:AMENDED RELIEF: During the March 3, 2005 public hearing, the applicant was requested, and agreed, to accept alternative relief for a 6 ft. deep porch, increasing the setback for a possible alternative plan that would be more conforming to the code's front setback requirement of 35 feet, and allowing a 10 ft. wide porch as additional lot coverage, instead of 6 ft. or 8.5 ft. Page 2 - March 10, 2005 ZB Ref. 5666 - Welch and Guidoli CTM 10: 25-3-14 , . REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: On the basis of testimony presented, materials submitted and personal inspections, the Board makes the following findings: 1. Grant of alternative relief will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The depth of the porch will be reduced in size from 8.5 feet to 6 feet, increasing the setback from the front property line from 17 feet to 19.5 feet, at its closest point. The design is one-story and will blend with a historical character, designed and located similarly to others in the neighborhood. 2. The benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by increasing the front yard setback from 17 feet to a minimum of 19.5 feet. There is no method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, without relief from the code provision. 3. The amount of relief requested is substantial, resulting in a 44% reduction of the code required 35 ft. front yard setback, 1.7+-% increase over the 20% code limitation for lot coverage. 4. The difficulty has been self-created. The home was constructed prior to 1957, and the zoning code requirements (enacted after the construction of the home) are for a minimum 35 ft. front yard and maximum 20% lot coverage. 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 requested relief is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of an open porch 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 balancing test under New York Town Law 267-B, motion was offered by Member Simon, seconded by Chairwoman/Member Oliva, and duly carried, to DENY the variance for a 17 ft. front yard setback, and to GRANTalternative relief for a maximum 6-ft. x 36 ft. wide open front porch, and loltoverage at 21.7%, including approval of a 10-foot porch wrap-around on the side, instead of 8.5 ft. side wraparound). 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, Goehringer, Dinizio, and Simon. This Resolution was duly adopted (5~ J .6). C\)~ Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman 4/ ~ 11/05 Approved for Filing APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman Gerard P. Goehringer Vincent Orlando James Dinizio, Jr. Michael A. Simon Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road. P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 Office Location: Town Annex IFirst Roor, North Fork Bank 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) Southold, NY 11971 http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809. Fax (631) 765-9064 FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF MARCH 10, 2005 ZB Ref. 5665 - GREGORY WALLACE and LINDA WALTERS Properly Location: 62 Washington Ave, Greenport CTM 41-1-35 SEQRA DETERMINATION: The Zoning Board of Appeals has visited the properly 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' 12,000 sq. ft. lot has frontage along two streets: 100 feet along the north side of Washington Avenue and 120 feet along the west side of Booth Place. The property is improved with a one-story frame house and accessory garage located in the northerly yard, as shown on the August 19, 2002 survey prepared by John C. Ehlers, L.S. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Building Department's December 7, 2004 Notice of Disapproval, citing Sections 100-242A and 100-244B, in its denial of a building permit to construct a proposed second- story addition which will constitute an increase in the degree of nonconformance with a setback at less than 35 feet from the front property line. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on March 3, 2005 at which time written and oral evidence were presented. Based upon all testimony, documentation, personal inspection of the properly, and other evidence, the Zoning Board finds the following facts to be true and relevant: AREA VARIANCE RELIEF REQUESTED: The applicants wish to construct a second-story over the existing first floor of their home at less than the code required 35 feet. The setbacks of the proposed second-story will be 11 feet from the front (westerly) properly line and 28 feet from the front (south) property line, plus a 2 ft. cantilevered roof. 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 variance will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. This one-story dwelling is located on a corner lot with two front yards, and has existed in a nonconforming location for more than 40 years, at 11 feet Page 2 - March 10,2005 ZBRe!. elM ID: from the closest westerly front property line and 28 feet from the southerly front property line. The neighborhood consists of dwellings in similar setback locations. 2. The benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance. There is no alternative because the dwelling has existed in this location for more than 40 years. 3. The difficulty is not self-created and is related to the need for additional living floor area over the first floor of an existing dwelling, and the dwelling does not meet today's setback requirements. 4. 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. 5. Grant of the requested relief is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of a second-story 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 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 August 19, 2002 survey prepared by John C. Ehlers, L.S. and building diagrams certified by Lawrence Tuthill, P.E. dated January 5, 2005. 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, Goehringer, Dinizio, and Simon. This Resolution was duly adopted (5-0). .~JQY~l4J,~Q Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman 3/ /8105 Approved for Filing "-" "~ . "-"" APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman Gerard P. Goehringer Vincent Orlando James Dinizio, Jr. Michael A. Simon Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road' P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 Office Location: Town Annex IFirst Floor, North Fork Bank 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) Southold, NY 11971 . http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809' Fax (631) 765-9064 FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF MARCH 10, 2005 ZB Ref. 5658 - PETER WARNS Property Location: 8740 Peconic Bay Boulevard, Laurel CTM 126-5-2.1 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 31,450 sq. ft. parcel has 75 feet along the south side of Peconic Bay Boulevard and 97.02 feet along Peconic Bay, in Laurel. The property is improved with a 1-1/2 story, single-family dwelling. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Building Department's September 20, 2004 Notice of Disapproval, citing Sections 242A, 100-239.4B, and 100-244 in its denial of a building permit to construct additions and alterations to the existing single-family dwelling. The reasons stated by the Building Department are that: (1) there will be an increase in the degree of nonconformance with a proposed single side yard at less than the code required 15 feet; and (2) the setback from the bulkhead is less than 75 feet. It is also noted that the total side yards are shown at 29.9 feet 3.5 feet, for a total of 33.4 feet instead of the COde-required 35 feet. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on March 3, 2005 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 tnue and relevant: AREA VARIANCE RELIEF REQUESTED: The applicant wishes to construct a second-story addition with alterations to the existing dwelling as shown on the survey prepared by Daniel P. Jedlicka dated 7/13/98, with overlay diagram. The second-story addition will be 64 feet from the bulkhead at its closest point, 3.5 feet from the south/west side yard at its closest point, and 4.1 feet on the opposite south/west corner for the second-story addition. The total side yards will be 29.9 feet and 3.5 feet, or 33.4 feet. REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: On the basis of testimony presented, materials submitted and personal inspections, the Board makes the following findings: . Pagt> 2 - March 10.2005 ZB Ref. 5658 - Peter Warns elM 10: 126-5-2.1 " . 1. Grant of the variance will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The home is presently 64.357 feet from the bulkhead. measured from the most southeast corner of the building, and 3.5 feet from the south/west side. The neighborhood consists of lots with variable, narrow widths and containing two- story buildings with nonconforming side yards similar to the applicant's request. The total yard areas will exceed the code required The easterly yard area will remain unobstructed for a width of at least 29 feet, and the addition is proposed over the existing first floor area, presently 3.1 and 4.1 feet from the westerly side property line, without creating a new nonconforming setback. 2. The benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance because the applicant wishes to retain the existing first area of the home and to build up, as well as expanding to the east side with a side yard of 29 feet. 3. The variances granted are substantial. The code requires a minimum of 15 feet on a single side yard, and the relief results a 76% reduction of this requirement. The total side yards will be 33.4 feet, for a 1.6 ft. reduction, or 4.28% less than the code required 35 feet. The bulkhead setback will be a 10.7 ft. reduction, or 14% less than the code required 75 feet. 4. The difficulty was self-created and is related to the need for additional floor area, with a plan that was designed to take advantage of the existing first floor area of the home which does not conform to the code's setback 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 requested relief is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of a second-story 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 balancing test under New York Town Law 267-B, motion was offered by Member Goehringer, seconded by Member Simon, and duly carried, to GRANT the variances as applied for, as shown on the sketch of construction details, and survey diagram with overlay, prepared by Daniel P. Jedlicka dated 7/13/98. 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, Goehringer, Dinizio, and Simon. This Resolution was duly adopted (5A ~CO.~ Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman 4/14/05 Approved for Filing j .~.' .' APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman Gerard P. Goehringer Vincent Orlando James Dinizio, Jf. Michael A. Simon Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road. P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 Office Location: Town Annex /First Floor, North Fork Bank 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) Southold, NY 11971 , ,." http://southoidtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809' Fax (631) 765-9064 FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF MARCH 10, 2005 ZB Ref. 5662 - JKJ NORTH FORK REALTY, INC. Property Location: 53740 Main Road, Southold; CTM 61-4-6. Zone: Hamlet Business. 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 7900+- sq. ft. lot has 52.30 ft. frontage along the south side of the Main Road, Southold, and is improved with a two-story frame building, as shown on the January 18, 1984 survey, amended December 4,1986 by Roderick VanTuyl, P.C. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Building Department's November 29,2004 Notice of Disapproval, citing Section 100-92, in its denial of a building permit to construct alterations at second-story height of the existing building. The reasons stated for disapproval are that the new alterations will increase the degree of nonconformance with regard to a single side yard at less than 10 feet and total side yards at less than 25 feet. FiNDiNGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on March 3, 2005 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 proposes new construction which includes modification of the second-story/flat roof of the existing building. The new construction is proposed over the existing nonconforming building (18'8" by 54'10"), maintaining the existing nonconforming setbacks of the first floor (zero setback from the easterly lot line and 10 feet from the westerly side yard, for a total of 10 feet on both sides), as shown on the applicant's diagrams (with a ZBA date- stamp of December 27,2004). 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 variance will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. There will be no change to the second story . , --~ ~, ,. Page 2 - March 10,2005 ZB Ref. 5662 - JKJ North Fork Realty CTM ID: 61-4-6 which is presently used, except for the modified roof line which slightly increases the height to the top of the ridge at 15' 9 :y. " and replaces a flat roof that exists. 2. The benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance because the building has existed in a nonconforming location for over 40 years and is occupied. 3. The variance granted herein is not substantial. 4. The difficulty is related to the need to modify the roof, replacing the existing flat roof above the existing second-story of a building with nonconforming setbacks. 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 requested relief is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of structural alterations, 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 by Member Dinizio, and duly carried, to GRANT the variance as applied for, as shown on the applicant's building diagrams (with a ZBA date-stamp of December 27, 2004), and shown on the January 18, 1984 survey, amended December 4, 1986, prepared by Roderick VanTuyl, P.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 other features as are expressly addressed in this action. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Oliva (Chairwoman), Orlando, Goehringer, Dinizio, and Simon. This Resolution was duly adopted (5-0). .) ...._.. 1+ (',. J{.L<'~ A....J. 'j \LJL~ Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman 3// 1/05 Approved for Filing APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman Gerard P. Goehringer Vincent Orlando James Dinizio, Jr. Michael A. Simon Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road. P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 Office Location: Town Annex /First Floor, North Fork Bank 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) Southold, NY 11971 c' http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809. Fax (631) 765-9064 FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF MARCH 10, 2005 ZB Ref. 5654 - WilLIAM ARCHER (Co-op Unit #9) and KIMOGENOR POINT COMPANY joined in by letter of 2/28/05) Property location: 50 Jackson Street, New Suffolk; CTM 116-6-24.1. 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 home is located on a 5.90 acre parcel. The land has been held since 1915 by the Kimogenor Point Corporation, with each homeowner owning a proportionate share of stock in the corporation. The parcel is improved with the applicant's 1-1/2 story, single-family residence, five other individual single-family dwellings, and a clubhouse. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Building Department's September 29,2004 Notice of Disapproval, citing Sections 1 00-31 A and 100-243A, in its denial of a building permit to construct a proposed second- story addition. The reasons stated by the Building Department are: (1) that there are multiple dwellings on this parcel, and (2) reconstruction of the existing dwelling is a nonconforming use. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on March 3, 2005 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: RELIEF REQUESTED: The applicant wishes to add a second-floor addition and to renovate the first floor of the existing dwelling, as shown on the elevation and floor plans dated 7/23/04, and site plan prepared 11/3/03 by Samuels & Steelman, Architects. The use of the dwelling will remain as single- family, and therefore there will be no increase or change in the number (density) of single-family dwellings, confirmed by applicant to be 'six,' adjacent to contiguous property also owned by Kimogenor Point. The setback of this dwelling is noted as 70+- feet from the existing bulkhead along West Creek, and all other code provisions were noted by the Building Department to be in conformity with the code. REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: On the basis of testimony presented, materials submitted and personal inspections, the Board makes the following findings: Page 2 - March 10, 2005 ZB Ref. 5654 - William Archer & Kimogenor Point Co. ClM ID: 116-6-24.1 " . 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 building inspector indicates that the present dwelling is a nonconforming building containing a nonconforming use, based on the fact that the 5.90 acre parcel contains multiple individual dwellings. The applicant's home is one of six dwellings, owned by stockholders of the corporation, Kimogenor Point. 2. The benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than a variance. 3. The variance granted herein is not substantial since there is no change in the use density and the number of dwelling units, although nonconforming on one parcel, will remain the same. 4. The difficulty has been self-created and is related to the multiple dwellings on a single parcel of land, which is nonconforming. 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 requested relief is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of additions with alterations, 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 by Member Dinizio, and duly carried, to GRANT the variance, as applied for, as shown on the elevation and floor plans dated 7/23/04, and site plan prepared 11/3/03 by Samuels & Steelman, Architects. 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, Goehringer, Dinizio, and Simon. This Resolution was duly adopted (5-fl _ J~)~.&~ Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman 4fil/05 Approved for Filing APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman Gerard P. Goehringer Vincent Orlando James Dinizio, Jr. Michael A. Simon Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road. P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 Office Location: Town Annex /First Floor, North Fork Bank 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) Southold, NY 11971 http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765.1809. Fax (631) 765.9064 FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF MARCH 10, 2005 ZBA Ref. 5676 - DR. FRANCIS KESTLER Property Location: 11535 Main Road and Pacific Street, Mattituck; CTM 142-2-16 Zone District: Residential-Office. 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 22,406 sq. ft. parcel has 101.37 feet along the north side of Main Road (a/k/a State Route 25) and 217.14 feet along the west side of Pacific Street in Mattituck. The property is improved with a two-story main building and detached building, as shown on the September 24, 2003 survey prepared by Martin Donald Hand, L.S. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Building Department's January 14, 2005 Notice of Disapproval concerning an application for a building permit for additions with alterations to an existing single- family dwelling conversion to a dentist office. The reason stated in the disapproval is that the front yard setback of the proposed new construction is less than 50 feet from the front lot line. (In addition, it is noted in the Notice of Disapproval that the proposed conversion to a professional office requires site plan approval from the Southold Town Planning Board.) FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on March 3, 2005 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 applicants wish to enclose (and convert) the existing screened front porch to a waiting room and with ingress and egress adjacent to the proposed dental office, with new handicap access and ramps. The setback is 10'1' from its closest point the front property line, and the handicap access area will be greater than the existing 11'1" setback at the westerly side of the proposed converted porch area, as shown on the site map (S-3) prepared 1-28-2005 by Condon Engineering, P.C. 1. Grant of the variance will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The new alterations for conversion of the existing Page 2 - March 10, 2005 File No. 5676 - Dr. Frank Kestler CTM Id: 142-2-16 '. . front porch, and the new handicap ramp and access areas, will meet or exceed the existing setback of the principal building. 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 building has maintained nonconforming setbacks for over 50 years, and there is no reasonable alternative to change the building to meet the 50 ft. front yard setback requirement of the code. Without an area variance, the addition is not possible. 3. The variance granted herein is substantial. The code requires a minimum of 25 feet for both side yards, and the addition is a two-ft. reduction from this requirement, resulting in total side yards of 22+- feet. 4. The difficulty has been self-created and is related to the need to convert the porch and the location of the porch as it exists in a nonconforming location, prior to this variance application. 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 porch at the front of the existing dwelling structure predates the enactment of zoning and is the reason why the nonconformity exists. The Board has taken into consideration the nonconforming setbacks of the business buildings in the immediate neighborhood on both sides of State Route 25. 6. Grant of the requested relief is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of additions and alterations, 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 Dinizio, seconded by Member Simon, and duly carried, to GRANT the variance as applied for, as shown on the site map (S-3) prepared 1-28-2005 by Condon Engineering, P.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 other features as are expressly addressed in this action. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members ~ (Chairwoman), Goehringer, Orlando, Dinizio, and Simon. This Resolution was duly adopted (5-~ 15J. ~'t! Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman 3/ ,; /05 Approved for Filing APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman Gerard P. Goehringer Vincent Orlando James Dinizio, Jr. Michael A. Simon Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road. P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 Office Location: Town Annex /First Floor, North Fork Bank 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) Southold, NY 11971 http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809' Fax (631) 765-9064 FINDINGS, DELffiERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF MARCH 10, 2005 AppI. No. 5671 - CINGULAR WIRELESS PCS, LLC (A. Junge, Owuer) Property Location: 21855 C.R. 48 (Middle Road), Cutchogue CTM No. 96-1-19.1 SEORA 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 as a setback request. PROPERTY FACTSIDESCRIPTION: The applicant's property is located on the north side of C.R. 48 in Cutchogue, with 45,589 sq. ft. of land area and road frontage of 168.17 ft. The property is immediately adjacent to the Landfill at the north side. To the west are residences, and to the east, vacant land. The property is located in the Light Industrial (LI) Zone District and improved with an existing Telecommunications Tower and equipment shelter structure, and business buildings. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Building Department's December 15, 2004 Notice of Disapproval denying a permit to construct for the reason that the equipment shelter (storage building) is proposed in a location at less than 70 feet from the rear property line. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on March 3, 2005, at which time written and oral evidence was presented. Based upon all testimony, documentation, personal inspection of the property and the area, and other evidence, the Zoning Board finds the following facts to be true and relevant. AREA VARIANCE RELIEF REOUESTED: Applicant requests a location of a 13.5' x 23' equipment shelter bnilding, 32 feet from the rear property line. The January 10, 2005 updated site plan (ZOI) shows its proposed location near the existing 100' monopole tower and equipment compound, and north of the existing parking area. Also proposed is additional landscaping and fencing on the west and south sides. 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 character of neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The Telecommunications Law requires co-location on existing towers. This property contains an existing tower, and applicant's propose to co-locate antennas in accordance with the codes within the existing 100 ft. height of the tower. The need for an equipment shelter building is in support of the co-location. The existing telecommunications tower sits in the northeasterly rear yard, and there is a need for this building to be as close to the tower as possible. Page 2 - March 10, 2005 ZBA Ref. 5671 - Cingular Wireless (and others) 96-1-19.1 atCutchogue " . 2. The benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by some method, feasible for applicant to pursue, other than an area variance because of environmental constraints and hecause the proposed location is the most beneficial to the applicants and the neighborhood. The requested variance is not unreasonable and is within keeping of the many regulations pertaining to public utility uses and transmission towers. 3. The variance is not substantial and exceeds the sethack requirements (ref. 100-33) which apply to similar types and designs of accessory storage structures in this and all other zone districts. 4. The relief granted will not have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. No evidence has been submitted to suggest the new location of the equipment shelter structure will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. The applicant will provide landscaping for buffering the area. The Board suggests five-foot arborvitae, planted four feet apart, to be continnously maintained. However, the Board reserves the right to review this buffering layout if screening is not adequately foUowed by applicant relative to this particular area. 5. In considering this application, the Board deems this action to be the minimum necessary and adequate for the applicants to enjoy the benefit of equipment shelter, and that the grant of this variance will preserve the character of the neighborhood, and the health, safety, welfare of the community. BOARD RESOLUTION: In considering aU ofthe above factors and applying the balancing test under New York Town Law 267-B, motion was offered by Member Orlando, seconded by Member Dinizio, and duly carried, to: GRANT the variance as applied for, and shown on the Infinigy Engineering Co. site plan ZOI dated 9-29-04, updated 10-14-04. This action does not authorize or condone any current or future nse, setback or other feature of the subject property that may violate the Zoning Code, other than snch uses, setbacks and other features as are expressly addressed in this action. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Oliva (Chairwoman), Goebringer, Orlando, Dinizio, and Simon. This Resolution was duly adopted (5-cJ Ik "J:re. 1 & &\)OO'lA Rnth D. Oliva, Chairwoman 4- y- -05 Approved for Filing ., APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman Gerard P. Goehringer Vincent Orlando James Dinizio, Jr. Michael A. Simon Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road. P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 Office Location; Town Annex /First Floor, North Fork Bank 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) Southold, NY 11971 http://southoldtown . northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809. Fax (631) 765-9064 FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF MARCH 10,2005 ZB Ref. 5586 - CURTIS and SUSAN RAND Property Location: Greenwood Road, Fishers Island; CTM 12-1-13.3. 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 9,147.6 sq. ft. parcel has 93+- feet along Greenwood Road, Fishers Island. The property is improved with a two-story dwelling presently 27'11 "+- feet from the front lot line, and without the as-built deck, 32'4"+- feet from the rear lot line, as shown on the site map prepared by Susan Young, Architect. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Building Department's May 14, 2003 Notice of Disapproval, amended October 13, 2004 Notice of Disapproval, citing Sections 100-242A and 100-244, in its denial of a building permit concerning porch reconstruction and an as-built rear deck addition at less than 35 feet from the rear and front lot lines. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on March 3, 2005 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 wishes to reconstruct the 8 ft' by 35'4" front open porch which will be 27'11" from the front lot line adjacent to Greenwood Road. The new 12'5" by 31'2" wide rear deck, as built, will be 19'11" from the rear line. No changes are proposed in the side yards. 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 variance will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The one-story front porch will replace an existing porch, and will remain open on three sides. The rear deck will remain open and unroofed, and must be compliant with all codes. The house is in excess of 50 years of age, and cannot be changed. Page 2 - March 10,2005 ZB Ref. 5586 -C. and S. Rand ClM ID: 12-1-13.3 " . There are similar setbacks of other homes in the neighborhood, although the requested 27'11" front yard setback and 19'11" rear yard are the maximum reductions from the code that the board will approve under the circumstances. 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 home is at least 50 years of age and cannot be changed. The one-story front porch is existing, and the new construction is a replacement of same. 3. The variance granted herein is substantial. The code requires a minimum of 35 feet for the front yard, and 35 feet for the rear yard. The reconstruction of the existing porch will be a 20% reduction from the front setback requirement, and the deck will be a 43% reduction of the code requirement. 4. The difficulty was self-created and is related to the need for a porch and an open rear yard deck, designed as additions to a home in a nonconforming footprint, and planned without conforming to the current Town 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 requested relief is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of additions, 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 by Member Simon, and duly carried, to GRANT the variance as applied for, as shown on the site map prepared by Susan Young, Architect and date stamped by the ZBA January 13, 2005, SUBJECT to the condition that the rear deck shall remain 'open to the sky'. 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, Goehringer, Dinizio, and Simon. This Resolution was duly adopted (5-0~ l~'&~ Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman 4/14/05 Approved for Filing . Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road. P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 "- Office Location: "- Town Annex /First Floor, North Fork Bank 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) Southold, NY 11971 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman Gerard P. Goehringer Vincent Orlando James Dinizio, Jr. Michael A. Simon http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809. Fax (631) 765-9064 FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF MARCH 10,2005 ZB Ref. 5664 - D. RYAN and S. KRAMER Property Location: 165 Bungalow Lane, Mattituck; CTM 123-3-4.1 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' 31,031 sq. ft. parcel has 125 feet along Bungalow Lane in Mattituck, and is improved with a single-family dwelling and accessory garage structure, as shown on the November 11, 2003 survey prepared by Stanley J. Isaksen, Jr. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Building Department's November 23, 2004 Notice of Disapproval, amended December 29, 2004, citing Sections 100-33 and 100-242A, in its denial of a building permit to construct an addition to the existing accessory garage building, with a nonconforming location less than 40 feet from the front property line and less than five (5) feet from the side property line. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on March 3, 2005 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 wishes to construct a 10.3 ft. by 22.5 ft. by 25 ft. by 8.5 ft. addition at the south and east sides of the existing accessory one-car garage, for additional vehicle and storage purposes. The addition will extend along two sides of the garage, at three (3) feet from the northerly side property line and 20.1 feet from the front property line, as shown on the survey amended December 20, 2004, by Stanley Isaksen, Jr. 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 variance will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The applicants propose to construct an addition for two-cars, as a single-story garage located in the front yard. The building will not be any closer I Page2 - March 10, 2005 ZB Ref. 5664 - O. Ryan and S. Kramer CTM 10: 123-3-4.1 " , than 3 feet from the northeast corner, and no closer than 20 feet to the front line along Bungalow Lane, as shown on the survey map prepared December 20, 2004 by Stanley Isaksen, Jr. 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 accessory garage has existed in a nonconforming location in the front yard at 3.1 feet from the northerly (side) property line and 17.3 feet from the westerly (front) property line. No expansion would be possible unless some relief were requested. 3. The variance granted is substantial and results in a 50% reduction from the code required 40 ft. front yard and 40% reduction from the 5 ft. minimum code required side yard. 4. The difficulty has been self-created and is related to the need for a garage, designed as an expansion to the existing accessory garage in a nonconforming location. 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 requested relief is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of a garage addition to an accessory building, 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 Member Dinizio, and duly carried, to GRANT the variance as applied for, as shown on the plan prepared by Architecnologies revised 12-13-04, and survey amended December 20,2004, by Stanley Isaksen, Jr. 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, Goehringer, Dinizio, and Simon. This Resolution was duly adopted (5~ .,,-Q.6)~ Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman 4 /13/05 Approved for Filing APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman Gerard P. Goehringer Vincent Orlando James Dinizio, Jr. Michael A. Simon Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road. P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 Office Location: Town Annex /First Floor, North Fork Bank 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) Southold, NY 11971 .' http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809. Fax (631) 765-9064 FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF MARCH 10,2005 ZB Ref. 5659 - DOROTHY W. FAUCON Property Location: 46925 Main Road, Southold CTM 69-5-16 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 19,808 sq. ft. parcel has 99.77 feet along the Main Road and is improved with a 1-story and 2-1/2 story frame dwelling and accessory barn, as shown on the June 18, 2004 survey prepared by Joseph A. Ingegno. On February 22,2005, floor plan diagrams were submitted by the owner showing the room layout of each of the two floors of the dwelling (including one kitchen in the main dwelling unit and one kitchen in the apartment, bedrooms, bathrooms, etc.). BASIS OF APPLICATION: Building Department's December 6, 2004 Notice of Disapproval, citing Sections 100-31 B in its denial of an application for a certificate of occupancy pertaining to a two- family use of a dwelling constructed prior to 1957. The reason stated by the Building Department is that the inspection record dated November 10, 2004 indicates that the dwelling is occupied as a single-family dwelling, and that Section 100-31B(1) requires a special exception for a two-family dwelling. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on March 3, 2005 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: VARIANCE RELIEF REQUESTED: The applicant is requesting a reversal of the Building Department's December 16, 2004 disapproval concerning an application for a two-family dwelling (preexisting) certificate of occupancy. REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: On the basis of testimony presented, materials submitted and personal inspections, the Board makes the following findings: Page 2 - March 10,2005 ZB Ref. 5659 - Dorothy W. Faucon CTM ID: 69-5-16 . . The applicant has submitted an Affidavit affirming that the house was modernized with a second- floor apartment (two-family conversion) in 1954 and 1955, although the original house was designed as a single-family at the time of construction (circa. 1860), and that the layout of the second apartment (on the second floor) is the same today as it was when Mrs. Dorothy Faucon and her husband renovated it in the mid-1950s. The layout of the downstairs apartment has remained the same throughout the years except from time to time repairs were made either to the heating and electrical system and now some updating of the kitchen and bathroom presently taking place (without structural repairs). The information furnished by applicant indicates that the dwelling has been used as a two-family house until the present time as such, and that it has been listed as such for fire insurance purposes. 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 Simon, seconded by Member Goehringer, and duly carried, to GRANT the application as applied for, reversing the Building Inspector's December 14, 2004 denial of an application for a certificate of occupancy for a two-family dwelling, as shown on the survey of June 18, 2004 by Joseph A. Ingegno. 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, Goehringer, Dinizio, and Simon. This Resolution was duly adopted (5-0)~ \ ~ JS~SlA~, Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman 4/14/05 Approved for Filing . . ) Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road' P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 Office Location: Town Annex /First Roor, North Fork Bank 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) Southold, NY 11971 . # .' APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman Gerard P. Goehringer Vincent Orlando James Dinizio, Jr. Michael A. Simon http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809' Fax (631) 765-9064 FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF MARCH 10, 2005 ZB Ref. 5673 - CDR MATTITUCK, INC. Property Location: 185 Stanley Road, Mattituck CTM 106-8-18 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 applicant's 20,859 sq. ft. parcel has 105 feet along the south side of Stanley Road, Mattituck, and is improved with a single-family dwelling with garage ( which buildings was relocated from another site). The September 3, 1997 survey prepared by Peconic Surveyors, P.C., revised October 1, 1997 shows the dwelling in a location 60 feet from the front lot line, side yards at 20 and 28+- feet, and that the property is shown as Lot 16 on the Map of Sunset Knolls filed 1/5/1968 in the Office of the Suffolk County Clerk. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Building Department's January 6,2005 Notice of Disapproval, amended January 7, 2005, citing Section 100-30A.2A in its denial of a building permit application dated January 4, 2005 (ref. Stop Work Order dated 12/22/04). The reason stated in the disapproval is that finishing a basement is not permitted when the proposed construction would create a second dwelling unit within the existing structure. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on March 3, 2005 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 wishes to improve the lower (basement) floor area consisting of providing for an office work area, laundry room, bath room, and private recreation/exercise areas as shown on the plan prepared by Jeffrey T. Butler, P.E. dated January 4, 2005. The improvements also consist of ceiling heights to meet the 7'6" minimum requirement of the State Construction Code and egress. There existing no kitchen existing on the lower basement area, and there are no plans for same. There is no stove, no sink, no counter tops, no provision for a refrigerator or other indicia of a kitchen. REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: On the basis of testimony presented, materials submitted and personal inspections, the Board makes the following findings: l>age 2 - March 10, 2005 ZB Ref. 5673 - CDR Mal1ituck, Inc. CTM ID: 106-8-18 . <, '\ 1. The applicants are requesting the use of the lower floor area of their home as habitable space. The applicant is not proposing a stove, sink or refrigerator that would indicate a cooking area or a kitchen facility. Board Members have viewed the new habitable space and concur that these improvements are similar to any high ranch or high-level ranch dwelling which has a lower den or bedroom area with bathroom(s) contained, without evidence of a separate dwelling unit or second kitchen facility. 2. The applicant has no choice except to apply to this Board for a variance or for interpretation. The Board, after inspection of the premises, determines that the use is conforming. 3. The alterations to the lower half of the dwelling was a basement area, and is being improved as habitable space in conjunction with the entire single-family dwelling use of the premises, without a second dwelling unit. 4. Based upon further reviews and final inspections by the Building Inspector for these improvements, the health and safety requirements must continue to be in conformity with the codes as a single-family dwelling. 5. Grant of the requested relief is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of improvements to the lower half (basement) for habitable space while maintaining the single-family dwelling use of the premises and 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 by Member Orlando, and duly carried, to REVERSE the action of the Building Inspector's decision rendered January 7,2005, with the Condition that the habitable improvements shown on the plan prepared by Jeffrey T. Butler, P.E. dated January 4, 2005 meet applicable provisions of the State Construction Codes for a single-family dwelling. 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 ,. ? , 'Page 3 - March 10,2005 ZB Ref. 5673 - CDR Mattituck, Inc. CTM ID: 106-8-18 addressed in this action. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Oliva (Chairwoman), Orlando, Goehringer, Dinizio, and Simon. This Resolution was duly adopted (5-'(7 '. ,)~(X. ~<L Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman 3/29/05 Approved for Filing APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman Gerard P. Goehringer Vincent Orlando James Dinizio, Jr. Michael A. Simon Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road. P.O. Box 1179 Southoid, NY 11971-0959 Office Location: Town Annex /First Floor, North Fork Bank 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) Southold, NY 11971 ~ http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809. Fax (631) 765-9064 FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF MARCH 10,2005 '::)G,I.../ ZBA File~ - WHITNEY B. ARMSTRONG Property Location: 2-1-11.3 SEQRA DETERMINATION: The Zoning Board of Appeals has visited the property under consideration in this application and determines that this review faUs 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 3.15 acre parcel is located on the north side of Clay Point Road, on Fishers Island, and is improved with remains from a fire-damaged dwelling and two accessory structures (building and tennis court) shown on a 2/21/04 survey prepared by Richard H. Strouse. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Building Department's December 21,2004, Notice of Disapproval, citing Section 100-239.4A.1 in its denial of a building permit to construct a new dwelling, replacing the existing fire-damaged building, with a setback of less than 100 feet from the top of the bluff or bank landward of the sound. It is also noted that this new design, prepared December 21, 2004 by Thomas Phifer and Partners will replace the previous design addressed in the September 7, 2004 decision (ZBA application 5577). The requested setback with this new design for the dwelling will extend to 60 feet at the northeast corner (closest point) from the top of the bluff or bank. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a publiC hearing on this application on March 3, 2005, 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 wishes to construct a new dwelling with new porch in the same footprint of the fire-damaged two-story dwelling. This new one-story construction will be with variables between 60 feet, at its closest point, to 81 feet from the top of the bank, and greater than 100 feet to the high water of the Fishers Island Sound. 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 variance will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The applicant wishes to rebuild and enlarge the Page 2 - March 10, 2005 ZBA Ref. 5661 - Whitney Armstrong CTM 10: 2-1-11.3 . -. house, leaving the extensive landscaping, and including the (1927) footprint of the former dwelling that was fire-damaged. This bank contour varies from one end of the property to the other. The bank is a gentle slope to the water. The new dwelling will be of low-profile design to take advantage of the existing landscape with extensive shrubbery and at least 113 feet from the approximate high water mark of the Fishers Island Sound. It would also be very costly to relocate the extensive plantings or to move the building, which would disturb the well-established landscape and abundant shrubbery. 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 applicant wishes the build a one story house the replace the two-story house that was destroyed by fire. To gain the square footage lost by not constructing a second story, the plan submitted under ZBA 5577 (approved 9/7/04) was revised by applicant to expand the first floor area, beyond the original foot print. 3. The variance granted herein is substantial, representing a 40% reduction from the code require- ment of 100 feet from the top of the bluff or bank. The property contains a bank area that is stable and gently sloping with abundant landscaping. ,,~:,-,," 'of ,..f ,'.-q ":' :.1'\'. 4. The difficulty has been self-created. ,~; ,..,. '-I"~ ,:. / 'h.:~".; :":)~ 1; ;;:, ,~, ;.. ;-j'^' (n':fp r!:-.'~~; j . t." ,.l. "!~~'e(',i:-J,~-.' 5. No evidence has been' submitted to suggest that a variance 'in 'thiS reSidenliaV'CUml'J'lt1rlity'wilt have an 'adverse impact on the physical or'environmentalconditions'i1"i the-r1ieighborhood:'The property is extensively landseaped with gardens and gently rolling topography:'" -'," ,,,,:,,,,,,' ,! 6, Grant of the requested relief is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of a new dwelling, while preserving and protecting th'e 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 Dinizio, seconded by Member Goehringer, and duly carried, to GRANT the variance as applied for, as shown on the plan' prepared December 21, 2004 by Thomas Phifer and Partners, 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 (Vice-Chairman), Goehringer, Dinizio, and Simon. This Resolution ~~~te~~j Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman 4/13/05, Approved for Filing