HomeMy WebLinkAbout5988
5?
.:z,
3-cit..-
).;
/
,
.
.
APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS
Ruth D. Oliva
Gerard P. Goehringer
James Dinizio, Jr., OlaiIrTBn
Michael A. Simon
Leslie Kanes Weisman
Mailing Address:
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
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Tel. (631) 765-1809. Fax (631) 765-9064
RECEIVED
<>t ~ 3',~5f'lY).
JAN 1 9 2007
~Cl.~
- Sdi1fh~idTow;CCIe;'-
FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION
MEETING OF JANUARY 11, 2007
ZB File No 5988 - Albert and Barbara Reibling
Property Location: 75 Island View Drive, Greenport
CTM 57-2-32
SEQRA DETERMINATION: The Zoning Board of Appeals has visited the property under
consideration in this application and determines that this review falls under the Type II category of
the State's List of Actions, without further steps under SEQRA.
PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: The applicant's 8,712 sq. ft. parcel has 107.52 feet along
Island View Drive, and is currently improved with the existing foundation (without the dwelling that
had existed).
BASIS OF APPLICATION: Sections 280-122 and 280-124, based on the Building Inspector's
November 14, 2006 Notice of Disapproval concerning an "as built demolition and reconstruction of a
single-family proposed dwelling, for the reason that the as-built construction is not permitted with the
proposed increase in the degree of nonconformance new construction was not written under
Building Permit No. 32123-Z or under Variance granted under ZBA #5775 concerning additions to
the existing dwelling. The Notice of Disapproval also refers to the ZBA Interpretation No. 5039
(Application of R. Walz) and states that the new construction constitutes an increase in the degree of
the setback nonconformances (less than 35 feet from the rear yard and less than 75 feet to the
bulkhead).
SUFFOLK COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE CODE: This application has been referred as required
under the Suffolk County Administrative Code Sections A14-14 to 23, and the Suffolk County
Department of Planning reply dated December 15, 2006 states that the application is considered a
matter for local determination as there appears to be no significant county-wide or inter-community
impact.
LWRP: TOWN CODE CHAPTER 268 DETERMINATION: In the Zoning Board of Appeals referral
under Chapter 268 of the Town Code, LWRP Coordinator Mark Terry replied on November 29,2006
recommending the project is exempt pursuant to Section 268-3(B) for this replacement construction.
This recommendation has been accepted by the Board of Appeals.
> .
Page 2 - January 11, 2007
ZBB File No. 5988 - Albert and BarlJ Reibling
CTM No. 57-2-32
.
FINDINGS OF FACT
The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on December 28, 2006, 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: Relief is requested under Zoning Code Sections 280-122
and 280-124. The owners' desire to raise the existing foundation walls, to reconstruct the existing
walls which have been demolished, and for related construction as shown on the plans prepared by
Meryl Kramer, Architect, with a revision date of 7-17-2006 (re-dated 11/14/06). The variances
requested are for structural replacement of the dwelling that was damaged, with the as-built
demolition of walls, shown on the plans revised 11/16/06, rather than the alterations and addition
shown on the 5/18/2006 construction diagrams filed under building Permit No. 32123-Z.
The applicants commenced construction for additions under Building Permit No. 32123 dated 6-16-
06, and after an inspection on 11/13/06, the Building Inspector reported there were no remains of
the existing framing and that the work appeared to be going beyond the work allowed under the
building permit (see plans revised 5/18/2006 approved by the Building Department). Shortly after a
Stop Work Order was issued, and the applicant filed this application.
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 are planning to reconstruct the
exterior walls in the exact location of the walls that were demolished. The new construction will
meet the FEMA requirements with the minimum elevation above sea level for the first floor, and the
foundation walls will remain. The applicants' new dwelling will be the same or similar traditional New
England style to blend with the surrounding homes and with the existing setbacks that have been
maintained over the years.
2. The benefit sought by the applicants cannot be achieved by some method, feasible for the
applicants to pursue, other than an area variance because the walls were in damage.
3. The variance granted herein is not substantial because the setbacks will remain the same.
4. The difficulty has not been self-created because the existing setbacks have remained in this
location for many years.
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 modest home, while preserving and protecting the character of the
neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community.
Page 3 - January 11, 2007 A
ZBB File No. 5988 - Albert and Bar_ Reibling
elM No. 57-2-32
.
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 Oliva, and duly carried, to
GRANT the variance as applied for, as shown on the site and architectural diagrams with a
revision date of 7-17-2006 by Meryl Kramer, Architect.
Any deviation from the variance given such as extensions, or demolitions which are not shown on
the applicant's diagrams or survey site maps, are not authorized under this application when
involving nonconformities under the zoning code. This action does not authorize or condone any
current or future use, setback or other feature of the subject property that may violate the Zoning
Code, other than such uses, setbacks and other features as are expressly addressed in this action.
The Board reserves the right to substitute a similar design that is de minimis in nature for an
alteration that does not increase the degree of nonconformity.
Simon, and Weisman. This
1/1 '1/2007
"
c;>
9i""
......
men
;::
:.:
lE
1::
I I
II
~I\
% ~\
Q, \ \
\ \ \
\L \ \ \
I \ \
I \ \
..\ \ \
~ \ \
~ \ \
I \ \
\ \ \
\ \ \
01:1 \ \ \
'?1tp. \~ \ \
-::. ~ \ i->- \ \
0" 0 OJ
o \ - \ L-_
i 0 '-- wood~
Z ..-J I
_,_ "",,"eo. bU\I<~lL- - -:.--=- :.../
~- ~--:2J;--
9\).""Q.D ,7 _ 4.~ _-9 -
---;:" --
WOod ..~,--- - -;:r-
deck " :E
\ il:
\ '
EL4,S
ISLAND VIEW DRIVE
(public water In st.)
EL 4.4
EL,4,7
S 85'40' 00" E
1.4
0,7
All survey Information taken from
survey dated april 29, 2004 by
Peoonic Surveyors. PC, NYS Uc, It
49618
z
b.
~
~
~
~
~
~
11
~
~
::0
o
EXIST, SEPTIC
SYSTEM TO
REMAIN
OUTSIDE SHOWER
PIPE O,S'N
1,0'E
SITE PLAN
!I.
'?r
~
~
i
~
III
'tl
::T
..
'"
%
..
t
..
'0>
"'
107.52'
c inllnk fence
WATER M ER
C,LF. ~nl Wood bulkheect
!l:
J
7.6' FIN,FLEL,
SED
, AN,FL,EL
'. .
t
, .
\9J"c;
b
lJl
b
Q
\
. \
,
(~ ,,~ollWlELLS
c e\ ~\ 1
EL3,9
FC
2,S'N
1,6'E
579"32'20"
0,8'N
N/O/r RE\O'<
z
io.1
REIBLlNG RESIDENCE
1 "=')fI'
11_1 "'-?nnF\
.
.
FLOOD ZONE AE (EL8)
FLOOD ZONE FROM FIRM MAP NO,
36103C01S9 G May 4,1998
MERYL KRAMER
arc !'I I tee t
4!l!l MAIN STREET P.O. BOX 683 QREENPORT, NY 11944
.,l.",.UI'
.
.
LEGAL NOTICE
SOUTH OLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 28,2006
PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Section 267 of the Town Law and Chapter 280
(Zoning), Code of the Town of South old, the following public hearing will be held by the SOUTH OLD
TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS at the Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, P.O. Box 1179, Southold,
New York 11971-0959, on THURSDAY. DECEMBER 28. 2006:
9:50 A.M. ALBERT AND BARBARA REIBLlNG #5988. Request for Variances under Sections
280-122 and 280-124, based on the Building Inspector's November 14, 2006 Notice of
Disapproval concerning a proposed new dwelling, after recent demolition, for the reason that
the new construction was not written under Building Permit No. 32123-Z or under Variance
granted under ZBA #5775 concerning additions to the existing dwelling. The new construction
will constitute an increase in the degree of nonconformance located at less than 35 feet from
the rear property line and less than 75 feet to the bulkhead, at 75 Island View Drive, Greenport;
CTM Parcel 1000-57-2-32.
The Board of Appeals will hear all persons, or their representatives, desiring to be heard at each
hearing, and/or desiring to submit written statements before the conclusion of each hearing. Each
hearing will not start earlier than designated above. Files are available for review during regular
business hours and prior to the day of the hearing If you have questions, please do not hesitate to
contact our office at (631) 765-1809, or by email: Linda.Kowalski@Town.Southold.ny.us.
Dated: December 4, 2006.
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
RUTH D. OLIVA, CHAIRWOMAN
.
.
#8154
STATE OF NEW YORK)
)S8:
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK)
Candice Schott of Mattituck, in said county, being duly sworn,
says that he/she is Principal clerk of THE SUFFOLK TIMES, a weekly
newspaper, published at Mattituck, in the Town of Southold, County of Suffolk
and State of New York, and that the Notice of which the annexed is a printed
copy, has been regularly published in said Newspaper once each week for
1 week(s), successively, commencing on the 21st day of December.
2006.
~&y~
Principal Clerk
Sworn to before me this
2006
J7A
day of
Ctu,
(}Y\(bhW.lJJ GvJL {
CHRIST"", \fOLlNSKI
NOTARY PUBLlC.cT"1~ OF NEW YORK
No.Ol,v0610fi050
Qualified Ir ~;I/f:)U< County
Commission EXl- ,[<.;n h7..:,ruar~' 28. 2008
/-~~ 7
1/(6$
12j2-f r1I ~
I
LEGALS...
From page 10B
LEGAL NOTICE
SOUTHOWTOWN
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 28, 2006
PUBUC IlEARlNGS
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pur-
suant to Section 267 oithe Town Law
and Chapter 280 (Zoning), Code of the
Town of Southold,the following public
hearings will be held by the SOUTH-
OW TOWN ZONING BOARD OF
APPEALS at the. Town Hall, 53095
Main Road, P.O. Box 1179, Southald,
New York 11971..Q959,on rnURSDAY,
DECEMBER 28,2006:
9:35A.M. JOAND' and HAROLD'
1. KIEFERft5960. Request for a Vari.
ance under Section 280-116, based on
the Building Inspector's July 14, 2006
Notice of Disapproval concerning a
proposed deck addition at less than the
code-required 100 ft. minimum from
top of bluff adjacent to the Long Island
Sound, at 1115 Terry Lane, Orient; aM
Parcel.lliOO'l4-3-3.
9:40 AM. KEVIN and LESLEY
MILC'!WSK.I#5987. ReQuest for a Vari-
ance under Section 280-14, based on
the Building Inspector's September. .15,
2006 Notice of Disapproval concern.
ing a proposed addition to the existing
single family dwelling at less than the
code-required minimum 60 feet from
the front Yard lot line, at 1371 Cox Neck
Road, Mattituck; CIMII3-7-19.8.
9:45 AM. LEE AND MARIE BE-
NINATI #5946. Request for a Variance
under Section 280-124, based on the
Building Inspector's June 30, 2006 No-
tice of Disapproval concerning a pro-
posed ,addition and alterations to the
existing single-family dwelling within
15 feet of the southerly side yard, at 855
Oakwood Drive, Southold; CIM Parcel
# 90-4-17.
9:50 A.M.. ALBERT AND BAR-
BARA REIBLING #5988. Request
for Variances under Sections 280-122
and 280-124, based on the Building
Inspector's November 14, 2006 Notice
of Disapproval concerning a proposed
new dwelling, after recent demolition,
for the reason that the new construc-
tion was not written under Building
Permit No. 32123-Z or under Variance
granted under ZBA #5TI5 concerning
additions to the existing dwelling. The
new construction will constitute an in-
aeaae in the dc.,ee of noncooformance
located at less than 35 feet from the rear
property line and less than 75 feet to
the bulkhead, at 75 Island View Drive,
Greenport; CIM Parcel 1000-57-2-32.
10:05 A.M. MAGGI-MEG REED
and MICHAEL SCHUBERT #5980.
Request for a Variance under Sections
280-15 and 280-124, based on the Build-
ing Inspector's August 15, 2006 Notice
of Disapproval concerning shed con-
struction located at less than the 35 ft.
minimum front yard setback allowed
under Building Permit No. 31292-Z dat-
ed July 19,2005 and ZBA #5708 issued
June 9,2005. Location of Property: 935
Private Rd #3, East Marion; CfM Par-
cell000-21-1-2.
10:15 A.M. MARYANN MEARS, et
at #5984. Request for a Variance un-
der Section 280-14, based on the Build-
ing Inspector's August 11,2006 Notice
of Disapproval concerning a proposed
deck addition at less than the code re-
quired minimum of 10 feet on a single
side yard and 15 ft. minimum on the re-
maining side yard, at 1050 Dean Drive,
Cutchogue; CIM Parcel 1000-116-5-12.
10:25 A.M. KATHLEEN BOWER
#5981. Request for a Variance under
Section 280-15, based on the Building
Inspector's September 19, 2006 Notice
of Disapproval concerning an as-built
'accessory shed lOcated in a yard other
than the code-required rear yard, at
12710 Soundview Avenue and comer of
Horton's Lane, Sonthold; CIMParcel
1000-54-7-1.3.
10:35 A.M. NO FQ PROPERTIES
LLC, MARK GORDON, ELLIE
GORDON #5983. Request for a Vari-
ance under Section 280-116, based on
an application for a building permit and
the Building Inspector's August 21, 2006
Notice of Disapproval concerning pro-
posed additions ,and alterations to the
existing dwelling at less than 100 feet
from the top of the bluff adjacent to the
Long Island Sound, at 1150 Northview
Drive, Orient; CIM 1000-13-1-1.
10:40 A.M. MICHAEL LIEGEY
#5979. Request for a Variance under
Section 280-15, based on the Building
Inspector's February 15,2006 Notice of
Disapproval, amended October 18,2006
concerning a proposed accessory garage
in an area other than the code-required
rear yard, at 105 Town Creek Lane,
Southold; Parcel 1000-64.-1-9.1.
The Board of Appeals will hear all
persons, or their representatives, desir-
ing to be beard at each hearing, andlor
desirinR to submit written statements
before the conclusion of each hear-
ing. Each hearing will not start earlier
than designated above. Files are avail-
able for review during regular busi-
ness hours and prior to the day of the
hearing If you have questions, please
do not hesitate to contact our mnce
at (631) 765-1809, or by email: Linda.
Kowalski@Town.Southold.ny.us.
Dated: December 14, 2006.
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
RUTH D. OLIY A,
CHAIRWOMAN
8154-1 TI2/21
.
.
" '
~ \o00.~~
, ~'(r"""
l
DJ-\')
,~"
,
-
FORM NO.3
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
f'ECENEO
~Q\j 1 6 1\l\l\)
NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL
o Of ,,~~E"\.S
"tOllING 60,,1\
DATE: November 14,2006
To: Meryl Kramer for
A Reibling
P 0 683
Greenport, NY 11944
Please take notice that your application dated November 14, 2006
For an "as built" demo & reconstruction of an existing single family dwelling, at
Location of property: 75 Island View Road, Greenport, NY
County Tax Map No. 1000 - Section 57 Block 2 Lot 32
Is returned herewith and disapproved on the following grounds:
The "as built" reconstruction on this 8.712 ft. parcel. is not permitted pursuant to Article
XXIII Section 280-122. which states:
"Nothing in this article shall be deemed to prevent the remodeling. reconstruction or
enlargement of a non-conforming building containing a conforming use. provided that
such action does not create anv new non-conformance or increase the degree of non-
conformance with regard to the regulations pertaining to such buildings."
Pursuant to the ZBA's intemretation in Walz (#5039), such reconstruction will thus
constitute an increase in the degree of nonconformance.
The rear vard setback is at approx. 13'.
Pursuant to Article XXIII Section 280-124 such buildings on lots less than 20.000 sa. ft.
reauire a minimum rear setback of35' ,
In addition the reconstruction is not permitted pursuant to Article XXII Sect. 280-116C
"All buildings or structures located on lots upon which a bulkhead.. . exists & which are
adiacent to tidal water bodies other than sounds shall be set back not less than 75' of the
bulkhead. "
The existing survev indicates the reconstruction is approx. 13' to the bulkhead. The deck
reconstruction is indicated at 24'7" & 27'4" from the bulkhead.
Note: Existing Pmt#32123Z was written as addition/alteration per ZBA decision #5775.
~C-u
{ Permit Examiner
. -.
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD PROPERTY RECORD CARD
.;.
(vI... . e
LOT
IdtJ d -.j '1- .2. -.j2
OWNER
DIST SUB.
/0
ACR/5
TYPE OF BUILDING
hI IJ), I( er i /, ~ o/-w~
S
.J{,j nL/;/u_
RES.
SEAS. ~ I. " VL.
FARM
COMM.
Mkt. Value
IMP.
TOTAL
DATE
REMARKS
.
. ~ L
R..> r.bl,....." J..Ir. _ I.;
.'
~<il1 ~AciJ
Co ~~:))
AGE
NEW
FARM
Tillable
Woodland
Meodowlond
House Plot k,
~
-r--
BUILDING CONDITION
BELOW ABOVE
NORMAL
Al:.re
Value Per
Acre
Value
FRONTAGE ON WATER
z$ ('iJlfo~; 1'10'1.
, - I S
- /:c;
-----
FRONTAGE ON ROAD
DEPTH
BULKHEAD
............
--
DOCK
TRIM UJ h z t-e.
--[mJ--L-~-1-~-l ~-t-LJ--L! ~
-H-+---H-+T-tti' -ii-+-+---.i- : LJu'l
I I -<---l-..--I-,~-4- -t--+...+-I--+-
, : ' I i \ -+' , I I I , I
I ' ~ ~-~~
- '+' \ I I I! 11: l, l W!J
Iii -r---n-T--r---! " t : N-+--t----I--:- '-11
'E~--~ ,,' 'I I 1-1--1 II +-1-
1-+--++-+-+-111.1 i,! ~'~';i:-Ll1
i I i --1-! I n I : 1 1 -:"7-; d=tr-:-fTT- I ( Tj--
I I ., I: j 1 I ~ ,I: \ I 1 I -, I I ! , I
!. I ' 'I n'! ~~ ~I'l'- ~"i ; '-+-+-W I_L...
1---1- '--L I I . I, ' "1 I I r : : \ : ,~!
'---W--+..--L--t I--r~m---,--t-H R I ' ,-';--:--+ --r--;-t-i-i-c'---:-",!--
I --j-...--L-I I _~' \ _ : J...:- :':.. I l i ' . \
\ . r'---'- 'I' -:- ~ -:-~--r--:--;--;-+---I--l---l--
I' I ----1-" I, i ' i ! ! " I ' , , ',.' ; " ' , : I !
I I i I I ' , , , , i I - --;---.-: I ' I ,-
___ ________________.______ __" ~! _ '"",~ : ; ! ~-L-J-:-'----,. : ! i --l-_' I ! ~I: -~--
, , --L----I---.(.-..L' ,':' : I . I \ ; i ' ; " i
/l..,Sf ..-, I I I' i I I I I ,----r-r-r- I - ~ -""T--r -,-,---,----r----:- I I , I-
.'.... 139xv;.~/6N ~J~iJ4'h- ! -':iif~111 :itUt-t-t-n-.tt-:1:=
Extens'""II I I" "1 'ii""l::'i---LL
" I I 'i ii' [--[---;--/-:-:;, ! !-
~~ .l,l/.> }(:/J.--= ::..2(,0 It-.$"" I '.r1Basement Floors
Porch ' I I E><t. Walls I Interior Finish
Breezeway I ! I ! Fire Place ')1.c. i Heat
Garage I ! Type Roof T J..L U - Rooms 1st Floor i
: I I I ---+--~~
Patio ! I I : Recreation Room[ I Rooms 2nd Floor i
O. B1\\'\'" i $,0/' Pi "I J; ! 11.54 II Dor,:,?,,, I -I Driveway I
Total i i I -lIS') r/ -1 ' r
.
.
~
,
-
.
.' " ~ ... .( . ~'-
COLOR
I--
I
~
~-
; BR. i
: FIN. B I
, ,
I
I
I
, K.
, lR.
; DR,
.
--
;
FORPCL.NO.
SEESEC.t().
OS3-0S~012.6
+
---;z--
V
-N-
.~ tiJ;
,
0'
~
ci
"
J-j - d- 31
.33
S3-fo-~f
SOUND
-l~
..
lS,
NOTICE
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK Q)
Real Property Tax Service Agency
COl.lltyCenter Rlverhaod,NY 11901
,CALEINFEEI,
I~ 0 20oll lOG
,
E
y
"
.
p
'"'" ~ SOUTHOLD
SECTION NO
~AINTENANCE, ALTERATION, SALE OR
DISTRIBUTION OF ANY PORllOHOF lHE
SlfFOU COUNTY TAX ~AP IS PROHIBlTrD
IITHOUT ~RITTEN PER!.IIS~ON OF THE
REAL PROPERTY TAXSER\IICE AGENCY.
"'.. ~
057
1000
PROPERTY MAP
CDNVERSllN DAlE: 110,. ~4, ngB
!J-I~iJ _ ~ ~:p-l2-~I')0TS
I 7J..I->R P ~d.vt ~ r .
0LANNING BOARD MEMBE:r'
JERILYN B. WOODHOUSE
Chair
KENNETH L. EDWARDS
MARTIN H. SIDOR
GEORGE D. SOLOMON
JOSEPH L. TOWNSEND
.
MAII.lNG ADDRESS:
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, NY 11971
OFFICE WCATION:
Town Hall Annex
54375 State Route 25
(cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.)
Southold, NY
Telephone: 631 765-1938
Fax: 631 765-3136
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
To: Ruth D. Olivia, Chair
Town of Southold Zoning Board of Appeals
RECEIVED
NOV 2 9 2006
From: Mark Terry,
Senior Environmental Planner
L WRP Coordinator
Date: November 29,2006
ZONING_~()~1l OF APPEALS
Re: ZBA File #5988 (Reibling Properties)
SCTM#1000-57-2-32
The proposed action has been reviewed to Chapter 268, Waterfront Consistency Review of the Town of
Southold Town Code and the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (L WRP) Policy Standards. Based
upon the information provided on the L WRP Consistency Assessment Form submitted to this department,
as well as the records available to me, it is my recommendation that the proposed action is exempt from
review pursuant to Chapter 268-3, Exempt Minor Actions, item B which states.
"Replacement, rehabilitation or reconstruction of a structure or facility, in kind, on the same site,
including upgrading buildings to meet building or fire codes, except for structures in areas designated by
the Coastal Erosion Hazard Area (CEHA) law where structures may not be replaced, rehabilitated or
reconstructed without a permit"
Please call me with any questions.
Cc: Kieran Corcoran, Assistant Town Attorney
t\~~;; .
\ l a.J:: . ----;-l
t r \ RE~E~VEn ,
i,,:,C 20 '""OJ
.
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK
(i)
STEVE LEVY
SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
THOMAS ISLES, AICP
DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
December 15,2006
Ms. Ruth Oliva, Chair
Town of Southold ZBA
53085 Main Rd., P.O. Box 1179
Southold, NY 11971
Dear Ms. Oliva:
Pursuant to the requirements of Sections A 14-14 to 23 of the Suffolk County Administrative Code, the
following application(s) submitted to the Suffolk County Planning Commission is/are considered to be a matter
for local determination as there appears to be no significant county-wide or inter-community impact(s). A
decision of local determination should not be construed as either an approval or disapproval.
Applicant(s)
Municipal File Number(s)
Catherine Mesiano Inc.lBeninati
Kiefer, Joan
Reed, Maggi-Meg
NOFO Properties
Mears, Mary Ann
Meryl KramerlReibling
Peconic Building SolutionslLeigey
5946
5960
5980
5983
5984
5988
5979
Very truly yours,
Thomas Isles, AICP
Director of Planning
S/s Christopher S. Wrede
Environmental Planner
CSW:cc
LOCATION
H. LEE DENNISON BLDG. - 4TH FLOOR
100 VETERANS MEMORIAL HIGHWAY
.
MAILING ADDRESS
P. O. BOX 6100
HAUPPAUGE, NY 11788-0099
.
(631) 853-5190
TELECOPIER (631) 853-4044
S?
.;l,
Bot.,.
).;
/
APPLICATION TO "E SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONIN
S
~ For Office 0.. Only
Fee: $1400 - Filed By: ~ Date Assigned/Assignment N "
NOV 1 6 Z006
S9K'
Office Notes:
Parcel Location: House No.15- Street \SLAJ-lD VieW &Hamlet~T
SCTM 1000 Section 5::r Block~Lot(s) ?J1- Lot Size~ Zone District~
I (WE) APPEAL THE WRITTEN DETERMINATION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR
DATED: ~for "1>6 \?U\\-T" bl?MO 4 -R8WNf:.rn~OfI.I Of ~XIST" 4S'IM6L>B-W4IU'(
PWEU../"-\6
Applicant/Owner(s):~~'iL. ~f'Ja. :fb~P.:A~ i-Al W8.I:lS\=:IBv1f\k;
Mailing
Address:
Telephone:
- 2~2eo ~eAtcWGR&oT 12B\"LE:-",YO~KTOW~ttr'S" NY
1J4' 2.A~- tJ ((>I~ Fax: / . lD5~B
NOTE: If applicant Is not the owner, state below if applicant is owner's attorney, agent, architect, builder, contract vendee, etc.
Authorized Representative: ---Mfj R. V I _
Address: Tn E:O><-- (09) ':b
Telephone:-A13 - 2? 1~cO
KRAMeR - ARG+\rn::6T
cSKffI\\E?Q.fZT / N~44
4*1~ Cbq~h
Fax:
PI~ specify who you wish correspondence to be mailed to, from the above listed names:
rpplicant/Owner(s) D Authorized Representative D Other:
WHEREBY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENIED AN APPLICATION DATED ~t:j
FOR: ~
Building Permit
D Certificate of Occupancy D Pre-Certificate of Occupancy
D Change of Use
D Permit for As-Built Construction
D
Other:
.
Provision of the Zoning Ordinance Appealed. Indicate Article, Sectiou, Subsection and paragraph
of Zoning ~dinance by uumbers. Do not quote the code.
Article :L ~ Section~ Q2D Subsection \ 2-2) L'2.4) II CO c..,
Type of Apyeal. An Appeal is made for:
JM\ Variance to the Zoning Code or Zouing Map.
D A Variance due to lack of access required by New York Town Law-Sectlou 280-A.
D Interpretation of the Town Code, Article Section
D Reversal or Other
A ppJJ..lJPpeal ~ D has not been made with respect to this property UNDER Appeal
No~earW5 (for current and all prior owners).
NameofOwners: l?~ ~t> At..~.P...~I?LIf.J.APpeaINo.
REASONS FOR APPEAL (additional sheets mav be used with aDDlicant's sienature): ~ A~D
AREA VARIANCE REASONS:
(1) An undesirable change will not be produced in the CHARACTER of the neighborhood or a
detriment to nearby properties if granted, because:
(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:
(3) The amount of relief requested is not substantial because:
(4) The variance will NOT have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions
in the neighborhood or district because:
(5) Has the alleged difficulty been self-created? ( )Yes, or ()No. Does this variance involve as-built
construction or activity? ( ) Yes, or ( ) No.
This is the MINIMUM that is necessary and adequate, and at the same time preserve and protect the
character of the neighborhood and the health, safety, and welfare of the community.
Check this box ( ) IF A USE VARIANCE IS BEING REQUESTED, AND PLEASE COMPLETE THE
ATTACHED USE VARIANCE SHEET: (Please be sure to onsult your attorney.)
Authorization from Owner)
Sworn to before me this
1(. day of rl,.~.~\ou-, 20..oL.
~M~~
N Public
John iVl. ,-" ,.'cie
NOTf,:>( f'~:Y;'_!(;, State of New York
N') r: r\
C
(
'I( '-;olmty
"<;,; M<iy 29, 20BJ.
.
.
APPLICATION TO THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS
REASONS for APPEAL
1. An undesirable change will not be produced in the CHARACTER of the neighborhood
as a result of the proposed work. The applicants are desirous of keeping the
traditional New England style to blend with the surrounding homes and the existing
setbacks that have been maintained over many years. The reconstruction of the
existing exterior walls of the house and the raising of the existing foundation walls will
bring the house into compliance with current NYS Residential Building Code, NYS
Energy Code, and Flood Zone Compliance. The design of the proposed house does
not vary from that which a variance was granted in 2005: The height will be less than
27 feet to the top of ridge.
2. The benefit sought by this project CANNOT be achieved without an area variance.
The proposed construction will not add additional lot coverage or expansion of the
nonconforming setbacks on the outside dimensions of the footprint. The
construction of the existing house was sub standard and severely damaged by water,
black ants and termites. It was not feasible to preserve the existing exterior wall
construction once construction commenced. The exterior walls will be re-constructed
in the exact location of the walls of the demolished walls.
3. The amount of relief is not substantial. The proposed work does not vary from what
was approved In 2005.
4. The variance will NOT have an adverse effect on the physical or environmental
conditions of the neighborhood. The proposed addition will improve the appearance
of the facade of the existing house and will be consistent with traditional New
England architectural standards. The variance will simply maintain the existing
setback violations while allowing the Owner to upgrade and maintain their property.
5. Yes, the variance has been self-created.
ZBA Reasons for Appeal
Reibllng Residence
1
11/15/2006
-r
APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS
Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman
Gerard P. Qoehriager
V\llCcnl Orlando
James Dinino. Jr.
MicbaoOl A. SiJUllll
http://soulhOk\tOwn,l\onh!'ork.net
BOARD OF APPEALS
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Tel. (631) 765.1-. Fa (631) 765.9064
SuA.. Town Hall
53095 Ma~~d' P.O. Bllx 1179
SoIa(huId, N"{ 11971-0959
Otlice l..ocation:
Town ADneX /First P\OOr. North Fork 1lW1k
54375 Main Road (at YOWlgS Avcllll'l)
Southold, NY \l911
E 'fJ If
FINDINGS. DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION
MEETING OF OCTOBER '2J. 2005
ZB File No. 5715 - ALBERT and BARBARA REIBLING
property Location: 75 Island VIf1tI Drive, GreenpoR
eTM 57-2-32
~EaRA ~RMIN.AT1ON~ The ZOlliIlII eoard 01 AppealS has visited the property under cOIlsideration in this
applicatiOll and determines thaI tills review falls under the Type II categOrY of the Slaw's List 01 Actions.
without an adverse effect 00 the environment If the project Is implementsd as planned. -
PROPERTY FAr:TSIDESCR/PTlON: The appticant's 8.712 sq. ft. parcel haS 107.52 feet along
Island VIfNI Drive. and is iinprovedwith a single-story cIWel\lng and wood deCks as shoWn on the site
plan prepared by Meryl Kramer, Architect.
~ASIS OF APPLlCATIOti: Buik1ing Department's August 3. 2005 Notice of Disapproval, citing
Section 1 ()()-3OA.3 in its denial of en application for a building permit to consINct proposed addition
and alterations to the exlsllng dWelling. The reasons slated by the eulldln9 Inspector In the denial Is
that the new construction will=..titute an increase in the deg1'88 of nonconformance when located
at less than 35 feet frOm the rear lot line and less than 75 feet from the 1)uIktleal1.
F\NDlHGS Of FMrr
The Zoning eoard of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on October 20. 2005 at which
time written and oral evidence were~' Based upon all testimOny. documentation. personsl
inspectiOn of the pcoperty. and other evidence. the Zoning Board finds the folloWing fac.tS to be true
and relevant
AREA V AR\AI'!CE REliEF Clt=nUESTED: The applican\'$ WISh to GQnstrUCI a loft addition 9'5" x 17'
(size ref. from projeet description form) over the exlstlng first floor area of the dwelling, maintaining
the existing nonconforming se\baC:kS at 42'11" from the wood bulkhead, and 13'3' from the rear
property line. 35 shoWn en the 7128105 site plan prepared by Meryl Kramer, Architect.
The height of the new addition is propo6llCl at 26'2-1 f2" to the top of the ridge. as shOWfI en the
schematic etevation diagram dated 9/21105, prepared by Meryl Kramer, Architect.
BFASONS FOR 80t.RD ACTION: On the basis of tesllmony pre5Elnted, materials submitted and
personal inSpectIons, the Board makes the folloWing findings:
EXHIBIT A
I
.
7,
.
.
,..
Page 2 - 0cfDtJer27. 2005
ZB Ale Rei. 5775 - A. and B. ReIbIinQ
CTM 57.2-32 .
1. Grant of the variance will nol produ<:e an undesirable change in the character of the
neighborhood or a detriment to nearby propertieli. The applieants are desirous of keeping the
traditional New England style to blend with the surrounding homes and the existing setbacks that
have been mainlalned over many years. The addition win be for a loft over the eldstir,lg first floor
area of the home. without changing the existing Iocatlon of the home. The height will be leal than
27 feet to the top of the ridge and will mainlain as low a ridge height as possible. while meeting other
code requirements (such as building codas for ceiling height and other structural mandates). The
loft addition Will ackI to the faljade of the elCiSting home with New EngiaIld design standards and
upgrade their property.
2. The benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by some method. feasible for the
applicant to pursue. other than an area variance. The proposed construction Will not add additional
lot coverage or expansiOn of the nonconforming setbacks on the outslcIe dimensiOns of the building
footprint
3. The variance granted herein Is not substantial.
4. The diffiCUlty has been self-created and is related to alterations and addItion to a dwelling that
has existed for more tha1'l30 years in a noncorlf",,,,;,tg location. -
~
5. No evidenCe has been submitted to suggest that a variance in this residential community will
have an adverse Impact on the pl1ySical or erl'llronmental condIIIons In the neighborhood.
6. Grant of the requested relief Is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the
applicant to enjoy the benefit r:A an addition. while preserving and protecting the charaeter of the
neighborhood and the heelth. safety and welfare of the community.
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD: In considering an of the abOVe factors and applying the balanclng
test under New YOlk TOWIl law 267.8. motion was offered by Member Goehrlnger. seconded by
Chairwoman Oliva. and duly carried. to
GRANT the variance as applied for. as shown on the elevation sketch dated 9/21/05. and
site plan dated 07128105. prepared by Meryl Kramer. Architect
This action does not authorize or condone any current or future use. setback or other feature of the
subjeet property that may violate the Zoning Code. other than such uses. setbacks and oth.er
features as are expressly addressed in this action. (The Zoning Board of Appeals reserves the right
to require a 1'1_ application in the event of liubslantial or unreasonable change with respect to these
diagrams and zoning nonconfomity.) .
Vote of the BoarcI: Ayes: Members Oliva {Chairwoman). Goehrlnger. Dinizio. and Simon. {Member
Orlando was absent.) This Resolutl~ duly adopted (4-0).
~~, & ~Qu...a...
Ruth O. OlIva, ChaitWOman Witt-IDS
Approved for F"dlng
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
TOWN'HALL
SOUTHOLD,NY 11971 "'-".i.',\ ~.~
TEL: (631) 765-1802 . """" k ." (J".... .
FAX: (631) 765-9502
www.northfork.netlSoutholdl PERMIT NO.
Approved
Disapproved ale
,20~
~
~J- d-32-
\
f~~
BUILDING fliiMIT APPLICATION CHECKLIST
.'. Do' .ve or need the following, before applying?
, I, t,
. .. :.": i' . Board of Health
. ;" '. 4 sets of Building Plans
~- 1', ,'J '. j
..l-i ." 'i i . Planning Board approval
Survey
Check
Septic Form
N.Y.S.D.E.C.
Truit€e& '1,) \~\
ontad: ...
. ."...~: ,.'..".;..;'
.'.....t,.,.,..t_~)... "Vv\odd,..
. .
~ . . ".-,.
~, , ,.....'1.-..:"
;v~ t.l tJ ,':,. ~
.
Examined
..
.. .
/'
.....
)
Mail to:
-' ;
Il.jt" ,~O..gZ. ,0
~.'{.:-- "'b .,,.//]
'.. ~ ~~} ".J
. _.;~-::;'\ I
" ,.,. '.'
.... . i ~I II '~\l
~:r.~"~~ .'~ _\ >--.\ \\~ .:: as'
{\; iJ. -' - ~ \ 1"-\;..) \ APPLICATION FdRPJjI1-DJ.NG PERMIT
\\ \\ \ 'V li,;- \ ',\1 r, ....,(, ".... \--,. ", (\0.. ~l~
lUU "....... ...~-r- l '~'"':"" ~~: ':'": .,.'r,") c.::, Date I-lJ
--i;\-i~ iJilY'QIS.---J . tU;l~TaUCTIONS <> _"~:. ~
,,;o'-N!,;O .
a. This application MUJ'Qe ~Ietely filled in bY\!iiJ~~'lJr in ink and sub1&~Q ~ih&;Building Inspector with 4
sets of plans, accurate plot plan to scale. Fee according to schedule.
b. Plot plan showing location of lot and of buildings on premises, relationship to adjoining premises or public streets or'
areas, and waterways.
c. The work covered by this application may not be commenced before issuance of Building Permit.
d. Upon approval of this application, the Building Inspector will issue a Building Permit to the applicant. Such a permit
shall be kept on the premises !ivaill/ble for inspection throughout the work.
e. No building shall be oc,fupied or used in whole or in part for any purpose what so ever until the Building Inspector
issues a Certificate of Occupancy. .
f. Every building permit shall expire if the work authorized has not commell.eed within 12 months after the date of
issuance or has not been completed within 18 months from such date. If no zoning amendments or other regulations affecting the
propet;ty have been enacted in the interim, the Building Inspector may authorize, in writing, the extension of the permit for an
additioo .wt&ihilist1'hereaftlr;'l'uW.iJerimt~1ll ~1rM41f1ed. .'-3/<.JA.~~ .J :'.fit{
APPLICATION IS HEREBY MAD!:! to the Building Department for the issuance of a Building Permit pursuant to the
Building Zone Ordinance of the Town of South old, Suffolk County, New York, and other applicable Laws, Ordinances or
Regulations, for the construction qf buildings. additions, or alterations or for removal or demolition as herein described. The
applicant agrees to comply with . aws, ordinances, building code, housing code, and regulations, and to admit
authbrized ins~. P \ ~~.F~~' .~J ~ : \ g for necessary inspections.
. -1 1'1
'.~< \'t.A~ 2. 5 2)(" '-' \
\ _ .., ~'T _.'.; \
l_' 'lQL~_~_~~)_:'.I2\~
Phone:
E~iration
.
a ~" .. ':".. 't',.,
f~ - t,~(~
.----.
Inspector
'II ,~, ...:.. r-
-J'" ,...
U 1~ ,~.
or. -~t-
,20~
State whether applicant is owner, lessee, agent, architect, enginee~, general contractor, electrician, plumber or builder
~\'eVT
, ..
Name of owner of premises ~M"L tu\J. 6\ 'Deft _j?~d,l/f1l
(As on the tax rldl or latest cU~)
If applicant is a corporation, signature of duly authorized officer .
(Name and title of cOrPorate officer)
Builders License No.
Plumbers License No.
Electricians License No.
Other Trade's License No.
1. Location ofland on' which pro~o~ed work will be donl<... ~
~ ~1tU\6- Vttw unvt..
House Number Street -
County Tax Map No. 1000 Section
Subdivision
5'
Block
FilP.iI M~n Nn
6r~~(-\)
Hamlet
O'L
t;.ot ~12...
~t
(Name)
.
EXHIBIT B
. - '. j .
2. - State existing use and occupana premises and . te;de
a. Existing """ ond occuponcy
y of proposed construction:
- ~
-' . .
b. Intended use and occupancy
~k- ~\~\-\J~a\~~
,
,
3. Nature of work (check which applicable): New Building '-""
Repair ~ Removal Demolition
Addition
Other Work
Alteration
4. EstimatedCost t)J)o.OO~
~
(Description)
Fee
5. If dwelling, number of dwelling units
If garage. number of cars
(To be paid on filing this application)
Number of dwelling units on each floor
6. Ifbusiness, commercial or mixed occupancy, specify nature and extent of each type of Use.
Rear '3~'.. 3"
7. Dimensions of f"-9stilj,l! structures, if any: Front ~'B ~ '311
Height Iii-a Number of Stories ..,
Dimensions of same structure with alterations or addJtions: Front as ~ 3 ' Rear "38', '31#
Depth ~~ - '3 u Height 21'. (J Number of Stories /\ Il/ '2-.
'" 13j... .[1 ,'. #? ,..J t:tlf '7,..' '2 If "2 ,j I 3"
Sc;;I'lllnnenslOns of en\l.\le.'tiew:construction: Front ~ cr"":;J Rear :;It:) ,... J Depth :7:) ...
Height~" _: d Number of Stories~ /2-
9. Sizeoflot: Front~Rear S!J..2.D' Depth /l0Sj .0'
Depth 3-;'... 3 If
10. Date of Purchase
Name of Former Owner
II. Zone or use district in which premises are situated
12. Does proposed construction violate any zoning law, ordinance or regulation? YES V NO_
13. Wi11lot bere-graded? YES_NO ~Wi11 excess fill be removed from premises? YES ~ NO_
14. Names ofownero~
Name of Architect \.. ~
Name of Contractor
Address Phone No.
AddressYb 00L. (,q".Jto~o~,..ll':}..3 h
Address Phone No.
15 a. Is this property within 100 feet of a tidal wetland or a freshwater wetland? *YES ./" NO_
* IF YES, SOUTHOLD TOWN TRUSTEES & D.E.C. PE~ MAY BE REQUIRED.
b. Is this property within 300 feet of a,tidal wetland? * YES NO
* IF YES, D.~.C. PEJUvv.rf ~m .~E.REQUIRED. --
. .
16. Provide survey, to scale, with accurate foundation plan and distances to property lines.
'. .. , .., .. I, .,......
r'1"/\. .Jl, (.~..lrrt\~.flt.;,:;'!h: X".V .'h .
17. If elevation at any pomt on property IS a( 1'0 feet or below, must provide topographical data on survey.
STATE OF NEW YORK)
lis:
COUNTY OF )
.".~.., .,..rr.f.. i.', Q ,
i.,. ..,:::/. ~ . J',.~ Ia":
W~~~ k.~E:a.,.'~iam' ,be~du!Y ~-'~~ depj,;'i."~)~,.\a~ that (s)he is the applicant
(NameofmdlVlduaIs~(, en !:!I!Y'" . ., ,,1 ~'"
(S)He is the ~)r/(\~ .....
(Contractor, Agent, Corporate Officer. etc.)
of said owner or owners, and is duly authorized to perform or have performed the said work and to make and fIle this application;
that all statements contained in this application are true to the best of his knowledge and belief; and that the work will be
performed in the manner set forth in the application filed therewith.
20125
otmyPublic
CYNTHIA M. MANWARING .
NOTARY Il$LfS;. STATE Or NEW YO~K "~
NO:01 MA6100507
QUAUFIED IN SUFFOLK COUNW"Y
COMMISSION EXPIRES OCT. 20 f,L1
.':~ ':.
~ i.
..,. ,
, .
,,~,' ....
: \.
~c.RM'lt ~ ~~)d.~
f1 cLd~) A Its.
I .
t%J
><:
:I:
H
tJj
H
..,
()
ISSUED TO~ELf>LUJG DATE ~-J\.-t)~
ADDRESS 16 '~LANO '1\€W LA 6f2€cNPOlf
/t/It ~~
This notice must be displayed during construction .
and returned to Building Dept. to get a certificate of
I. occupancy upon completion of work.
BUILDING INSPECTOR'S OFFICE, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
SOUTHOLD, N.Y.
C'i.. {' ~ ~5 0 t\J I ~ "I t.,.. 07
:"~
. ---e
FORM NO.3
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
/v~
\::;
I--t~'
NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL
DATE: November 14, 2006
. To: Meryl Kramer for
A Reibling
P 0 683
Greenport, NY 11944
Please take notice that your application dated November 14, 2006
For an "as built" demo & reconstruction of an existing single family dwelling, at
Location of property: 75 Island View Road, Greenport, NY
County Tax Map No. 1000 - Section 57 Block 2 Lot 32
Is returned herewith and disapproved on the following trounds:
The "as built" reconstruction on this 8.712 ft. parcel. is not permitted pursuant to Article
XXIII Section 280-122. which states:
"Nothine in this article shall be deemed to prevent the remodeline. reconstruction or
en1areement of a non-conformine buildine containine a conformine use. provided that
such action does not create anv new non-conformance or increase the del!:fee of non- ~
conformance with reeard to the rel!:Ulations pertaining to such buildines."
Pursuant to the ZBA's interpretation in WaIz (#5039), such reconstruction will thus
constitute an increase in the del!:fee of nonconformance.
The rear vard setback is at aoprox. 13'.
Pursuant to Article XXIII Section 280-124 such buildines on lots less than 20.000 sa. ft.
require a minimum rear setback of35'.
In addition the reconstruction is not permitted pursuant to Article XXII Sect. 280-116C
"All bui1dines or structures located on lots uoon which a bulkhead.. . exists & which are
adiacent to ticIa1 water bodies other than sounds shall be set back not less than 75' of the
.bulkhead." .
The existine survev indicates the reconstruction is approx. 13' to the bulkhead. The deck
reconstruction is indicated at 24'7" & 27'4" from the bulkhead.
Note: Existine Pmt#32123Z was written as addition/alteration per ZBA decision #5775.
~
~ U/-
{Permit Examiner
.
I
EXHIBIT E
G5110/2005 10:40
ZBA
5317.~59_
o
_.. HH'_ e-"""
,-.
t.'~" ';4,
o
.~.
.::
APi'EAr.s BeAml MEMBERS
Soulhold.Town Hall
S309S MAin Road
1'.0._ 1179
SoulII~ Now York 11971-0059
Z9A'I'OX (il31) 765-9064
ToIePhono (63il) 765-tl109
~ .1'. Goobrinser, Chaitman
JanlOS Dlnmo, Jr.
. Lj'Ilia A 'fonora
LOrn S. Conins
aeorge RomiJIll
BOABll Ol'APPEALS
TOWN OP'soUfiiow'
MEE'TlI'lG OF JANUARY ~ 2002
. ADPIi..No~."~..- .MeR:AND.tESUE WAlZ .
.S'tRE.E1"';"LOllAtlPJlI::', 1108 OId,O!C~ 1l000G, Eat Marlon
".IlAtI!.:oF Pv,!!!oJc'l'lEARlNG:" liI_bOr 15, 2OD1; N_r 29, ZOO1,'
FINDINCIS OF FACT
IN.niE.MATTliR QFI\OGEIlIIND LFBIJE WAU,'~UCANTS, FOil AN INlDI'IlI!iATION
OF .THE CODE' OF' 'J;IlE .TOWN OF SOUTHOLD; ArtIcle XXIV Section 11JD.242A. .-
M.No1:-~~ftfa!~iftg: ~i~~ings ~ CO~1'IiI1ng uses" f' 10 ~.. the Bulldirna In.pector's
_rmlnaticlii ~dil"'d iothe Moly Z. 2001 NotI....Of Di..""""",I. .
BASIS. OF'APPEAL:'.AppellonlS Iloger InG LHl;o Waf. are .p....Ung 1II0..Bulldlnm
11tli~r'.. Moy2; ZOD1, 11_ 01 DitepprOYll rOrl.buildlnm plrmlt. to conotrucu ~ocond.
$tOry oddltion to"'; ci"-!ilnlily _lIing.-Tho May I, 2OD1.Notice of DiaI""""",1 re_ tile
rollowlltg, .
""':'p...d ~ 1I(lC""""_ pursulHlffu ilrfll:J.XXlVSoclIon100-MA whle"
-
NCIIJIlnIlIn fIIis' Attlcl..ohall be _.. pnrvont 1111 fomo/1oI/rlg, ~
or ....._ Of a nonconltmn/nll bul/(///tl/. _III""" oonfotm/ng .... ptOVIrJ9
_ .UCII_ ...... not....... _ n.... """"'mlbm.,,,ce or InctIan III. dogno
01;""'_ 'Wiln _dlo 11M 1'811_"" ".,.,.,ng ..._lwIlr/II7tp.
E1tfsIInll_rvh8s. nonconfonn/ng _clr0l3 __1II0-.ty_ lOt
linoIllldU.i;l.c1ll lIMo -Y- Uno. Tho ~ oI'lIM .._df/oo"wpr...ntnn
. .......Iir lIIe dog_ af """.....lbrmltJr...
PII0PERTY DEscRIPTION:
Tho ,ubjoct,J!lOporty.l. a nonCOnfonnlng 101; .._Inlol, apprvxJmolely .UOCl'llll, 10-
Ilt 2$01 '0JCl on:hard Iloaa. Eo" Mll'ion; SCTM 100..a7.e.4. ThO iot'iO impl'OV8Cl .with
ilppllcams' ,t"Gu.,J ~ich II . oM-oltoay building with liCIt yard. that .~ nonconforming
undcir llIction::1~42A for nonconfo""In, lOll!, whlc:ll requl... '" mln"",,m side YOI'll
_k or 10 ft, and , _I Of 25 II. for _,Ido foreiO. Tho builGlng .... . nonco_lng
sotliock af :j.r..t fnlm 1IIo....tel1Y side lot line and J.5 root in th. _rJy .Ide.llne,
IlELIEF IlEQUESTED:
I\pPDcanto l1IQuest III. .Boa.... of ApP.'!8l' to __.tIIe Buil~ing I.."".tor', dellllmin,,'on
.thot lite.. p...poHd ...,ond_IV oddllon Ovtr lIMo "'OOlPrtlll" of !be hhIllng hO"""
rlpruenl$ .. .11 InCrqH in the deQtee Of -;aonconformlty" pet S1M60-n Z42A. They contend
..............;..
.
EXHIBIT F
/
/"
.-
I
PAGE
02
06/10/2005
10: 40
ZBA
._'.
PAGE
03
,.
631765_
rI
Pa90 2 ~J".." 201, 2..)-'
~I..NO.. 5q3Q... fl; and"L:Walz
1000.31.+5 at'EiI&t Mmon' .
'--~' .
o
. '-.-'
"~;
. 1~a11he BU.lldlng In.pocltlr imJll'l>perly opplled Secti.n ~ end ~uOSl OJ> Intorp_.n
.., I"" ""<19. P"M"'on, ","pl"","1O !l"Ilueol"l!1e B.~,d: of. Appe.lo .I..",~... ~ Bulldlllll.
. !nilpectr;f.<I_noll.n..n III. "'"ow1ng g.......do: .
. ., " . " "' ; ,.' .
".1. AP9n~' m.I~..th....~~...tory:ad;ditton.. ~CH!I& Mt, _~Lite .n.:~lncni..
'.fft:~. deiil:~ qf. JibncoofOimitY'. becau.. th..addition noo- UP.lllid'F1ot out", and
l8:tti",..ri9 CI~~rlo tht 10(11n..
2'.J\ppll~ Cont.nd IhOt th. d!lllrpc' of _...nfonn.ity ohouid.be m...u..... ...Ihe
h.~zonlll ~e (ram"'. '~oIpr1nt" oIl11e. Oldollng nonOdnfonnlng building 10
tlie .p\'tiporty IIn., Applicants acknilWl.d"" thai OldoIirig .Ide yord...1 boen Oia
n~~nnl~cr .n.cHh~' the .~d;4torx IIddltl~n V(OIIld ~In tlte nOncOl'tfDntllng
olllbacri: H........" BPpllcjmlo inolrilaln..ItIOt th.", I. n. "":oiIge In III. deg... of
nc.rJcorifOrmlty'_Ir'CB.anOthll1llls cloSer tharrtli-a't which exI.tI~" and'th.nforo the
Codlt requ1r.tn.~t 'l~ rn4it: .
. WHEREAS. ~. following eod'. prov'-Ions 81'8 pertln.nt ~ thltt requat:
I. ArIlcli XXIV_ion ~ ~.rioonronnlng building. _ oonformlng..... reado: .
Nothing In thie ArtJcle shall be dMITI.t to prwent the remodeling, NtCOdstrilctiol't
or'renQV$tlo,. of;ll noneonfonning building contalrting a conforminG tI..,.provtded
that such ec:tlon dOGS not Create any nlW nOl'lconlGrinanC4t ot'nCl'e88e.the degree
CJf nOJlQ.ontorrftance.wlth regard to the mgulstiOne pertalnl,:,g to !!JUCh bulldlligs..
u. Sect:lon 10~13 DDflnltlon of tM zoning code,
NONCONFORMING BUIUII/tG OR STI'lUCTURE - A buDding or atNOI.'" llIgeny
exI8i1ng Oot Iii. _ dall> of lIIi. cli_ or any applicable ."","dment th.reto
....I.whlch 101"'; by rea.on of~uch adoptl.n, I'01IIol.n 0' ....nilmen!, to canfonn to
the present :i;nstriGl reg~I8tlon.. for any pl'Hcrfbed slrtJcture or building
noqulrarl!Ofll, ...h'" fronl, Illd. Or...r yordo, building holgh~ building ...... or 101
oOVllnlQo, 101 .... po, _1Ii~g' "nil, dwelling ..Ito per buDding, numbor 01 parking
and. 1~lnCll IPpecH. etc., but whldt 15. continuously maintafiMd after the effective
dOte oIth_ regulaIIO'"
WHEREAS,. The Z.n/ng 'S-.If/ of Appeels held pub/k; heorln,. on IIHI mailer on NO"",,,ber
Ill, 2001 end N.".,.,b" 29,' 2001, 01 w111c1> limo _. _."",/'_"" wore _nled.
a.sed upon .0 tOtimony. d(<<:Vm.maflon, personll ob$8M1itlOn.!r of membeR of the ba.rd
. ,and ofhltr evld.nofJ, tiN Zoning 8~ find. UHt fallowing fiefS ro b~ frW and ""evant:
1. The h...d oIth. 8u~dlllll' aeperlm.ni hloIlfiod Ihat an In....... In the dog... 01
nonconrormanQe wm occ:ur If the new CQf18trU4;:Uon Or ...novatlon to a nonconforming.
buildin" li!t 1a~ ., or doser to the pI'\'Hxlsttng .nOnconforming _ bac1c Iir'le. Its.
",,"",pi.. h. -.. Nil the no."""",""ln,, bulld'n" has . old. yanf olllbook 01 3 feel.
.'
~-_......- .
06/10/2005 10: 40
.,
631 7659~
. ............-..:.
ZBA
.
."
D
~'3~J8ntiary2...20fJ9 ..~'.....
,"",pl. No. 50$9'" ~. .,,,fL w'"
100o..s7+S ~ !:alt M~l'Ion
o
'-
~ the ""'1'0"'1 .Ingl_ry odcllll.n 10 nl bock :3 fOOl .10 Inch... 1/1.... would lie ~.
In.... 'In. Iho dogroo of tho blllldin",o _..oont.rmonco. Slmilorly. .he .0Id, .the
~#i"ti~,.inl.: .!ioll....thlit.. . .,ri~...~ odlllir... """". ihO,o,OioifaOlpriniof ..
nOil\>onf!ltmlnu .""lldlng.Would.,~.lI1..;doglll'l of:no.....nformll)', ,IliIl1f.tho ..........
OtifiY.8din'tJilil ~.~ lllidc.riIoro t.hilri ~ng _P~. fer......pl..).,.....1O"lilCh..;n.
inC:ti.ii..:in~th..c1....of nonCo";onn.nce 'llquld:.oCcur, and the ~e pRrlt8lon crt ~IDn
W'Awouid.beinot.. . . . .
:z. In oxilirilnl~g, ,tIlo pn>vi""ono sot forth In 242A, tho _ill ~nM !hal:lIMI d...... of a
,IR..IIIClinu'!i. ~rlKl. nODoorrformltv I. I!IMJlv ....hl&rlhiK b\nhe rhIWMJmilrrsloNi.. salCe.
Whlaft" .raM'n<< eoi'ftDlv'wfth ,flY 'NtJulllflons Dilrtaln/na. to..Ut!It bUl1dIrriIS~ fO"'eDmpl,&'" ~
'\11& iiil_.:Rq~mi!t . minimum oldo:\A1rC 001 baCk of 10 fHl,: and . .I.g'~ 'bulld'n"'.
boO'O nonoonrorin'ng'o. """" of S-."", d'!llroo ofnoncllnfa<!nlly Is th;,1.0 lI;.bj 2lI n.
~;;iB,'. or:ii\lli oq.."n.."pOco .whioh ...up.... tl.., lll-foot; n"""".....iilllclflulidlilg,' Sid. xoi:ll
.18.; Tho'dog... of io>dOllng norioonrorrnon..,." lieen oOtobllom.rby Iho ~ whiCh
d... 1)01 ~",)lly with 1II0000n'"g _rollo.... . .
3. Tho ~rd filida" th~t pUrCu~rit to pdlOn 242A, If the new conlrtrUctJol1, ram.od.n.,g,
,..&can!J(rUcUQfI,' or acIdltlon~ to ik ,i,tmcotrfbt:tril"g b,,"dlng Q'Ntrils' , new iIIW, of
1IO~ailte;. whtio no,," ""hlhld.bsfo.... tho doi1rw of. ""Ndlng's nonconfomrlfy WIll'
~'lri!;~ F".. ~le, If,th,_ bl,liidln9'& n"r.l~onfOrmln9'.10 ft. by 20 ft. dlmefUJ.lons art!
~dod;' ~ of Ihe' now: ...rlOlruotlem Which 'on_ 1J1kr'lh. lD-foot;. no..
.......tttod'l>ulldlilll. ol~. '"'" ......wo~ld ....at. .; now .roil,", nonoonromilly, who.. non.
oidoi<id ~~:.iu\dwo.'Wln.......ll/e 4~....ofnon...nronnlty. SI;",""'Y,II ","ooohd.
i1ooi':"",.".dd'!il:~lghl'~P /Wer '1lI.i rionCo1!fonnl;,g lit1\. by 20 It. ..... tho acIcIM!on
Wwta ~ II." arN,of. nonconfotrnltyiWh8l'1t nDrim 'exfsted beforo. and would lncreaea
tb. '1.",. 0, hQ"~donfOnriance. . .
~ A~hou9b .lppllGOIItS oo....,d lhel Iha prepooocl .ieond.fl_ ocllltdon 0- Ihe
bulldl~g": ~$tl." fn!>lpdnt do.... n.Un..... th. __ of nonoonfonnlly. ". flnd no
leg.l .boilIio 'fod!>'. ._....,on.. Tho .....nel-floor oddlllon. will In_ ,,,. building'.
"""bil8hact; d"'lr;8 .of n.noonloimll)' ~u.. .Ih.... Would lie more a~ more .,;qu"",
. fOOla\l.. I!l~" ..,ume, ond .mQro .,,"lId"'l1 wllhin tha 1lMoo1. oo_nn'_' old. yord .......
81mPly """"....OIa .....04 floor Is built on lOp or . nonconforming footp~nl d_ nOl
gr8I:1~r'lt orf:IGget.""e fact that It.iII cl'88te .'new nl:or nonconformit1. whe", none
.xI_,before. .
5, Th~ ~ard 011"" .wlth ,hOt Bu~dlng 'nepootor'a dOl_notion 0101 Iho .p....I.....
pro".,.od. O_i1c1-oto1y addition "'P.....nIo an InClQllSlln tho dogree of n.n_rmllY, .
. ..
8. Th.Boo.reI 110M thollhWelo. n. ",,"Ie In bollon 242.4 10 "u_olo.he Building
Dep8rtmtr:lt~.. '~Iti(ln tI1.at pern:'l1t$' B nonc:onformlng structure to C)Ql.f1d into a
ftonconfoim.irJg. ...... tf tho _1~lon: Is 111' Inch lUe or: _ foot lees Utan the :lII;lClsting
b~ilding'.' "unconformin,g .lItbd. 'This .pp~cb """ItS nft'. nonCClorifo""il1U
con.trud~on . where nOlle masted bet'o~ Thili poslt.i~ :could be Viewed as arbitrary
_.~'.
-,.~-...
PAGE
04
05/10/2005
,'-
. 1ft rc
~~
I
10:40
53175514 ZBA
.--..'..--. ,....,..-........>.F.rn:..".. ..-..-.- .
r.. ..." P!,r:~~";':').:'~'J' ..~Ji.' "',
- 0
.,..-....
~......-...
...-e--
1""""\
!'OliO 4 - J...uy 20, :lO.t..-"
'Appl: No,: 1$039... R. and li'Watc
1lJGQ.37.e.~ at East Nutfoo :
'"
beGaLlse the th.... dlmert.nallpace wlth,ln whi~ ";11 atructure Is perrnlttM to be ,b\lllt on ..
lot is defined' by the toWn C()de regulations gcwernlng building lIet b3eks, m~um height
_t.tdbb1k.
. NOW. ON MoTIoN. BVi,'IEMBER TORTORA, SECONDED DY.ClWfUlAN GOEHRiNGER, liE
IT
.RESOLVED, that IhoDooR! of .AppIlOlo Interprols ArtIclo XXIV, S~"n 242A to
m~n that:
. ~odelll'lG, ~n.truc.tlon ow: ,nlarga"-ent (If . nartCOnfonnIng' b~lI,ding ....,tth a
o.nfonnlnguae lo pennltlid provided thlil such. action d.... no! 0JNte and .ow.
noneOtlformance .or IncreSs. the dtlgrN' Of ftOnt:OlJfr;itnShce with. regard to th.
_utollons perlolnilJ{/ to.~ btJ/ldlngs. . .
An lMoJWJ1Iq In Ih. t/ea,. Of noneonlmmllne..' will ommr If the remodeling,.
reconctrUGtlol"l" or' enlargemerrt c;:reeIU ,8 vertical lOr horamal expansion of the
_bl.lshod p~g dlm.nslons at tho n....,famllng building, .nd 1I1;;n_
ClOn"'",aflo. do.. not ClOmply with !I1o "'IIulallons P!'rtolnlnd to ouch buildings,
.~d/or Jf the n8W constrUction cnetes a 'new area' of l'lonc;:ontOnnllnee. .th.,.
..ortle:ally or horlwrdallY, 'whB1"8 non. exiated bofo~ . .
NOW, THEREFOllE BE IT FURTl-lER
. RESOLVED to DENY tho oppll.....' niqueot to rvvo_ tho Building Inspootor'o
determination.
VOTE OF THI:.1I0ARD: AYES: Momb.....Goohrfngor (9holmlon). T_"" C.llln8, .nd
l:'Ioml,rig., NAY: M~lJ8r Dinlzlo. ('I'otfng &pinet the decision for the IMSOn ttm the
cIoclalon go.. beyond tho auth.rIty.f!l1o Zoning BosRI"of AppoOlo.) .
Thi. _olutlon W1lS duly adoplod (4-1).
DrowIng Addendum Attochod for Filing wH
I.
RECEIVED AND FII.ED B
'i1-m SOtrrllOtD TOWN .
D.?1~\"~O~ A'~ <r: ~
- ~t.!)~. oviD
T""" .ae.k. r';'" of"SouthoId .
_.,......--TC'_.....____
PAGE
05
.
.
HOFFMANN v. GUNTHER
Cite as 666 N.Y.S.2d 685 (A.D. 2 DepL 1997)
685
,.278, 627 N.Y.S.2d 15). Further, the
erly deadlocked jury announced its ver-
. "convicting the defendant within a rela-
~" brief interval subsequent to the deliv-
''!of the' AUen charge and without any
. ening communication with the court.
.~ erthese circumstances, there is "no way
nclllSively discounting the erroneous in-
" . on as a factor in the eventuation of the
'ty verdict" (see, People v. Roche, supra).
"'1'1'
'e: defendant's remaining contention is .
~?ut merit.
245 A.D.2d 511 ./
the Matter of Paul HOFFMANN,
Jr., et aI., Respondents,
v.
Thomas E. GUNTHER, etc.,
et al., Appellants,
.
ii~bert Motzkin, et al., Intervenors-
~r Appellants. .
"~.
-.'
a .
"'~! Supreme Court, Appellate Division,
. Second Department.
Dec. 22, 1997.
"f~andowners brought Article 78 proceed-
-:',00 challenge decision by Zoning Board of
peals (ZBA) revoking building permit for
roof on house addition built following
e-yard variance in 1979. The Supreme
purt, Westchester County, Rosato, J., ruled
Javor of landowners. Appeal was taken.
~,~ Supreme Court, Appellate Division, held
~;t: (1) side-yard variance was not required,
. g (2) any requirement of 1979 variance to
~"e addition unchanged in accordance with
IllIIlS on file was not clearly stated aild was
,~ective.
Affirmed as modified.
.
1. Zoning and Planning <$=>503
Side-yard variance was not required for
replacement of flat roof with gabled roof on
house addition for which side-yard variance
had been granted; when side-yard variance
was granted in 1979, the property ceased to
be nonconforming
2. Zoning and Planning <$=>501
Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) had au-
. .thority to attach conditions to area variance,
but also had obligation to clearly state any
conditions, so that landowners, their neigh-
bors, and town officials would be fully aware.
3. Zoning and Planning <$=>503
Any requirement of 1979 variance to
leave house addition unchanged in accor-
dance with plans on file was not clearly stat-
ed and was ineffective to prevent subsequent
change in roof design; it was not apparent
from language of 1979 resolution granting
side-yard variance that variance was granted
on condition that petitioners leave addition
constructed in accordance with plans on file
in perpetuity.
Robinson Silverman Pearce Aronsohn &
Berman, LLP, New York City (Judith M.
Gallent and Laura M. Vasaturo, of counsell,
for appellants.
'Marcus, Rippa & Gould, LLP, White
Plains (Marianne L. Sussman, of counsel), for
intervenors-appellants.
Pirro, Collier, Cohen & Halpern, LLP,
White Plains (paul D. Sirignano and Julie A.
Enowitch, of counsel), for respondents. .
Before RITIER, J.P., and SULLIVAN,
GOLDSTEIN and LERNER, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY TH~ COURT.
,
In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article
78 to review (1) a determination of the Zon-
ing Board of Appeals of the Town of Mamar-
oneek, dated March 29, 1996, revoking a
building permit, and holding, inter alia, that
a side-yard variance previously granted in
1979 was "granted on the condition that con-
struction proceed in strict conformance with
plans filed with the 1979 application", and (2)
so much of a determination of the Zoning
I
EXHIBIT G
Z'~}
.....
~
I
HYNES v. TOMEI
Clte..666 N.Y.S.2d 687 (A.D. 2 Dept. 1997)
of Westbury v. Board of Appeals of Inc.
il. of Westbury, 173. A.D.2d 615, 570
.Y.S.2d 314). The ZBA had the authority
attach conditions to the granting of the
a variance (see, Matter of Kumpel v. Wil-
on, 241 A.D.2d 882, 660 N.Y.S.2d 482).
. owever, it also had the obligation to clearly
tate any conditions imposed, so that the
petitioners, their neighbors, and Town offi-
. als, would be fully aware of the nature and
nt of any conditions Jmposed (see, Matter
Sabatino v. Denison, 203 A.D.2d 781, 783,
o N.Y.S.2d 383; Matter of Proskin v. Don-
n, 150 A.D.2d 937, 939, 541 N.Y.S.2d 628;
rYUth Woodbury Taxpayers Ass'll. v. Ameri-
. n Inst. of Physics, 104 Misc.2d 254, 259,
N .Y.S.2d 158), without reference to the
. utes of the proceeding leading up to the
ting of the variance (see, South Wood-
!fury Taxpayers Assn. v. American Inst. of
J'hysics, supra, at 259, 428 N .Y.S.2d 158).
,Here, it is not apparent from the language of
the 1979 resolution granting the side-yard
variance, that the variance was granted on
;l:Qndition that the petitioners leave the addi-
tion constructed in accordance with the plans
'.on file unchanged in perpetuity. Nor did the
j~979 variance impose any height conditions
,other than those impos~d by the zoning ordi-
aded
of the pe
ions to
t. After>
, minutes
granting,
; de
Jd the buil
terminati '
J) the 1
; in favor q.
a petition;
mt the "1995
lformity with
nd thereforll'
Ie 1979 Vari,
~ ourt did not
.....J t,
ZBA thatjl!
I. Rather,i
de-yard varf;
was not su
Since the project in issue here was within
the height limitations of the zoning ordi-
'hance, did not deviate from or increase the
.'.puilding's footprint, and did not encroach
Upon the required side yards established by
'the 1979 variance, once the ZBA granted the
';necessary front-yard variance, it should have
authorized issuance of a building permit and
a certificate of occupancy.
de-yard varl-!
995 constrilC-
leterminatiqn.
;he side-yatp.
Ie petitio~~'
687
237 A.D.2d 52
In the Matter of Charles J. HYNES,
etc., Petitioner,
v.
Albert TOMEI, etc., et aI., Respondents.
Supreme Court, Appellate Division,
Second Department.
Dec. 22, 1997.
Defendant charged with, inter alia, mur-
der in first-degree moved for order declaring
unconstitutional statutes enabling defendant
charged with first-degree murder to avoid
death sentence by entering into plea barg$t.
The Supreme Court, Kings County, Tom~i,
J., granted motion. The People sought writ
of prohibition. The Supreme Court, Appel-
late Division, Mangano, P.J., held that: (1)
petition would be converted to action for
declaratory judgment, and (2) statutes did
not violate defendant's right to jury trial.
Ordered accordingly.
1. Jury e:031.3(1)
Statutes enabling defendant charged
with first-degree murder to avoid death sen-
tence by entering into plea bargain did not
unconstitutionally penalize defendant's right
to jury trial. U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 6;
McKinney's CPL ~~ 220.10, subd. 5(e),
220.30, subd. 3(b)(vii), 220.60, subd. 2(a).
2. Prohibition e:ol, 10(1)
Because of its extraordinary nature, pro-
hibition is available only where there is clear
legal right, and ,then only when court, in
cases where judicial authority is challenged,
acts or threatens to act without jurisdiction
or in excess of its authorized powers.
3. Prohibition e:o 1
Prohibition is not proper method to de-
termine the constitutionality of statute.
4. Declaratory Judgment e:ol0, 122.1, 123
Remedy of declaratory judgment is
available in cases where constitutional ques-
,
(
vuv 000 ,,~w IUKK SUPPLEMENT, 2d SERIES
Board of Appeals <Ae Town of Mamaro- granted, and ceuction proceeded nearly'
neck, dated April i'J!I"I996, as denied 'the to completion, at which time two of the petj.
petitioners' application for a side-yard vari- tioners' neighbors raised objections to
ance, the appeals are from a judgment of the granting of the building permit. After
Supreme Court, Westchester County (Rosa- hearing, and after consulting the minutes '
to, J.), entered September 27, 1996, which the proceedings leading to the granting
vacated and annulled so much of the detenni- the 1979 variance, the ZBA, in its dete .
nation of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the tion dated March 29, 1996, revoked the buil
Town of Mamaroneck, dated April 17, 1996, ing permit. In reaching that determinatio
as denied the petitioners' application for a the ZBA held, inter alia, that (1) the 19
side-yard variance, granted the subject vari- construction ''was not nonconfOrming" hf1;
ance to the petitioners, and directed the issu- cause the 1979 variance permitted it", thuS
ance of a building permit and certificate of "any future change to the [addition] wo
occupancy. · · · not constitute a change to a nonco
ORDERED that the judgment is modified, forming use", (2) the 1979 variance "s
on the law, by (1) deleting the provision that the variance is granted on the condi .
thereof which directed the Zoning Board of that construction proceed in strict confo
Appeals of the Town of Mamaroneck to issue ance with plans file~ with the 1979 appli
a side-yard variance, and substituting there- tion", and (3) a new survey prepared
for a provision declaring that no side-yard the building inspector issued the buil .
variance is required, and (2) adding a provi- permit indicated that the 1979 constructio
sion thereto annulling the finding of the Zon- encroaelied on the required front-yard se
ing Board of Appeals of the Town of Mamar- back, requiring a variance for the front y
oneck in its determination dated March 29, The petitioners applied for front-yard an
1996, that the 1979 variance was "granted on side-yard variances, and the ZBA, in its d
the condition that construction proceed in termination dated April 17, 1996, granted tb
strict conformance with plans filed with the variance for the front yard, but denied th
1979 application"; as so modified, the judg- ,variance for the side yards on the gro
ment is affmned, with costs payable to the that "the detriment to the community
respondents by the intervenors-appellants. ceeds the benefit to the applicant".
The petitioners' house, which was con- proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78
structed in the 1920's, prior to the enactment sued.
of the current zoning ordinance, does not The Supreme Court, in ruling in favor
conform with the requirements in the current the petitioners, noted that the petition,
zoning ordinance for lot area and side yards. raised a "plausible" argument that the "1
In 1979 the petitioners applied for a side- changes to the roof were in conformity wL.
yard variance to construct an addition to the the local Zoning Ordinance and therefo,'
house. The Zoning Board of Appeals of the satisfied the requirements of the 1979 V '1.
Town of Mamaroneck (hereinafter the ZBA) ance". However, the Supreme Court did~.
granted the variance. In so doing, the ZBA annul the determination of the ZBA that).
noted that the side-yard variance was grant- side-yard variance was required. Ratherij
ed "to allow the construction" of an addition ruled that the denial of the side-yard .'
"in strict conformance with plans filed with ance was improper because it was not S '
this application provided that the applicant ported by substantial evidence.
complies in all other respects with the Zon- [1-3] We conclude that a side-yard ".
ing Ordinance and Building Code of the ance was not required for the 1995 cons
Town of Mamaroneck". As d te-,"oti
tion. the ZBA noted in its e H";'-,.
dated March 29, 1996, when the side-'!~
variance was granted in 1979, the petition
property ceased to be nonconforming .(~
Mafter of Borer v. Vineberg, 213 A.D.2d ~
623 N.Y.S.2d 378; Matter of Concerned ,
'zens of
Vil. of
'N.y.S.2
',to attsc
. area Val
'son, 24
,
, Howeve
:state al
petition.
'cials, we
,extent 0
of Sabat
,1i1ON.Y
.ovan, 15
..,south Vi
can Ins:
.428 N.Y
,
'minutes
, granting
'.!fUry Ta
,'physics,
Here, it
the 197~
~variance,
,condition
~on cons
,on file ur
l'
1979var
,.other t!ul
c
"nance.
~'
In 1995 the petitioners applied f.or a build-
ing permit to replace the existing flat roof on
the 1979 addition with a gabled roof, which
did n.ot exceed the height permitted by the
zoning ordinance. The application was