Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-01/22/2009 SpecialAPPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Ruth D. Oliva James Dinizio, Jr. Michael A. Simon Leslie Kanes Weisman Mailing Address: Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road · P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 Office Location: Town Annex/First Floor, No~.h Fork Bank 54375 Main Road (at Y0"fings Avenue) Southold, NY 11971 http://southoldtown.northfork.net ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTItOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809 ° Fax (631) 765-9064 MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING THURSDAY, JANUARY 22, 2009 A Special Meeting of the SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS was held at the Southold Town Annex Building {Capital One-North Fork Bank), Second Floor, Executive Board Room, 54375 Main Road, Southold. Present were: Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman/Member Ruth D. Oliva, Member James Dinizio, Member Michael A. Simon, Member Leslie Kanes Weisman, Member Linda Kowalski, ZBA Confidential Secretary 6:05 P.M. Chairman Gerard P. Goehringer called the meeting to order and proceeded with agenda items as follows: STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT updates: A. Received Type II by Planning Board: GAMA PROPERTIES (7-11) # 6219 - Variance for convenience store conversion at Main Road and Factory Avenue, Mattituck. B. Pending via Lead Agency: ROMANELLI REALTY INC. # 6224 - Special Exception for commercial use as contractor yard. The above updates were confirmed. DELIBERATIONS/DECISIONS/OTHER RESOLUTIONS: 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: Page 2 - Minutes Special Meeting held January 22, 2009 Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals Approved with Conditions: RONALD ZITO #6233 Approved as Applied: 2000 BROADWATERS #6186 JENNIFER JACOBS and CLAYTON GATES #6206 DIANE MULVANEY and BETTY J. BRESLOFF #6228 JACQUELINE MOSKOWITZ #6238 (pergola, carport and pool) ROBERT BERGAMINI #6241 ROMANELLI REALTY INC. #6268 Denied: GAMA DEER PARK INC. #6219 HENRY TRAENDLY and BARBARA CADWALLADER #6207 ANTHONY and BARBARA BONAGURA #6081 JACQUELINE MOSKOWITZ #6238 {fence) Denied and Grant of Alternative Relief: THOMAS G. and JOYCE I. MESSINA #6223 Denied Grant Alternative Relief with Conditions: THEODORE E. PRAHLOW #6234 STEVE and OLGA TENEDIOS #6198. RESOLUTIONS/UPDATED REVIEWS/OTHER: A. RESOLUTION ADOPTED: ZBA # 6152 - W. Turnbull. Motion was offered by Member Weisman, seconded by Member Oliva, to accept the corrected map as per applicant and their surveyor under ZBA # 6152 (Application by William Turnbull). This resolution was unanimously adopted by all members (5-0). B. RESOLUTION ADOPTED: Motion was offered by Member Weisman, seconded by Chairman Goehringer, to send John Winters' letter to ZBA counsel for review and reply concerning ZBA # 6004 (Application by Christopher Astley). This resolution was unanimously adopted by all members (5-0). C. Reminders for pending information or other updates for February 19, 2009 hearing continuation: (a) Lloyd Kaplan #6221 at Soundview Avenue, Southold; (b) Hope Schneider # 6215 at Goldsmith's Inlet, Southold; (c) Jennifer Stork # 6232 and # 6187 at Peconic Bay Boulevard, Laurel. (No action was taken). Page 3 - Minutes Special Meeting held danuary 22, 2009 Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals D. RESOLUTION ADOPTED {APPROVAL OF MINUTES}: Motion was offered by Chairman Goehringer, seconded by Member Weisman, and duly carried, to accept and authorize the filing of Minutes with the Town Clerk's Office, as prepared for ZBA Meeting held January 8, 2009. Vote of the Board: Ayes: All. The Resolution was duly adopted (5-0). E. Work Session, new business if any: 1. Planning & Zoning (Includes Code Committee). (no discussion). 2. Association of Towns: Member Simon confirmed his interest in pre- registering for the seminars. Chairman Goehringer explained budget restrictions and the remainder of 2009 meeting and seminar appropriations allowable and limited out of the only budget line for ZBA department matters (B8010.4). No other pre-registration was requested at this time. EXECUTIVE SESSION: No action was taken. There being no other business properly coming before the Board at this time, Chairman Goehringer declared the meeting adjourned. The meeting was adjourned at 8:13 P.M. Respectfully submitted, · ............ ' ........ -~ . L~nda Kowalski/~2'/2009 I ncli~ded by Re fer~'~}~d '~A~,~ (? Gerard P. Goehringer, Chm~rna~ d/~/'f/2009 · Approved for Filing x~f ~ Resolution Accepting for Filing -~/ /]2009 RECEIVED ~'APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Ruth D. Oliva James Dinizio, Jr. Michael A. Simon Leslie Kanes Wei~man http://southoldtown.northfork.net ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809 o Fax (631) 765-9064 Mailing Address: 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 FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DECISION MEETING DATE: JANUARY 22, 2009 ZBA FILE # 6186 - 2000 BROADWATERS LLC, Applicant PROPERTY LOCATION: 2000 Broadwaters Road, Cutchogue CTM 104-9-12 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. SUFFOLK COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE CODF' This application was referred as required under the Suffolk County Administrative Code Sections A 14-14 to 23, and the Suffolk County Department of Planning issued a reply dated June 24, 2008 stating that this application is considered a matter for local determination as there appears to be no significant county-wide or inter-community impact. PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: The subject property is a 17,279 square foot nonconforming wooded lot in the R40 District that is improved with a dilapidated accessory garage. It has two front yards; one fronts for 47 ft. along Broadwaters Road the other along Crabbers Road which is an unopened paper Road. The lot is 258.04 feet deep. The southerly portion (rear) of the property is in a FEMA flood zone, contains wetlands and is adjacent to Breadwaters/Haywaters Cove, as described on the survey by John C. Ehlers Land Surveyor dated 7-3-2007. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Request for a Variance under Section 280-124, based on the Building Inspector's May ,12, 2008 Notice of Disapproval concerning a proposed new dwelling with a setback at less than the code-required 35 feet from the front lot line (after demolishing the existing building). Findings of Fact The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on August 21, 2008, October 30, 2008 and January 8, 2009, 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 REQUESTFD: After demolition of an existing dilapidated accessory garage, the applicant proposes to construct a new dwelling of approximately 3,216 square feet that will be located at 14 feet from the front yard setback of Crabbers Road, an unopened road, where the code requires a 35 foot minimum front yard setback. Page 2 - January 22, 20089 ZBA #6186 - 2000 BROADWATERS LLC CTM 104-9-12 AMENDED APPLICATION: During the hearing, the applicant was asked to address concerns from the Board of Appeals and the neighbors (see additional information below). The applicant on December 19, 2008 submitted a plan to the Board of Appeals that retained the proposed 14 foot front yard setback from Crabbers Road, but reduced the width of the proposed dwelling from 58 ft. to 54 ft thereby increasing the proposed side yard setback to 14 ft. from 10 ft. In order to preserve more of the existing natural buffer along Broadwaters Road and to create privacy from the adjacent neighbors the amended site plan reduced the width of the proposed driveway entrance from 26 ft. to 12 feet, and included on the site plan are the existing trees that could be preserved or transplanted as well as the new plantings proposed along the north and east areas of the property. Finally, drywells were added to the site plan to control roof runoff. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Three public hearings where held on this variance application: August 21, 2008, October 30, 2008 and January 8, 2009. During these hearings the adjacent neighbors, Mr. and Mrs. Mikulas, submitted written documentation and oral testimony in which they claimed that the subject property, lot 12/263, had merged with the adjacent property, lot 13/264. On December 30, 2008 the Board of Appeals received a letter from Attorney Gall VVickham stating that the lots had not merged. On November 19, 2008 the ZBA requested that the Town Attorney review these claims and documents, and, the Town Attorney's opinion is, as stated at the public hearing on January 8, 2009, there is insufficient evidence to conclude that the lots had merged. In addition, both the Mikulas and another neighbor, the Ropers, objected in writing and at the public hearings to the proposed size of the applicant's house and its closeness to the Mikulas' side yard, noting that the slb!sing grade of the property would make the easterly side of the basement (facing Bmadwaters Ro, ad) mostly below grade while the westerly side (facing Haywaters Cove and wetlands) would ~be at grade, creating a walkout basement with partial finished livable space and two stories above. (However, the Board notes that Town Code defines such structures as legal 2% story dwellings). The clear cutting of many trees on the subject property and the potential environmental imply)acts that might cause were also of concern. REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: On the basis of testimony presented, materials submitted and personal inspections, the Board makes the following findings: 1. Town Law ~267-b(3){b)(3)(l). Grant of the variance as amended will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. Crabbers Road is an unopened, unpaved road leading to a dead end and appears as a side yard rather than a front yard. The existing neighborhood has homes that are considerably smaller than the house proposed by the applicant; but there are also numerous houses that are as large or larger in the area that have also been built on comparably sized irregular parcels. 2. Town Law §267-b(3){b){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 there are two front yard setbacks and a wetlands setback with required environmental buffer which restricts the building envelopg. 3. Town Law §2~7-b(3)(b)(3). The variance granted herein is not substantial. The proposed front yard setback fro.m Crabbers Road is 14 feet at the southeast comer of the proposed house and widens to 20 feet,at the southwest end. Crabbers Road is an unopened paper road that looks like a side yard. In this regard the proposed 14 ft. setback is only one foot (1') from the code required 15 ft. side yard seth~ck. 4. Town Law §267-b(3)(b)(5). The difficulty has been self-created insofar as the applicant has chosen to build a large home on a small, irregular lot. Page 3 - January 22, 20089 ZBA fl6186 - 2000 BROADWATERS LLC CTM 104-9-12 5. Town Law ~267-b(3)(b)(4). No evidence has been submifted to suggest that a variance in this residential community will have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood. The proposed house is set back 90 feet from the edge of the wetlands, the proposed deck is set back 75 feet and the Southold Town Trustees have granted a permit (#6916) to the applicant after evaluating all potential environmental impacts. The application is exempt from the LWRP according to a letter from the LWRP Coordinator, Mark Terry, dated August 20, 2008. At the request of the Board of Appeals, the applicant has added drywells on site to control roof runoff and proposes to retain and transplant healthy trees where possible and to add significant tree enhancements to control erosion. 6. Town Law §267-b. Grant of the requested (amended) relief is the minimum action necessary and adequate te enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of a new dwelling and deck 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 Weisman, seconded by Member Simon, and duly carried, to GRANT the variance as applied for in the amended application, and shown on the site plan by Garrett A. Strang, Architect, labeled SP-1B dated 12-19-08. 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 minimus in nature for an alteration that does not increase the degree of nonconformity. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Goehringer (Chairman), Oliva, Dinizio, Simon, and Weisman. This Resolution Was duly a.dopted (5-0). RUTH D. OLIVA, VICE CHAIRWOMAN ~ ~. /2009 Approved for Filing · ~1~ *APP. EALS BOARD MEMBERb ., Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Ruth D. Oliva James Dinizio, Jr. Michael A. Simon Leslie Kanes Weisman http://southoldtown.northfork.net ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS ~ TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809 · Fax (631) 765-9064 Mailing Address: 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 FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS, AND DETERMINATION MEETING DATE: JANUARY 22, 2009 ZBA FILE # 6241 - Robert J. and Margaret Bergamini, Applicants PROPERTY LOCATION: 4050 Camp Mineola Road, Mattituck CTM 123-5-20 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 subject property is a 13,631 square foot parcel measuring 117.12 feet along Camp Mineola Road to the south, 103.45 along the eastern boundary, 117.51 feet along the northern boundary, and 126.77 feet along the western boundary, and is improved with a single-family house as shown on the August ,17, 1971 survey prepared by Young & Young, and September 6, 2009 plan prepared by Joseph Fischetti, P.E. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Request for a Variance under Section 280-124, based on the Building inspector's October 17, 2008 Notice of Disapproval concerning an addition to an existing front yard deck at less than the required minimum front yard setback oF 35 feet and a lot coverage exceeding the code limitation of 20%. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on January 8, 2009 at which time written and oral evidence were presented. RELIEF REQUESTED: The aPplicant proposes to construct an addition to a front deck with a front-yard setback of 16 feet and resulting in lot coverage of 21.8%. REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: On the basis of testimony p~esented, materials submitted and personal inspections, the Board makes the following findings: Page 2 - January 22, 2009 ZBA # 6241 - R. and M. Bergamini CTM 123-5-20 1. Town Law 267-b(3)(b)(1). Grant of the variance will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The proposed deck addition is 75 square feet. It is designed to provide egress from the rear bedroom. It will not decrease the setback from Camp Mi~eola Road. 2. Town Law 267-b(3)(b)(2). The benefit of safety egress from the front bedroom cannot be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance. 3. Town Law 267-b(3)(b)(3). The proposed variance is not substantial. The area of the addition i~: only 75 feet, and requires a variance for lot coverage of less than 10%. 4. Town Law 267-b(3)(b)(5). The difficulty was created when the deck and house were constructed with a nonconforming front yard setback that did not permit a safety exit from a front bedroom. 5. Town Law '267-b(3)(b)(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. 6. Town Law '267-b. Grant of the requested relief is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of an additional egress and slightly enlarged deck, while preserving and protecting 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, a motion was offered by Member Simon, seconded by Member Weisman, and duly carried, to GRANT the variances as applied for, as shown on the October 21, 2008 site diagram and shown on the September 6, 2009 diagram prepared by Joseph Fischetti, P.E. 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 apphcation 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 Page 3 - January 22, 2009 ZBA # 6241 - R. and M. Bergamini CTM 123-5-20 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. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Goehringer (Chairman), Oliva, Dinizio, Simon and Weisman. This Resolution was duly adopted (5-0). RUTH D. OLIVA, VICE CHAIRWOMAN lk2'? /2009 Approved for Filing Office Location: Town Annex/First Floor, North Fork Bank 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) Southold, NY 11971 Mailing Address: 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 http://southoldtown.north fork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809 Fax (631) 765-9064 FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF JANUARY 22, 2009 ZBA FILE # 6081 - ANTHONY and DOROTHY BONAGURA, Applicants PROPERTY LOCATION: 900 Holbrook Lane, Mattituck CTM Parcel 1000-1 13-6-1 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. The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on October 18, 2007 and January 8, 2009, 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: REQUEST MADE BY APPLICANTS: The Applicant-Owner requests a Special Exception under Section 280-13B of the Zoning Code, to establish an Accessory Apartment with owner-occupancy in a single-family dwelling as enlarged with recent additions. PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: This property is 31,912.27 square feet with 84.45 feet along the mean high water line of Mattituck Creek, 336.25 feet along the western boundary, 101.90 feet along Holbrook Lane to the north, and 330 feet along the eastern boundary. The property is impro,~ed with a single-family house and an accessory shed, as shown on a July 30, 2007 survey prepared by William R. Simmons III, L.S. FINDINGS OF FACT In considering this application, the Board has reviewed the code requirements set forth pursuant to Article III, Section 280-31B(13) to establish an Accessory Apartment and finds that the applicant has failed to comply with the requirements for the reasons noted below: 1. The principle dwelling unit will occupy 1,423 square feet of livable floor area. Section 280-13B [c] of the Code requires a minimum of 1,600 square feet. Page 2 - January 22, 2009 ZBA # 6081 - A. and B. Bonagura, Applicants CTM Parcel 1000-113-6~11 2. The Certificate of Occupancy for the original dwelling was issued on September 28, 1988. No Certificate of Occupancy pursuant to Building Permit No. 32609Z, dated January 3, 2007, authorizing additions and alterations to the existing single family dwelling, has been issued. Section 280-13-B[m] requires that a building which is converted to permit an accessory apartment shall be in existence and have a valid certificate of occupancy issued prior to January 1, 1984, or proof of occupancy prior to that date. BOARD RESOLUTION: On motion by Member Simon, seconded by Member Oliva, it was RESOLVED, to DENY the Special Exception for an Accessory Apartment. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Goehringer (Chairman), Oliva, Dinizio, Simon, and Weisman. This Resolution was duly adopted (5-0). RUTH D. OLIVA, VICE CHA'rr:~WOMAN Approved for Filing /2009 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Ruth D. Oliva James Dinizio, Jr. Michael A. Simon Leslie Kanes Weisman http://southoldtown.northfork.net ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTI-IOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809 · Fax (631) 765-9064 Mailing Address: Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road · EO. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 Office Location: Town Annex/First Floor, North Fork Bank 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) Southold, NY 11971 FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF JANUARY 22, 2009 ZB File No. 6219 - GAMA DEER PARK, INC. (Applicant) Property Location: 9945 Route 25 and Factory Avenue, Mattituck Suffolk County Tax Map Parcel 1000-142-1-27 Town of Southold Zoning District: B-General 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 further steps under SEQRA. SUFFOLK COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE CODE: This application was referred as required under the Suffolk County Administrative Code Sections A 14-14 to 23, and the Suffolk County Department of Planning issued its reply dated September 22, 2008 stating that this application is considered a matter for local determination as there appears to be no significant county-wide or inter-community impact. BASIS OF THE APPLICATION: Request for Variances under Sections 280-49 and 280-50C, based on an application to the Building Inspector for a building permit and the Building Inspector's amended September 4, 2008 Notice of Disapproval concerning proposed additions and alterations in converting an existing gas station and convenience store uses to a convenience store (retail store). The reasons stated for disapproving the building permit application are that the new construction: ~i) will have a single side yard at less than the code required minimum of 25 feet; (2) will have a rear yard at less than 35 feet; (3) will be greater than the code limitation of 60 linear feet of frontage on one street. PROPERTY FACTS: The property contains 24,140 square feet with a 1,950 square foot retail building with a nonconforming frontage of 65 linear feet along the north side of New York State Route 25 (a/k/a Main Road), and the east side of Factory Avenue in Mattituck. Page 2 - January 22, 2009 ZBA # 6219 - Gama Deer Park, Inc. CTM 142-1-27 FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on December 4, 2008, 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 is requesting area variances from Zoning Code Chapter 280, Article XI Sections 280-49 and 280-50c, for reductions in the side yard setback and the rear yard setback for a proposed 25 ft. by 30 ft. extension (a 750 square foot addition) and alterations to the existing nonconforming building which contains the office and sales area for a gasoline station and convenience store, and business garage bays. The new 750 sq. ft. addition to the existing building: (1) will have a single side yard at less than the code required minimum of 25 feet; (2) will have a rear yard at less than 35 feet. In addition, relief is requested under Section 280-50C to enlarge the existing building by an additional 25 feet, resulting in a total length of 90 linear feet of frontage on one street (NYS Route 25, a/k/a Main Road), instead of the Code limitation of 60 linear feet. ~ The existing (1~,950 square foot) building is located at 21'8" from the northleast property line, 49'2" from the east property line, 88'5" to the south (front yard) lot line, and +/-39 feet to the west (front yard) property line. The new addition to the building: (1) will reduce the code-required minimum of 25 feet to 24.16 feet on a single yard to the north, (2) will reduce the code-required minimum of 35 feet to 21.67 feet on the rear yard, (3) will increase the linear footage from the existing nonconforming length of 65 feet to 90 linear feet adjacent to the Main Road (N.Y.S. Route 25). REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: On the basis of testimony presented, materials submitted and personal inspections, the Board makes the following findings: 1. Town Law §267-b(3)(b)(3)(1). Grant of the variances will produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. On the norther~n and eastern sections of the applicant's site are retaining walls raised above tl~e adjacent parcel containing a large parking area for the adjacent shopping center. Since the applicant's property contains these barriers, its patrons and employees are not able to access onto the adjacent shopping center's parking area and the property sits above the adjacent property like a plateau. The applicant's site is situated at a four-way traffic light and along two public streets with busy traffic and crosswalks for pedestrians. This site has a limited area for open space access. There are several businesses in close vicinity to this parcel with uncontrolled parking or that lack site plan approval. 2 Page 3 - January 22, 2009 ZBA # 6219 - Gama Deer Park, Inc. CTM 142-1-27 To the west of this site is Factory Avenue, a busy public road which is also accessed with poor turning and poor visibility at the four-way intersection, with difficult turning onto Factory Avenue. To the west of Factory Avenue are established businesses (ice cream store) and auto repair garage, boat sales/repair use, located in the B Business Zone District. In summary, the existing site is constrained substantially by its surrounding environment. The busy corner at NYS Route 25 and Factory Avenue can only marginally accommodate the new use with the current building as exists at this site. A conversion of the building with alterations fora new fulltime retail convenience store in an enlarged, longer building would exacerbate the difficulties that currently exist at the four-way street intersection with high traffic. No evidence was presented to the Board to indicate that the proposed fulltime use as a convenience store could not function within the present building, which contains space for two restroom facilities, one office and convenience sales area, a storage room at the rear of the building, and three garage bays for auto repair. The existing building is slightly under 2,000 square feet of floor area. The new proposed addition will expand this already nonconforming building and will create new setback and building frontage nonconformities. Additionally, there is a difficulty created for fire and rescue department to access the building as proposed with encroachments into the easterly side yard. The current nonconforming building is large enough to be occupied by three business uses, without inhibiting the easterly side yard for emergency access. The increased size for a single use..creates a new obstruction rather than keeping the yard areas open space, for emergency vehicles, for safe parking, or even for outdoor enjoyment for patrons or employees. Testimony was ~subrmtted to the Board at length indicating the impact that the use will have on the community. The increased size of the nonconforming building would create a detriment to its own on-site activities because the parcel lacks the size required under the current codes for a 30,000 square foot minimum parcel, and is nonconforming. The Board finds that the grant of all the requested variances will impact the immediate area and cause a detriment to nearby properties. 2. Town Law §267-b(3)(b)(2). The benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance (three,area variances). The applicant ~has made no attempt to enlarge the existing building in the conforming yard areas or by making it deeper, which would eliminate one of the requested variances for building frontage (length) along the Main State Road. Instead the apl~licant is requesting a new nonconformity at the easterly side yard which is currently open space without obstructions. Page 4 - January 22, 2009 ZBA # 6219 - Gama Deer Park, Inc. CTM 142-1-27 The existing building contains at least 1950 square feet for its current three uses, and can accommodate the new single converted use, as planned with removal of the existing three uses at the property (gasoline sales area, three garage bays, an office, sales area, storage room, bathroom facilities). In addition, the changes at the site to remove the gasoline pump islands, do not make the existing building more conforming to the code, but instead the addition as proposed with alterations to convert the three uses to a single use will create more nonconformity on the northern and eastern side yards. 3. Town Law §267-b(3)(b}(3). The variances requested herein are substantial, resulting in a 28% increase in building length and significant increases of nonconformity with regard to the setbacks that are already nonconforming on the side and rear of the existing building. The existing building length is already five feet longer, or 8.33% of the code maximum limitation of 60 linear feet, and the proposed addition increases that by an additional 33%, amounting to a six-fold increase in the degree of nonconformance for the additional 30 feet. 4. Town Law §267-b(3}(b)(5). The difficulty has been self created because it is applicant's desire to request additions to the already nonconforming building. 5. Town Law. §267-b(3}(b~(4). Testimony was presented to suggest that the variances in this community will have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood. 6. Town Law §267-b. Grant of the relief requested is NOT the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of his property, 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 Oliva, seconded by Member Simon, and duly carried, to DENY all, variances, as applied. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Goehringer (Chairman), Oliva, Dinizio, Simon and Weisman. This Resolution was duly adopted (5-0). ~ ~*'~- ~----~*r~, ~/~/2009 RUTH D. OLIVA, VICE CHAIRWOMAN Approved for Filing 4 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Gerard E Goehringer, Chairman Ruth D. Oliva James Dinizio; Jr. Michael A. Simon Leslie Kanes Weisman http://southoldtown.northfork.net ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809 · Fax (631) 765-9064 Mailing Address: 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 FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS and DECISION MEETING DATE: JANUARY 22, 2009 ZBA # 6206 - JENNIFER JACOBS and CLAYTON GATES, Apphcants PROPERTY LOCATION: 645 Jackson Street, New Suffolk CTM 1000-117-9-5.2 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 ategory of the State s Lxst of Actmns, without further steps under SEQRA. SUFFOLK COUNTy ADMINISTRATIVE CODE: This application has been referred as required under the Suffolk County Administrative Code Sections A 14-14 to 23, and the Suffolk County D~partment of Planning reply states that the application is considered a matter for local determination as there appears to be no significant county-wide or inter- community impact. PROPERTy FACTS/DESCRIPTION: The subject property is a non-conforming 12,760 square foot parcel in the R-40 District and is improved with a single family dwelling. The lot measures 100 feet wide along Jackson Street, 100.41 feet along the rear property boundary, 129.90~ feet deep on the easterly boundary, and 126.37 feet on the westerly boundary, as sh°YVn on the survey prepared March 7, 2008 by Stanley J. Isaksen, Jr., licensed surveyor.' BASIS OF APPLICATION: Request for Variances concerning this 12,760 square foot parcel under Sect. ion 280-124, based on the Building Inspector's July 24, 2008 Notice of Disapproval concerning a proposed second'stow addition and alterations to the existing dwelling, with a ~tback of less than the code-required 10 ft. minimum single side setback and less than 35 ft. minimum rear yard setback. Findings of Fact The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on January 8, 2009, at which tim. e 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: Page 2 - January 22, 2009 ZBA # 6206 - C. Gate~ and J. Jacobs CTM Parcel 117-9-5.2 AREA VARIANCE RELIEF REQUESTED: The relief requested is for new construction areas with a 9'7" setback on the westerly side yard at its closest point, and rear yard setback at 14'11" from the rear yard at its closest measurement. The new construction concerns the applicant's proposal to demohsh the roof over their existing one-story ranch house, to add a 22' x 28' second-story master bedroom suite addition over part of the existing first floor, and to build a new roof with cathedral ceiling over the altered first floor. They also propose to add a new screened porch entry. REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: On the basis of testimony presented, materials submitted and personal inspections, the Board makes the following findings: L ~" 1. Town aw q26V'b(3)(b)(3)(1). Grant of the variances will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. There are numerous large homes that have been built or enlarged along Jackson Street, most of which are two stories. The applicants' considered adding a single-story addition in their front yard but rejected it because a partial second floor addition will be more cost effective and also improvq~: the appearance and scale of their existing home to make it more compatible with tt~ surrounding homes. 2. Town Law q267~b(3)(b)(2). The benefit sought by the applicants cannot be achieved by some method, fea:.sible for the applicants to pursue, other than an area variance because the existing house is sited far back from the road, thereby creating a nonconforming rear yard setback of 17~7 feet where the code requires a minimum of 35 feet and also has a pre- existing non-conforming side yard setback of 9.6 feet, where the code requires a minimum of 10 feet. Therefo.~e, any addition will increase the degree of nonconformity and therefore require a variances. 3. Town Law q26?-b(3)(b)(3). The variances granted herein with regard to the proposed side yard are nut substantial because the proposed additions and alterations will maintain the exiq~ing non-conforming side yard setback of 9.6 feet, which is only six (6) inches less than:the code required 10 foot minimum. The proposed additions and alterations will al_~o maintain the existing non-conforming rear yard setback of 17.7 feet, which is a substantial variance from the code required 35 feet. 4. Town Law ~267-b(3)(b)(5). The difficulty has not been self-create'd but it the result of the placement of ~e original house on the lot at 77.4 feet from the road, thereby creating a non'conforming,;very small rear yard. 5. Town Law ]26~,-b(3)(b)(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 co~tions in the neighborhood. The subject property is relatively fiat with no drainage issue~ 6. Town Law .~267-b. Grant of the requested relief is the minimum action necessary and adequate to ena~e:~ the applicants to enjoy the benefit of an enlarged house, while Page 3 - January 22, 2009 ZBA # 6206 - C. Gates and J. Jacobs CTM Parcel 117-9-5.2 ' preserving and pr~otecting the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the coiximunity. 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 Weisman, seconded by Members Simon and Goehringer, and duly carried, to GRANT th.e. variances as applied for, as shown on the Site Plan prepared 7/18/08 by Samuels & Steelman, Architects. Any deviation from~'~the variance given such as extensions, or demohtions which are not shown on the apphcant's diagrams or survey site maps, are not authorized under this application when involving nonconfo~ities under the zoning code. This action does not authorize Or condone any current or future uge, 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 reserve~the right to substitute a similar design that is de minimis in nature for an alteration that doe~?hot increase the degree of nonconformity. Vote of the Board:-' Ayes: Members Goehringer (Chairman), Dinizio, Oliva, Simon, and Weisman. This R,esolution ~._a~, dulv~_ad~op~ (5-0). RUTH D. OLIVA, VICE CHAIRWOMAI~ ~72009 Approved for Filing APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Gerard E Goehringer, Chairman Ruth D. Oliva James Dinizio, Jr. Michael A. Simon Leslie Kanes Weisman http://southoldtown.northfork.net ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809 · Fax (631) 765-9064 Mailing Address: Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road · EO. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 Office Location: Town Annex/First Floor, North Fork Bank 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) Southold, NY 11971 FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DECISION MEETING DATE: JANUARY 22, 2009 ZBA # 6223 - THOMAS and JOYCE MESSINA, Applicants Property Location: 1690 The Strand, East Marion CTM 1000-30-2-61 SEQRA DETERMINATION: The Zoning Board of Appeals has visited the property under consideration in this application and determines that this review falls under the Type II category of the State's List of Actions, without further steps under SEQRA. SUFFOLK COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE CODE: This application was referred as required under the Suffolk County Administrative Code Sections A 14-14 to 23, and the Suffolk County Department of Planning issued its reply dated September 28, 2008 stating that this application is considered a matter for local determination as there appears to be no significant county-wide or inter-community impact. PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: The subject property is a waterfront lot of 26,230 square feet, of which 15,253 square feet is upland (buildable area) between the top of the bluff and the property line adjacent to the road. The property's eastern boundary is 347.64 feet, the western boundary is 355.52 feet, the southern boundary is 77 feet and the waterfront is 74.23 feet. This lot was part of the first clustered subdivision in the Town of Southold, and is improved with a single-family, two-stow frame house with garage. The lot is well landscaped with bushes and trees. BASIS OF APPLICATION: This application is based on Code Section 280-116 A(1), cited in the building inspector's notice of disapproval amended September 2, 2008 concerning a proposed swimming pool and spa at less than 100 feet from the top of the bank or bluff on a lot adjacent to Long Island Sound and with lot coverage exceeding the code limitation of 20% on this buildable land area of 15,253 square feet. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on January 22, 2009, at which time written and oral evidence were presented. Based upon all testimony, Page 2 of 4 - January 22, 2009 ZBA File # 6223 - Thomas and Joyce Messina CTM 1000-30-2-61 documentation, personal inspection of the property, and Other evidence, the Zoning Board finds the following facts to be true and relevant: RELIEF REQUESTED: The apphcant proposes to build a 30 ft. by 20 ft. in-ground swimming pool at a maximum depth of 8 feet, and a 5 ft. x 5 ft. foot spa at 75 feet from the bluff, as shown on the January 7, 2009 site survey prepared by Howard M. Young, L.S. This will also increase the lot coverage to 22.2%, which exceeds the code limitation of 20% of the buildable lot. TOWN CODE CHAPTER 95, LWRP DETERMINATION: Based on the information provided by the' LWRP Consistency Assessment Form and the application before the Board of Appeals, the LWRP Coordinator issues his recommendation dated October 2, 2008 that the proposed action is inconsistent from the LWRP review pursuant to Chapter 268 of the Southold Town Code. According to Chapter 280-116A which states: "(1) All building or structures located on lots adjacent to sounds and upon which there exists a bluffor bank landward of the shore or beach shall be set back not fewer than 100 feet from the top of such bluff or bank." It is recommended by the LWRP Coordinator that the Board require that the applicant amend the action and/or further the above policy to the greatest extent practicable. In order to comply with the Board's action of alternative relief noted below, and Chapter 268 of the Southold Town Code (LWRP), all backwash from the pool shall be placed in a dry well as landward as possible from the swimming pool. REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: On the basis of testimony presented, materials submitted and peksonal inspection, the Board makes the following findings: 1. Town Law §267-b(3)(b)(1). An undesirable change will not be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby property because there are other swimming pools in the neighborhood. Also, the property is heavily landscaped for privacy both to the applicant and their neighbors. 2. Town Law §267-b(3)(b)(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 subject site provides no conforming location for a swimming pool or any other accessory structure. 3. Town Law §267-b(3)(b)(3). The amount of alternative relief granted is not substantial. The area subject to this original request is 641 square feet, resulting in a 2.2% variance for the excess in lot coverage. The alternative relief reduces the square footage by 120 square feet, from 641 square feet to 521 square feet. Page 3 of 4 - January 22, 2009 ZBA File # 6223 - Thomas and Joyce Messina CTM 1000-30-2-61 4. Town Law ~267-b(3)(b)(4). The variance will not have an adverse effect, or impact, on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood because the topography of the lot is generally fiat to gently sloping to the south. Therefore the potential for erosion to the bluff is minimized. All necessary erosion control measures will be implemented during the ongoing and post construction. Ail backwash from the pool shall be placed in a dry well as landward as possible from the swimming pool. 5. Town Law ~267-b(3)(b)(5). The difficulty has not been self created because setback requirements have been changed since the creation of the subdivision and recording of declaration of covenants and restrictions in 1975. The definition of lot coverage and buildable land has changed subsequent to construction of the existing building. 6. Town Law §267-b. Grant of the alternative relief is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of a swimming pool and spa, while preserving and protecting the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community. RESOLUTION O~ THE BOARD: In considering all of the above factors and applying the balancing test u~der New York Town Law 267-B, motion was offered by Member Oliva, seconded by Member Simon, and duly carried, to DENY the variance as applied for a 20 x 30 foot swimming pool with spa, and further to GRANT ALTERNATIVE RELIEF for a 16 x 30 foot swimming pool and spa, reducing the lot coverage by 120 square feet, and further increasing setback to a minimum df 79 feet measured to the top of the bluff, subject to the following: Condition 1: Ail pool equipment shall be enclosed in a soundproof enclosure so as not to~ disturb neighbors, Condition 2f Ail heavv equipment should be kept to a minimum during constructioh of the 30 x 16 swimming pool and spa. Condition 3: In order to comply with Chspter 268 of the Southold Town Code (LWRP) all backwash from the pool shall be placed in a dry well as landward as possible from the swimming pool That the above conditions be written into the Building Inspector's Certificate of Occupancy, when issued. Page 4 of 4 - January 22, 2009 ZBA File # 6223 - Thomas and Joyce Messina CTM 1000-30-2-61 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 reserve~ the right to substitute a similar design that is de minimis in nature for an alteration that does not increase the degree of nonconformity. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Goehringer (Chairman), Oliva, Dinizio, Simon and Weisman. This Reso~ion was duly adopted (5-0). RUTH D. 0LIVA, VICE CHAIRWOMAN Approved for Filing APPEALS BOARD ~EMBERS Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Ruth D. Oli¥~ James Dinizio;:Jr. Michael A. simon Leslie Kanes We!sman http://southoldtown.northfork.net ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809 · Fax (631) 765-9064 Mailing Address: 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) Southotd, NY 11971 :FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING DATE: JANUARY 22, 2009 ZBA # 6238 5 JACQUELINE MOSKOWITZ, Applicant PROPERTY LOCATION: 80 Lakeside Drive and Cedar Point Drive, Southold CTM 1000-90-3-14 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 further steps under SEQRA. SUFFOLK COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE CODE: This apphcation has been referred as required under the Suffolk County Administrative Code Sections A 14-14 to 23, and the Suffolk County Department of Planning reply states that the application iS considered a matter for local determination as there appears to be no significant c¢iunty-wide or inter'community impact. PROPERTY :FACTS/DESCRIPTION: The subject property is a 14,118 square foot nonconforming lot in the R-40 District and is improved with a single-family dwelling with attach~ carport and accessory in ground swimming pool. The irregular, triangular shaped lot has two front yards and measures a total of 192.05 feet along Lakeside Dr!ye, a total of 161.36 feet along Cedar Point Drive, and 134.68 feet along the rear yar~! BASIS OF APPLICATION: Request for Variances on this 14,118 square foot lot, under Zoning Code Sections 280-122 and 280-124, based on applications for building permits and the Building Inspector's August 22, 2008 Notice of Disapproval, and Zoning Code. Interpretation ZBA #5039 (R. Walz), concerning construction of a pergola, fence height, swimming pool, and as-built carport structure, for the reasons that: (1) the proposed pergola to be added to the dwelling structure is not permitted because such additions/alteration will constitute an increase in the degree of nonconformance (nonconforming rear yard setback and front yard setback, see ZBA #3255 of August 14, 1984; Page 2 of 4 - Janua~ 22, 2009 ZBA # 6238 - Jacqueline Moskowitz CTM Parcel 1000-90-3-14 (2) the fence is not allowed as per Conditions under ZBA #3950 dated July 11, 1990 which states: the fence and any screening shall not exceed 4 ft. 6 in. in height in front yard areas above grade, the area beginning at a point of 30 feet from the corner of Cedar Point Drive to 30 feet from the corner of Lakeside Drive shall remain open and un-vegetated; (3) the existing swimming pool under Building Permit #19275 issued July 27, 1990 is located at less than the required minimum of 22 feet under ZBA # 3950 dated July 11, 1990; (4) the existing carport shows setbacks from each the front yard and rear yard at less than the code-required minimum of 35 feet. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on January 8, 2009, at which time written and oral evidence were presented. Based upon all testimony, documentation, personal inspection of the property, and ether evidence, the Zoning Board finds the following facts to be true and relevant: AREA VARIANCE RELIEF REQUESTED: The applicant proposes: To construct a 14.1 ft. x 18.8 ft. wooden pergola/sunscreen to sit above a part of an existing wood deck which will maintain the existing non-conforming 28.2 ft. front yard setback from Cedar Point Drive, and the existing non- conforming 16.3 ft. rear yard setback, To construct a 6 ft. high decorative wood fence approximately 90 Linear feet on Cedar Point Drive and approximately 90 linear feet on Lakeside Drive which is not permitted in front yards and by virtue of the previous ZBA Variance #3950 (see above), To obtain a variance for the as-built accessory swimming pool that was built at 20.8 ft. from the property boundary along Cedar Point Drive in error of the building permit and variance previously granted at 22 ft. (see above), To obtain a variance for an as-built carport with a non'conforming setback of 25.7 feet from Lakeside Drive and a nonconforming rear yard setback of 15 feet, as shown on the 9-04-08 diagram A-1 prepared by Boulevard Planning, P.C. REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: On the basis of testimony presented, materials submitted and personal inspections, the Board makes the following findings: 1. Town Law ~267-b(3)(b)(3)(1). Grant of the variances for the proposed pergola and as-built swimming pool and carport will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. Page 3 of 4 Januaw 22, 2009 ZBA # 6238 - Jacqueline Moskowitz CTM Parcel 1000-90-3-14 a) The proposed pergola is a light structure that will maintain the current non- conforming setbacks of the as built deck and will not be visible to nearby properties because of the existing heavy vegetation. b) The accessory pool is as built and has existed since 1990 by virtue of an error in its placement during the original installation. Granting a variance to legalize the existing location will not change the character of the neighborhood. c) The as-built carport is attached to the house, and is a small (20 ft. x 12.4 ft.), light weight, open structure that is located in a logical relationship to the driveway, house and Lakeside Drive. It has a reasonable setback from both the street (25.7 ft.) and the side/rear yard (15 ft.) and has no adverse visual or environmental impacts on the neighborhood. Grant of the variance for the proposed fence will produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The applicant's property is a corner lot that has two street frontages and an odd triangular shape. As such, it is seen by many other homeowners traveling on those streets. The neighborhood has a very open, rural feel to it, and no other 6 ft. high fences are in the immediate vicinity. The applicant has done extensive plantings to create privacy for their pool and, like other homeowners in the neighborhood, has added high post and wire fencing for deer control. It is the Board's feeling that a solid wood fence that is 6 ft. high in the applicant's two front yards would not be in keeping with the character of the neighborhood and upholds the previous ZBA Variance #3950. 2. Town Law §267~b(3)(b)(2). The benefits sought by the applicant for a proposed pergola and as built carport and swimming pool cannot be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than area variances because all of the variances applied for are already related to existing non-conformities. The benefits sought by the applicant for a proposed 6 ft. high solid wood fence in two front yards can be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance because additional privacy for the pool area can be achieved through creating a berm and additional plantings on the applicant's property. 3. Town Law §267-b(3)(b)(3). The variances granted herein are not substantial with regard to the as built carport, as built accessory swimming pool and proposed pergola, but is substantial in terms of the proposed 6 ft. fence height where the code permits a maximum height at 4 feet for a fence in a front yard. 4. Town Law ,~267-b(3)(b)(5). The difficulty has not been self-created with regard to the as-built pool and proposed pergola but is the result of a very oddly shaped lot with two fi'ont yards. The difficulty has been self-created with regard to the as-built carport and proposed wood fence since the carport was built witliout a permit or the Page 4 of 4-January 22, 2009 ZBA # 6238 - 3acqueline Moskowitz CTM Parcel 1000-90-3-14 possibility of conforming setbacks and the applicant chose to install a pool in their front yard where the code does not permit a 6 ft. high fence. 5. Town Law §267~b(3)(b)(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. Variances for the proposed pergola, as-built pool, and carport will not involve any grade changes, excavation, filing, and/or clearing done to the property. 6. Town Law §267-b. Grant of the requested relief is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of a carport, accessory pool and pergola, 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 Weisman, seconded by Member , and duly carried, to GRANT the variances as applied for regarding the proposed pergola, the as- built carport, and the as-built swimming pool, as shown on Sheet Number AT I dated 9-4-08 drawn by Boulevard Planning P.C. Architects and submitted by Peconic Permit Expediting, and to DENY the variance as applied for regarding a proposed 6 ft. high wood fence as shown on Sheet Number A-1 dated 9-4-08 drawn by Boulevard Planning P.C. Architects and submitted by Peconic Permit Expediting. 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. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Goehringer (Chairman), Dinizio, Oliva, Simon, and Weisman. This Resolution was duly adopted (5-0). RUTH D. OLIVA, VICE CHAIRWOMAN 2/~/2009 Approved for Filing ,~PPEALS BOARD MEMBERS \ Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Ruth D. Oliva James Dinizio, Jr. Michael A. Simon Leslie Kanes Weisman http://southoldtown.northfork.net ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTI-IOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809 · Fax (631) 765-9064 Mailing Address: 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 FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS, AND DETERMINATION (MAS) MEETING OF JANUARY 22, 2009 ZBA # 6228 - DIANE MULVANEY and BETTY J. BRESLOFF Location of Property: Marion Lane and Bay Avenue, East Marion CTM Parcels 1000-31-8-13 and 1000-31-8-12.4 SEQRA DETERMINATION: The Zoning Board of Appeals has visited the property under consideration in this apphcation 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 lot (Mulvaney) contains 34,124 square feet with 142.99 feet along Marion Road to the north, and 213.95 feet along the south/east lot line along Marion Road. The adjacent lot (Bresloffl contains 8,340 square feet with . Both lots are improved with a single-family dwelling, as shown on the October 7, 2008 survey for lot line change prepared by John T. Metzger, L.S. for Peconic Surveyors, P.C. BASIS OF APPLICATION: This apphcation is based on the applicant's request for a lot-line change and the Building Inspector's Notice of Disapproval citing code Section 280-18. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on January 8, 2009, 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: This is a request for area variances concerning a proposed lot area for 1000-31-8-12.4, at 225 Marion Lane, which lot will become less conforming by reducing its size from 34,194 square feet to 30,448 square feet in total size, and concerning 1000-31-8-13 at 730 Bay Avenue, East Marion, which lot will become more conforming by increasing its size from 8,340 square feet to 12,086 square feet. Page 2 -January 22, 2009 ZBA # 6228 - D. Mulvaney and B. Bresloff CTM Parcels 1000-31-8-13, 1000-31-8-12.4 REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION On the basis of testimony presented, materials submitted and personal inspections, the Board makes the following findings: 1. Town Law Section 267-b(3)(b)(1). Grant of relief will not produce an undesirable change in the character on the neighborhood and a possible detriment to nearby properties because the residential use of the properties will remain and the front yard setback will be increase. 2. Town Law Section 267-b(3)(b)(1). The benefit sought by the applicants cannot be achieved by some method feasible for the apphcant to pursue, other than an area variance because an area variance is the only way town will recognize the new lot lines. 3. Town Law Section 267-b(3)(b)(1). The variance granted herein is not substantial. Removing the existing right of way will decrease the degree of front yard nonconformity for Lot 1000-31-2-13. 4. Town Law Section 267-b(3)(b)(1). The difficulty has not been self created. It is created because a new right of way was constructed to give the owner of lot 1000-31- 2-12 access to their property and to eliminate the need for the right of way across lot 1000-31-2-13. 5. Town Law Section 267-b(3)(b)(1). There has been no evidence submitted to suggest that a variance in this residential neighborhood may have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood because nothing will change with respect to either of the above-mentioned conditions. 6. Town Law Section 267-b. The grant of the requested relief for the lot sizes is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of a lot line change, while preserving and protecting 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 Chairman Goehringer, and duly carried, to GRANT the variance as applied for, as shown on the October 7, 2008 Survey for Lot Line Change prepared by John T. Metzger, L.S. (Peconic Surveyors, r.c.). 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 Page 3 - January 22, 2009 ZBA # 6228 - D. Mulvaney and B. Bresloff CTM Parcels 1000-31-8-13, 1000-31-8-12.4 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. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Goehringer (Chairman), Oliva, Dinizio, Simon, and Weisman. This Resolution was duly adopted (5-0). Ruth D. Oliva, Vice Chairwoman 2/g/2000 Approved for Filing APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Gerard E Goehringer, Chairman Ruth D. Oliva James Dinizio, In Michael A. Simon Leslie Kanes Weisman Mailing Address: Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road · EO. 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 FINDINGS, DIgLIItERATIONS, DECISION MEETING DATE: JANUARY 22, 2009 ZBA # 6234 - THEODORE E. PRAHLOW, Applicant PROPERTY LOCATION: 1605 Old Shipyard l.~ne, Southold CTM 64'5'30 SEQRA DETERMINATION: The Zoning Board of Appeals ha~ visited the property under consideration in this application and determines that this review fnll~ under the Type II category of the State's List of Actions, without further steps under SEQRA. SUFFOLK COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE CODE: This application hnn been referred as required under the Suffolk County Administrative Code Sections A 14-14 to 23, and the Suffolk County Department of plnnning reply states that the application is considered a matter for local determlnn~Jon as there appears to be no signlt%~nt county-wide or inter-community impact. PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: The subject property is a 7,700 squn~e foot nonconforming lot, measuring 60 feet wide x 140 feet deep as shown on the survey prepared August 21, 2008 by John Metzger, licensed surveyor. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Request for Variances under Sections 280-124 concornin_= this 7,700 square foot parcel, and based on the Building Inspector's August 22, 2008 Notice of Disapproval concerning a proposed deck and porch additions to the existing single-¢nmily dwellln_% which new construction will be less thnn the code-required minimum of 35 feet for a rear yard setback and which exceeds the code'mhd/mum limitation of 20% lot coverage. Findings of Fact The ZOnln~ Board of Appeals held a public hearing on thin apphcafion on January 8, 2009, at which time written and oral evidence were presented. Based upon all testimony, documentation, personnl inspection of the property, and other evidence, the Zoning Board 6nds the following facts to be true and relevant: Page 2 of 4 -January 22, 2009 ZBA # 6234 -T~ Prahlow CTM 64'5'30 RELIEF REQUESTED: The applicant proposes to add the fo]lowing to their existing two-story dwelling: (1) an 8 ft. x 27.6 ft covered front porch with column,~ r~illngs, and stops, (2) a covered deck with columns and r.illnge at the rear of the house at the first intorior floor level measuring 8 ft. x 27.6 ft x 7.8 ft high (above grade) with a set of stairs measuring 4 ft. wide x 12 ft. and extendln§ beyond the proposed covered deck by 8 ft., and (3) a second-stoW rear deck with r~ilings measuring 8 feet x +/- 15.5 feet. These proposed roar yard additions will create a non-conforming rear yard setback of 27 feet for the proposed deck and porch and a rear yard setback of 19 feet for the proposed stairs. Conectively, the proposed additions will increase the lot coverage to 25.3%. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The applicant's home is a two-story modular construction on a crawl space that currently meets the code's mAx-im,~m lot coverage of 20% and has a 35 ft. conforming rear yard setback. Because the dwelling had to be built to FEMA standards, the finished first floor had to be much higher in elevation than others in the neighborhood and therefore it appears much taller and larger than other homes in the immediato vicinity which are typically modest one- story rsnch or bungalow style. The rear of the house was built with sliding doors on both floors in anticipation of proposed rear deck additions. The house currently does not have a Cer~it~cato of Occupancy. At the public hearing on January 8, 2009 written and oral tostimony was given by neighbors who voiced their concerns over the applicant's dwelling changing the chg~actor of the neighborhood by virtue of it's unns, mlly large appearance on a small lot and objected to increasing the lot coverage beyond what is allowed by code. They also voiced concerns over the loss of privacy in their own rear yards that the applicant's proposed elevatod first floor and second story rear yard decks would cause. ~ REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: On the basis of tostimony presentod, matorlals submitted and personal inspections, the Board makes the following findings: 1. Town Law §267-b(3)C0)(3)(1). Grant of altornative relief will not produce an undesirable change in the o-hA~acter of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The addition of a slightly shallower front porch will reduce the proposed 25.3% lot coverage and improve the appearance of the house from the street. A smaller roar yard deck at the fi,~i~hed floor level will permit the applicant to enjoy their rear yard while providing emergency egress and reducing the proposed excessive lot coverage. Page 3 of 4 - January 22, 2009 ZBA # 6234 - T. Prahlow CTM 64'5'30 2. Town Law §267-b(3)(b)(2). Alternative relief csnnot be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance because the house currently h~ a code compliant lot coverage and rear yard setback so any proposed addition will require a vari~ce. 3. Town Law §267-b(3)(b)(3). The variances as proposed are substavCis! in that the lot coverage of 25.3% represents a 26.5% variance beyond the code limits of 20% and the proposed roar yard setback of 27 feet is a 22.85% variA,~ce beyond the code required mi,~imum of 35 feet. 4. Town Law §267'b(3)(b)(5). The di~culty has been so]f-created insofar as the applicant could have chosen to build a smaller house in anticipation of hiA desire to have a front porch and two rear decks. 5. Town Law §267-b(3)Co)(4). No evidence bAA been submitted to suggest that a variance in thi~ residential community will have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood. The house hA~ been built to FEMA stav&A~ds and will adhere to the Town's drainage codes. 6. Town L~w §267-b. Grant of alternative relief is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of a front porch and rear deck while presorving and protecting the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and we]fare of the cemmu,~ity. 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 Weisman, seconded by Member Oliva, and duly carried, to DENY the VariAnces as applied for, and to GRANT ALTERNATIVE RETJEF as noted below and subject to the following Conditions: 1. The proposed covered front porch shall be reduced from 8 ft. x 27.6 ft. to 6 ft x 27.6 feet, and 2. The proposed second-story rear deck shall be (is) denied and the Sliding doors secured according to code or replaced with windows, and 3. The proposed rear deck at the finished floor level shall be no larger than 10 ft. x 8 ft. with 3 ft. (maximnm) high railings, and the required stairs to grade must be located to the side of the open deck so that they do not protrude into the side yard or the rear yard beyond the 27' non- conforming roar yard setback granted by this Board; and Subject to the following CONDITIONS: 1. The rear deck must remain uncovered and open to the sky. 2. A row of 5 ft tall or higher evergreens spaced 3 feet on center shall be Page 4 of 4 -January 22, 2009 ZBA # 6234 - T~ Prahlow CTM 64-5-30 plant, ed and continuously maintained along the applicant's westerly boundary (side yard) for 35 linear feet from the southwest (rear) corner of the house to the southwest (rear) comer of the property boundary. 3. Lot coverage based upon p{An~ for the alternative relief granted above is to be con6rmed by a survey or letter from a licensed surveyor and the applicant before a bui)rling permit is issued. That the above conditions be written into the Bui]dlng Inspector's Certificate of Occupancy, when issued. Any deviation from the variance given such as extensions, or demolitions which are not shown on the appl/cant~s diagrams or survey site maps, are not author/zed under thiR application when involving nonconformities under the zoni~_~ code. ThJ~ action does not authorize or condone any current or future use, setback or other feature of the subject property that may violate the Zonin~ Code, other thRn such uses, setbacks ~nd other features as are expressly addressed in ~h~. action. The Board reserves the right to substitute a pimilR~ design that is de mlnlmus in nature for an alteration that does not increase the degree of nonconformity. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Cxoehringer (Chnirman), Dinlzlo, Oliva, Simon and Weisman. This Resolution was duly adopted (5-0). RUTH D. OLIVA, VICE CHAIRWOMAN ~. 17..12009 Approved for Filing 'APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Gerard E Goehringer, Chairman Ruth D. Oliva James Dinizio, Jr. Michael A. Simon Leslie Kanes Weisman http://southoldtown.northfork.net ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTItOLD Tell (631) 765-1809 · Fax (631) 765-9064 Mailing Address: 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 FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS, AND DETERMINATION MEETING HELD JANUARY 22, 2009 ZBA # 6268 - ROMANELLI REALTY, Applicant PROPERTY LOCATION: 36660 Route 25 (Main Road), Cutchogue CTM 97-3-3.1 (formerly 97-3-3) and 200 Skunk Lane, CTM 97-3-6.1 (formerly 97-3-6) 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 11 category of the State's List of Actions, without further steps under SEQRA. SUFFOLK COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE CODE: This application has been referred as required under the Suffolk County Administrative Code Sections A 14-14 to 23, and the Suffolk County Department of Planning reply states that the application is considered a matter for local determination as there appears to be no significant county-wide or inter-community impact. PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: The applicant's property is located in the LB Limited Business Zone District and is currently shown as County Tax Map Parcel 1000-97-03-03.1 containing a lot area of 63,338 square feet (nonconforming), with 157.20 feet along the front yard lot line at the Main Road ('N.Y.S. Route 25), 164.44 feet x 64.53 feet x 98.52 feet x 215.14 feet x 223 feet x 24.25 feet x 158.12 feet. The adjacent lot (now or formerly of Midgley) is currently shown as County Tax Map Parcel 1000-97-03-6.1 containing a lot area.of 22,701 square feet (nonconforming), and 139.99' along the front yard lot line at Skunk Lane x 234.92' x 64.77' x 209.25'. BASIS OF APPLICATION: This request is based on the Building Inspector's December 16, 2008 Notice of Disapproval and the applicants' request for area variances concerning a change of lot line between two nonconforming parcels. The Building Inspector's Notice of Disapproval states that the minimum lot size requirement in the LB Zone District is 80,000 square feet, and the applicant requests approval of a reduced lot size containing 63,338.05 square feet for County Tax Map Parcel 1000-97-3-3.1. AREA VARIANCE RELIEF REQUESTED: The relief requested is for a transfer of 2,584 square feet of land area from the applicant's 65,992 square foot parcel to the adjacent parcel now or formerly of Midgley. The applicant's parcel is reduced in size to 63,338 square feet. The adjacent lot is increased from its nonconforming size of20,117 square feet to 22,701 square feet, all as shown on the January 29, 2003 survey updated June 2, 2008 by Stanley J. Isaksen, Jr., L.S. Page 2 - January 22, 2009 ZBA # 6268 - Romanelli Realty, Applicant CTM 97-3-3.1 (formerly 97-3-3); CTM 97-3-6.1 (formerly 97-3-6) FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on January 8, 2009, 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 tree and relevant: Reasons for Board Action: On the basis of testimony presented, materials submitted and personal inspections, the Board makes the following findings: 1. Town Law §267-b(3)(b)(3)(1). Grant of relief will not produce an undesirable change in the character On the neighborhood and a possible detriment to nearby properties because the 2584.01 sq fi.~that is the subject to the lot line change will not be apparent to the surrounding properties and the workshop will continue to be used as it has in the past. 2. Town Law §267-b(3)(b)(3)(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 has no control over the actions of the previous owner and the town building department. The granting of an area variance is the only practical avenue for the applicant to achieve the benefit sought. 3. Town Law §267-b(3)(b)(3)(3). The variance granted herein is not substantial, representing less than 4 percent of the original square footage of the lot. 4. Town Law §267-b(3)(b)(3)(5). The difficulties have not been self created and were caused by the actions of the prior owner and the Building Department's granting of a building permit and a certificate of occupancy. 5. Town Law §267-b(3)(b)(3)(4). There has been no evidence submitted to suggest that a variance in this neighborhood may have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood. The applicant will still have the original lot he purchased and the prior owner will still own the land upon which he built a workshop he will continue to use. 6. Town Law §267-b. The grant of the requested relief for the area variance is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of a lot line change, while preserving and protecting 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 Weisman, and duly carded, to GRANT the variance as applied for, as shown on the January 29, 2003 survey updated Jane 2, 2008 by Stanley J. Isaksen, Jr., L.S. Any deviation fiom 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 Page ~- January 22, 2009 ZBA g 6268 - Romanelli Realty, Applicant CTM 97-3~3.1 (formerIy 97-3-3); CTM 97-3-6. I (formerly 97-3-6) 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 minimus in nature for an alteration that does not increase the degree of nonconformity. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Goehringer (Chairman), Dinizio, .Oliva, Simon and Weisman. This~Resolution was duly adopted (5-0). RUTH D. OL1VA, VICE CHAIRWOMAN / -/g~/2009 Approved for Filing APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Ruth D. Oliva James Dinizio, Jr. Michael A. Simon Leslie Kanes Wei~man http://southoldtown.northfork.net ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809 · Fax (631) 765-9064 Mailine Address: Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road · P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 Office Location: Town Annex/First Floor, Noah Fork Bank 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) Southold, NY 11971 FINDINGS, DELmERATIOI~S and DECISION MEETING DATE: JANUARY 22, 2009 ZBA # 6198 - STEVE and OLGA TENEDIOS, Applicants PROPERTY LOCATION: 1625 North Sea Drive, Southold CTM Parcel # 54-4-18 (adjacent to Dunes and the Long Island Sound) SEQRA DETERMINATION: The Zoning Board of Appeals has visited the property under consideration in this application and detsrmlnes that this review falln under the Type II, category of the State's List of Actions, without further steps under SEqRA. ~ SUFFOLK COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE CODE: This application hah been referred as required under the Suffolk County Administrative Code Sections A 14-14 to 23, and the Suffolk County Department of Planning reply states that the application is considered a matter for local detsrmlnntion as there appears to be no signifloant county-wide or inter'cemmunity impact. PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: The subject property is a non'cenformin~ 26,350 square foot lot in the Residential R-40 District and is improved with aong story single fnmily dwelling, an attached deck, and garage with living quarters on the second floor. The property measures 100 ft. wide along North Sea Drive, 254.27 ft. deep on the easterly boundary, 274.28 fL on tho westerly boundary, and is adjacent to ~r.I~ong Island Sound on the Northerly boun&a~y, according to the May 13, 2008 survey.propared by Nathan Tait Corw/n III, Land Surveyor. BASIS OF A~PPLICATION: Request for Variances under Sections 280-124, based on the Buildln~ Inspector's June 30, 2008 amended Notice of Disapproval concerning the demolition of an existing single family dwelling and construction of a new single family dwelling on the following grounds: The proposed construction will be: (1) ~letsh;~hfi f~t~entatofi~nt yard; (2) less than 15 feet fora single side yard setback, tal side yard setbacks, and (4) lot coverage exceeds the cede limitation of 20% (100% lot coverage for zero buildable l~nd ares). Page 2 - Janua~, 22, 2009 ZBA # 6198 - S. and O. TenediOs, Appl/cants CTM 1000-54-4-18 Findings of Fact The Zoning Board of Appeale held a public hearing on this application on October 30, 2008 and January 8, 2009, at which time written and oral evidence were presented. Based upon all testimony, documentation, personsl inspection of the properly, and other evidence, the Zoning Board ~tlds the following facts to be true and relevant: LWRP DETERMINATION: A Letter dated October 27, 2998 from Mark Terry, Town LWRp Coorains+~)r, confirming inconsistency was submitted to the Board of ApPeals under Chapter 95, Waterfront Consistency Review of the Town of Southold Code and Lscal Waterfront Revit~li-ation Program (LWRP) standards. The letter reviewed the varlnnce requests for the front yard and side yard setback reductions for the proposed action in relation to a primary dane, a protective natural feature located within a Coastal Erosion Hazard Area. Pursuant to Policy 4.1 A. la, the letter notes 'On December 12, 2007 the Town of Southold Board of Trustees issued a Coastal Erosion Msn~gement Area permit for a non'major addition on the parcel which is a permissible activity within a primary dune area as stated by A(5) which states: ~lqon,m~or additions to existing structures are allowed on primary dunes pursusnt to a coastal erosion msn~gement permit and subject to permit conditions concerning location, design and potential impacts of the structure on the primary dune.~ Note; however, that the demolition and rebugding of the structure (as proposed) is :not permissible or attainable by the Southold Board of Trustees Coastal Erosion l~I~nn~ement Area permit. The permit cont~inn a condition that the 'structure isnot to be demolished." Corresvondln~ly, the demnlitlnn and rebuilrlln,, of the structure is not a permitted activity wlthi~ a prlmst~ r]i,n~_ area pursusnt t... Chai~ter 11 ~Coas~ Ernslnn ~IsT~,d Areas of the Southold Town Code.' Grant of alternative re]ief in this variance application, with an the conditions as noted, win Substantlsily bring the proposed slngle-fsmily residence into Et'eater conformity with the LWRP re~]~tions and the recommendations for best practices of County of Suffolk Soil and Water Conservation District. AREA VARIAIqCE REI,1E, F REQUESTEI3: The applicant proposes to remove the existin~ non-conforming one story dwe111ng and garage from its foundation to a temporary site on the subject property seaward of the existing dwe111ng, build a new FEMA coml~llsnt foundation of piles in the same footprint, place the existing Struchn~s, alter demolition (see additions] information below) back on the new piles, enlss,'e the interior livable space of the dwelling by connecting what remsln= of the relocated house and garage to each other in the space where the ori~n~! deck was located,: and build a new second story over the enlarged first story. Hew elevated exterior de,.Irs at the FEMA complisnt finlnhed first floor and related staircase are also proposed. The proposed demolition and construction will: 1. have a +/- 39.6/t front yard setback while the code requires a minimum of 40 feet; Page 3 -January22, 2009 ZBA# 6198 - S. and O. Tenedios, App~can~ CTM1000-54-4-18 2. a single westerly side yard setback of 9.16 feet where the code requires a mlnlma~l Of 15 f~et; 3. a total side yard setback of 20.83 feet where the cede requires 3§ feet; 4. a total lot ceverage of 100% because the property has zero buildable land, being on the seaward side of the Coastal Erosion Hazard Line, where the code permits a ws~imum lot ceverage ilmit~tion of 20%. ADDITIONAL INFORM&TION. At the public hearing held on October 30, 2008 the applicant's attorney, Ms. Patricia Moore, testified that the applicant does not propose demollnhlng the existing dwelling and that the Town Trustees reviewed their application, made suggested modifications, and granted a permit (No. 6790 & No. 6790C) on December 12, 2007, sta~ng that.'the existin~ structure is not to be demolished and if there is reason for the structure to have to be demohehed, a new permit must he applied for prior to demolition." The Board asked Chief Burider Inspector Michael Verity to testify at a public hey on December 4, 2008, to explain why his Notice of Disapproval referred to the application as a demolitiom Based upon hi~ testimony and that of Ms. Moore's and Joseph Fischett/, the applicant's engineer, and a thorough review of the pl~n~ submitted by the applicant, the following summation is relevant: The existing house was built in the 1960's and does not meet current BIYS bu/lding code stavd~ds. To bring the dwelling into conformity with FEMA and building codes, the applicant proposes to demolish 100% of the interior wAilA of the existing non'cenferming dwelling, and all existing interior floors, exterior decks and roofs which will constitute a tear down of censiderably more than 50% of the existing dwelling. As calculated from floor p)AnA by Joseph Fischett/, P.E. dated June 23, 2008 labeled sheets 1 and 2, the new dwelling wi]] retain approx/mAtely +/- 99.5 linear feet of the exist/ng exterior walls of which +/- 45 linear feet w/l] remain from the exist/~gheuse and 54.5 linear fe~t from the existing garage. These ori~nal exterior wall fi'agmente, which the applicant proposes to return to the new foundation of pries, may need to be rebuilt if they c~nnnt he sistered with 2' x 6's. New exterior wsllA will be added to enclose the space that existed between the o 'r~.nal house and garage where open dec'lng previously existed. Tiffs win add 760 square feet Pf living space to the first floor, which/s within the 25% mA~/,~um exp~n=ion of 1And coverage permitted by Coastal Erosion Law. All new interior wsllA and floors and a new roof over a proposed new second floor will be consl~ucted. Other than the centinued location on the existing footprint, the proposed dwell~ng, · s shown on the elevations by Robert JAmes Hi,gins, Architect, dated May 15, 2008 and the first and second floor plA,~= by Joseph Fischetti, P.E. cited above, will not resemble the current exist/ng non'cenformlng house in terms of interior layout, s/ze or exterior appearance. Based upon' these facts, the Board upholds the Building Inspector's Not/ce of Disapproval that the application as applied for censtitutes a demolition of an existing dwelling and a con~£ruction of a new dwelling. Page 4 - January 22, 2009 ZBA # 6198 - S. and O. Tenedios, Applicants CTM 1000-54-4-18 REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: On the basis of testimony presented, materisls submitted and poreonsl inspect/oils, the Board makes the following findings: 1. Town Law §267'b(3)Co)(3)(1). Grant of the relief as applied for will produce an undesirable :chs%oe in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The homes on North Sea Drive r-n~ from modest one-sto~ cottages to one-story ranch homes that have been raised on piles to comply with FEMA, to some large year 'round dwellln_o~. Setbacks from the read vary but most are substantial and conforming. Homes on the south side of the street are not in the coastal erosion h-,ard zone (flood plain) ('CEHA"). Accordln~ to the Suffolk County Tax Map, of the 40 residential lots on beth sides of North Sea between Kenny's Road and McCabe's Beach, only four (4) other lots are as small as the subject property. The proposed new construction would expand the ground coverage of the new first floor by 25%, have non-conforming side yard and front yard setbacks, sit very close to the read because of the location of the exis~,~e footprint, and with the proposed second story be more ths~ 35 feet high abeve grade to be FEMA compll.nt for the 6nlsbed first floor height. 2. Town Law §267-b(3)(b)(2). The benefit sought by the applicant c-nnot be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other th,n an aroa varl,nce because the :pre-existin_~ non-conforming dwellb~_~ is located in a coastal erosion hA.z~xd zane (flood pl,ln) with non-conforming setbacks so any construction on the subject property will require varl,nce relief. 3. Town Law §267-b(3)(b)(3). The varlsnce as applied for is not substantial for the proposed front yard setback of +/- 39.6 i2. front yard setback, which is only six (6) inches less than the code required mlnlm~im of 40 feet. The var/-nces as applied for are substantial for the: 1. single westerly side yard setback of 9.16 fo. is 36% relief from the code; 2. a total side yard setback of 20.83 i~. is a 40.48% rehef from the code; 3. a total lot coverage of 100% is a because the property has zero buildable 1And, being on the seaward side of the Coastal Erosion Hazard Line, where the code permits a mA~mllm lot coverage of 20%. Is a 400% variance relieL 4. Town Law §267-b(3)(b)(§). The ~it~culty has been self created insofar as the design for the preposod 26% ground coverage expAn-ion for additional first floor liVing space requires a complete demolition of the interior of the existin~ dwelling and garage and virtually all new construction, which is not permitted by the Trustees permit. 5. Town Law §267-b(3)Co)(4). Evidence h~s been submitted to suggest that a vari~nco in this residev~.iA1 con~I'I~I,T~i~ wi~ have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighberhood. A letter was received from the County of Suffolk Soft and Water Conservation District signed by Polly Weigand, Soil District Technic/an, dated August 14, 2008 in which a site inspection and .n.lysis of the natural vegetation and proposed construction on the subject property Page 5 - January 22, 2009 ZBA # 6198 - S. and O. Tenedios, Applicants CTM 1000-54-4-18 was described. The proposed roar yard elevated deck win encroach further seaward than the existing dwelling and deck and will create shade underneath that will damage the health of the thriving existing native vegetation on the beach, as will the proposed demolition and construction activity in areas outside of the existing footprint. Also, the LWRP Coordin~ter notes that while renovations and minor additions up to 25% of ground coverage area are permitted, the demolition and construefion of a new dwelling in the Coastal Erosion HA=~d Zone is not permitted. 6. Town ~ (}rant of the relief as applied for is NOT the minimllln action necessary and adequate to enAhlo the applicant to enjoy the benefit of a new dwelling on his property in the CEHA, while preserving and protecting the ehm'acter of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the commqnity. Altho~gl~ ~e p~ol~ed apph'c, sb'o11 is dcemed to be s demolitio11, grant o£~Ito~ti~v · 'e~'at'is/baz~d I~on tJle Bosrd'l~ recegaitJon thnt s ]loii~e ]la~ ~i~g existdd oll the subject prepea~ ~ince the 196ff ~ 7~e Basrd beYJe~s that co~truct,'nff a 11es, hoas~ on the swbject p~sperty ~ not hem ~m ad~ree impact o11 the 11eighborhood or en~Yxonmen~ pregided: (1) it is comp~mble in the amount a~ liable space ~,d erto~or decld~ to ~,hst c~11t~ e, rizt,~ (2,) it ia sited ~tZl, the eri,~:ing 11onco~forml,o-, l~o~pr~t on land that is ~re~dy disturbed (3) it Asa more cenforming ~dtbe&, (~ Jt. meeto .~.E,.q. Bvj]di~ ~odes ,~m2rt~i~MA z'egul~t~'o~, (5) adheres to the celld~t~'o~ noted below. 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 Weisman, seconded by Member Oliva, and duly carried, to DENY the application as applied for, and ts GRANT ALTERNATIVE RELW, F as noted below, subject to the conditions noted below: A new ~i,,gle f~mily dwelling may he constructed, a/ter demolition of the pro- existing nonconforming dwellin~o, within the boundaries of the footprint of~h~ exi~;ing dw~-]lln= as foHOWO-' 1. A single westerly side yard setback of no less than 15 feet as per code, 2. A total side yard setback of no less than 25 feet, .2. A (minim,,m) front yard setback of 40 feet as per code, 4. MaintenAnco of the e~sting lot coverage of 12.3% as calc~,l~ted on the survey by NathAn Taft Corwin HI, Land Surveyor, dated May 13, 2008. 5. Total habitable space not to exceed 1,688 square feet regardless of the number of stories (as per code), 6. TOtal exterior dee. ir~ and wAl~ways not to exceed 1,043 square foot (plus stairs as required per code), and 7. An attached, unheated garage is permitted within the footprint of the existing building, but no accessory structures are permitted; Page 6 - January 22, 2009 ZBA # 6198 -S. and 0. Tenedios, Applicants CTM 1000-54-4-18 Subject to the following conditions (and ns per recommendation of County of Suffolk Soil ~.a Water): 1) Any rear (seaward) deck(s) may not encroach upon the undeveloped beach area beyond the current setback from Long Island Sound of the existing rear deck; 2) Gutters and leaders connected to drywells must be in.died to control roof runot~ located as close to the house as possible in order to limit damage tO the vegetation in the areas that would occur with their inst~llation, To preserve natural vegetation on site, natural areas must be snow fenced off and hay bales inst~ll~d to contain sediment, located as close to the construction as possible; No heavy trucks or equipment 8hall acce88 the side or rear yard; Measures 8hall be taken to eradicate the invasive Japanese Knotweed on the south side (f~nt) of the property; 6) Access to the beach should be limlt~d to one footpath through the dune environment to limit damage from foot tral~c; and 7) I-n.~dseaping shall be non-turf und consist of native plants. That the above conditions be written into the Building Inspector's Certificate of Occupancy, when issue& Any deviation ~rom the varlanco given such as extensions, or demolitions which are not shown on the applicant's diagrams or survey site maps, are not authorized under this appli~tion when involving nonconformities under the zo. lng 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 C4)de, other than such uses, setbacks and other features as are expressly addressed in thl. action. The Board reserves the right to substitute a slml]~, design that is de mlni,~is in nature for an altera~on that d~es not increase the degree of nonconformity. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Cu)eh~inger (Chairman), Dini~o, Ollva, Simon, and Weisrna,~. This Resolution was duly adopted (5'0). RI.~'I'H D. OLIVA, VICE CHAIRWOMAN 2/-~/2009 Approved for Filing APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Ruth D. Oliva James Dinizio, Jr. Michael A. Simon Leslie Kanes Weisman http://southoldtown.north fork.net ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809 · Fax (631) 765-9064 Mailing Address: Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road · EO. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 Office Location: Town Annex/First Floor, North Fork Bank 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) Southold, NY 11971 FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF JANUARY 22, 2009 ZBA File # 6207 Names of Applicant: HENRY TRAENDLY Location of Property: 13000 MAINROAD, EAST MARION CTM 1000-31-14-11 SEQRA DETERMINATION: The Zoning Board of Appeals has visited the property under consideration in this apphcation 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 two properties which are the subject of the applicant's request for an unmerger are shown on the Suffolk County Tax!Map as District 1000 Section 31 Block 14 Lot Number 11 ('CTM 11'), owned by the applicant, and Section 31 Block 14 Lot Number 12 ('CTM 12') for the adjacent property. CTM 11 contains 7,087 square feet with 35 feet along the Main Road (a/k/a N.Y.S. Route 25) and extending 209.43 feet to a tie line along approximately high watermark of Orient Harbor, as shown by a survey prepared for Chardstol by Kenneth F. Abruzzo, L.S. dated July 23, 1996 (job #96-0575). The property is improved with a garage. CTM 12 contains 44,174 square feet and is improved with a dwelling and accessory garage, as shown on the November 21, 1984 survey prepared for Ireme McKasty by Howard W. Young, L.S.. BASIS OF APPLICATION: This application is a request for a waiver of merger under Section 280-11 to unmerge two properties based on an application for a building permit and the Building Inspector's amended July 25, 2008 Notice of Disapproval. The Building Inspector states that the Page 2 -January 22, 2009 ZBA # 6207 - Henry Traendly CTM 31-14-11 amended July 25, 2008 Notice of Disapproval is based on a survey by Louis G. Schwartz updated 7/15/2008 to address the merger of the subject lot which merged with an adjacent lot to the northeast (SCTM # 1000-31-14-12) pursuant to Article II, Section 280-10, which states: Merger. A nonconforming lot shall merge with an adjacent conforming or nonconforming lot which has been held in common ownership with the fi~st lot at any time after July 1, 1983. An adjacent lot is one which abuts with the parcel for a common course of fifty (50) feet or more :in distance. Nonconforming lots shall merge until the total lot size cbnforms to the current bulk schedule requirements." FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing concerning this property on September 25, 2008 and on January 8, 2009, at which time written and oral evidence were presented. Special Circumstances: The Assistant Town Attorney at the request of the Building Inspector advised that the adjacent lot 12 was merged with the applicant's Subject CTM 11 during the September 25, 2008 area variance hearing. ~he Building Inspector confirmed that the determination on July 25, 2008. During the January 8, 2009 pubhc hearing Mr. Traendly requested severing the lot mer~ger issue before the Board from the remaining area variance application,~,and therefore the remaining issues under ZBA File # 6154 will be held in abeyance until the waiver to unmerge has been decided. Uniqueness :of Application to unmerge CTM 11: During the hearing, the applicant teZtified that he transferred title in 2005 to CTM 12, an improved lot. CTM 12 is 44,174 square feet (1.01 acres), there was no attempt to create a lot line change to add square footage to CTM 11, before the sale of CTM 12. The Zoning Board finds that, pursuant to Resolution No. 2008-950 adopted by the Southold Town Board on October 21, 2008, amending the Zoning Code Waiver ProVisions of the Town of Southold Merger Law, Section 280-11, the applicant's r~quest for a waiver is denied for the following reasons: Page 3 - January 22, 2009 ZBA # 6207 - Henry Traendly CTM 31-14-11 1. The waiver would recognize a lot that is not comparable in size to the majority of the improved lots in the area because an analysis of the immediate area indicates the following: Tax Lot 1000-31-14-12, with which the subject lot CTM 11 is merged, is 44,174 square feet (1.01 acres) and is improved with a home. Tax Lot 1000-31-14-11, the subject property, is .16 of an acre and is improved with a garage. · Tax Lot 1000-31-14 -10 is .20 of an acre, improved with a home. · Tax Lot 1000-31-14-14 is .28 of an acre, improved with a home. · Tax Lot 1000-31-14-9 is .49 of an acre, improved with a home. · Tax Lot 1000-31-14-13 is .51 of an acre, improved with a home. · Tax Lot 1000-31-14-15 is .47 of an acre, improved with a home. · Tax Lot 1000-31-14-8.1 is .49 of an acre, improved with a home. · Tax kot 1000-31-14-8.2 is .46 of an acre, improved with a home. · Tax Lot 1000-31-14-7 is 1.6 acres, improved with a home. Across the Main Road at District 1000 Section 31 Block 5 are: · Tax Lot 1000-31-5 10.2 is 1.75 acres, improved with a home. · Tax Lot 1000-31-5-9.1 is .58 of an acre, improved with a small structure. · Tax Lot 1000-31-5-8.1 is .87 of an acre, improved with a home. This analysis indicates 12 properties within the immediate area, six of which are three times larger in area than the subject property. Also, one is five (5) Page 4 - January 22, 2009 ZBA ii 6207 - Henry Traendly CTM 31-14-11 times large} than the subject property, and two others are ten (10) times larger than.;~he subject property. 2. The waiver would recognize a lot that is not vacant. The evidence shows it had not been treated and maintained as a separate and independent resident lot since the date of its original creation and the evidence shows in fact that it is improved by an accessory building. 3. The proposed waiver and recognition will create an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district because: a. CTM 11 is very narrow and impacts both parcels on either side. b. The neighborhood consists of many one-half acre lots and larger lots. ! c. Construction on this property will impact the fragile nature of this area to include Dam Pond and Orient Harbor, reference May 10, 2007 letter' issued by the Town LWRP Coordinator to the Town Trustees confirming inconsistency under Chapter 268 Waterfront Consistency Review, Southold Town Code, and standards of Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP) Policy Standards. RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD: In considering all of the above factors and applying the balancing test under Town Code Chapter 280, Article II, motion was offered by Member Oliva, seconded by Chairman Goehringer, and duly carried, to DENY the waiver as applied. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Goehringer (Chairman), Oliva, Dinizio, Simon and Weisman. This Resolution was duly adopted (5-0). R'~ITH D. OLIVA, VICE CHAIRWOMAN Approved for Filing 2/<~ /2009 APPEAl~S BOARD MEMBERS Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Ruth D. Oliva James Dinizio, Jr. Michael A. Simon Leslie Kanes Weisman http://southoldtown.northfork.net ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809 · Fax (631) 765-9064 Mailing Addmss: 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 FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS, AND DETERMINATION (MAS) MEETING OF JANUARY 22, 2009 ZBA FILE it 6233 - Ronald and Patricia Zito, Applicants PROPERTY LOCATION: 1185 Bungalow Lane, Mattituck CTM 1000-123-3-16 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 further steps under SEQRA. PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: The subject property is a 17,476 square foot parcel measuring 65 feet along Bungalow Lane to the west, 282.61 feet along the southern boundary, 69.41feet along Deep Hole Creek to the north, and 260.46 feet along the northern boundary. The lot is improved with a single-family house, an accessory cottage and garage, as shown on the July 3, 2008 survey prepared by Stanley J. Isaksen, Jr. L.S. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Request for a Variance under Section 280-124, based on the Building Inspector's August 25, 2008 Notice of Disapproval concerning an as-built shower addition set back less 10 feet in a side yard, and a total side yard setback of less than 25 feet. Findings of Fact RELIEF REQUESTED: The applicant seeks permission for a 22 foot total setback consequent to the addition of a 6' x 10.9' extension to an existing porch and removal of a shed and 4 foot shower. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Applicant commenced the construction of a porch extension on the east side of the house without a building permit, which was denied because of insufficient side setbacks. The applicant has responded to the Building Department's disapproval by proposing to eliminate the west side setback violation by removing a shower and shed. Page 2 - January 22, 2009 ZBA # 6233 - Ronald Zito CTM 123-3-16 The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on January 8, 2009, at which time written and oral evidence was presented. REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: On the basis of testimony presented, materials submitted and personal inspections, the Board makes the following findings: 1. Town Law Section 267-b(3)(b)(1). Grant of the variance will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. Adding a 6' x 10.9' (10.5') addition to the existing 10.3' x 10.5' screened porch on the east side of the house will be compensated by the removal of a shed and shower on the west. 2. Town Law Section 267-b(3)(b)(2). The benefit of an enlarged porch cannot be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance. 3. Town Law Section 267-b(3)(b)(3). The proposed variance is not substantial. Removal of the shed and shower on the west side of the house will bring the west side setback into conformity and create a total side yard of setback of 22 feet. 4. Town Law Section 267-b(3)(b)(5). The difficulty was self- created. 5. Town Law Section 267-b(3)(b)(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. 6. Town Law Section 267-b. 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 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, a motion was offered by Member Simon, seconded by Member Weisman, and duly carried, to GRANT the variance as applied for, as shown on Map A-1 prepared July 9, 2008 by Mark K. Schwartz, A.I.A. and stamped "Final Map Reviewed by ZBA" with hand notations and July 3, 2008 survey prepared by Stanley J. Isaksen, Jr., subject to the following condition: Page 3 January 22, 2009 ZBA # 6233 -/~ onald Zito CTM 123-3-16 Removal of the shower and shed on the west side of the dwelling. That the above condition be written into the Building Inspector's Certificate of Occupancy, when issued. 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. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Goehringer (Chairman), Oliva, Dinizio, Simon, and Weisman. This Resolution was duly adopted (5-0). Ruth D. Oliva, Vice Chairwoman 1/.03,/2009 Approved for Filing