HomeMy WebLinkAbout6505 BOARD MEMBERS
Leslie Kanes Weisman, Chairperson
James Dinizio, Jn
Gerard P. Goehringer
George Homing
Ken Schneider
Southold Town Hall
53095 Main Road · P.O. Box 1179
Southold, NY 11971-0959
Office Location.:
Town Annex/First Floor, Capital One Bank
54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue)
Southold, NY 11971
http://southoldtown.northfork.net
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS q_ RE'C£1VEs') L0, ,/--_.
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD 92 011 '
Tel. (631) 765-1809 · Fax (631) 765-9064 NO
FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION ~j,~a/~. ~
MEETING OF NOVEMBER 3,2011 $outholcl Town Clerk
ZBA FILE: 6505
NAME OF APPLICANT: John J. and Joy E. Gallagher
PROPERTY LOCATION: 700 Bayview Drive (adj. to Spring Pond), East Marion, NY SCTM#1000-37-5-4
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 August 2, 2011 stating that this application is considered a matter for local determination as there
appears to be no significant county-wide or inter-community impact.
LWRP: This application was referred for reviewed under Chapter 268, Waterfront Consistency review of the
Town of Southold Town Code and the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP) Policy Standards. The
LWRP Coordinator issued his reply dated September 26, 2011, based upon the information provided on the LWRP
Consistency Assessment Form submitted to this department, as well as the records available to us, it is our
recommendation that the proposed action is CONSISTENT with LWRP policy standards and therefore is
CONSISTENT with the LWRP, provided the following best management practices are followed; a 10 foot
landscaped buffer landward of the wetlands and gutters and leaders into drywells.
PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: The subject parcel is vacant and consists of 5,870 sq. ft. It has 14.30 feet
of frontage on Bayview Drive, 152.49 feet on the east property line, 75.67 feet on Spring Pond and 127.51 feet on
the west property line as shown on the survey prepared by Nathan Taft Corwin, 111, LS dated July 19, 2011, (added
proposed garage).
BASIS OF APPLICATION: Request for Variance from Article II1 Code Section 280-13 based on an application
for building permit to build an accessory building on a vacant lot, and the Building Inspector's July 20, 2011
Notice of Disapproval stating that an accessory building is not permitted on a vacant lot (without a
principal dwelling).
RELIEF REQUESTED: The applicant proposes to construct an accessory garage 16'X24' with attached 9'X16"
deck on a vacant lot, without a principal dwelling, where the code requires accessory structures shall be accessory
to a principal use.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Several neighbors appeared at the public hearing to object to the requested
variance and several letters were received against the application. The applicant was asked to bring the proposal
into more conformity with the code by placing the garage on his dwelling lot or merging the two lots, which he
declined saying that it would use up too much of his front yard and he did not want to merge the two lots for the
purpose of building a garage.
Page 2 of 2 - November 3, 201 !
ZBA File/t6505 - Gallagher
CTM: 1000-37-5-4
FINDINGS OF FACT/REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION:
The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on October 6, 20l 1, at which time written
and oral evidence were presented. Based upon all testimony, documentation, personal inspection of the property
and surrounding neighborhood, and other evidence, the Zoning Board finds the following facts to be true and
relevant and makes the following findings:
1. Town Law §267-b(3)(b)(1). Granting of the requested variance will produce an undesirable change in the
character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. There are no parcels in this neighborhood,
which contains an accessory structure that is not an accessory to a principal dwelling. What the applicant proposes
is uncharacteristic of the neighborhood.
2. Town Law §267-b(3}(b)(2). The benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by methods feasible for the
applicant to pursue that would require either no variances, or substantially less requested relief from the code
requirements. The Applicant is able to place the proposed garage on his house lot, which is adjacent to this vacant
lot or they could merge the two parcels together.
3. Town Law §267-b(3)(b)(3). The variance, if granted herein, would be substantial. The request represents a
100% relaxation of the code.
4. Town Law §267-b(3)(b)(4) Evidence has been submitted to suggest that a variance in this residential
community will have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood. The
applicant stated that he intends to use the accessory structure to pursue his hobby of growing oysters on 10 acres of
leased underwater land. Very little evidence was presented by the applicant to convince the Board that this kind of
activity would not cause odors that are inherent in the production of shell fishing over and above what might be
considered harvesting oysters for personal consumption.
5. Town Law §267-b(3)(b)(5). The difficulty has been self-created. The applicant purchased the parcel after the
Zoning code was in effect and it is presumed that the applicant had actual or constructive knowledge of the
limitations on the use of this parcel under the Zoning code in effect at the time of purchase.
6. Town Law §267-b. Denial of the requested relief is the minimum action necessary and adequate to preserve
and protect the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety, and welfare of the community.
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD: In considering all of the above factors and applying the balancing test under
New York Town Law 267-B, motion was offered by Member Dinizio, seconded by Member Goehringer, and duly
carried, to;
DENY, as applied for, and shown on the survey prepared by Nathan Taft Corwin, III, LS dated July 19, 201 I,
(added proposed garage).
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 rightto 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 ~Veisman (Chairperson), Goehringer, Dinizio, Homing.
(Absent was: Member Schneider) This' Resolution was duly adopted (4-0).
'~e~siie Kanes Weisman,. Chairperson
Approved for filing /[ /~l/2011