The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About6524 BOARD MEMBERS Leslie Kanes Weisman, Chairperson James Dinizio, Jr. Gerard E Goehringer George Homing Ken Schneider http://southoldtown.northfork.net ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809 · Fax (631) 765-9064 Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road · RO. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 Office Location: Town Annex/First Floor, Capital One Bank 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) Southold, NY 11971 FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERI~INATION MEETING OF JANUARY 5, 2012 ZBA FILE: 6524 NAME OF APPLICANT: Richard G. and Norma M, Moeller SCTM# 1000-21-02-15 PROPERTY LOCATION: 1155 Aquaview Ave. (adj. to Long Island Sound), East Marion, NY 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 Nov. 16, 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 DETERMINATION: This application was referred for review 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 a recommendation dated November 29, 2011, based upon the recommendation, as well as the records available to us, it is the Board's determination that the proposed action is INCONSISTENT with the LWRP. The following best management practices are recommended: 1. require the creation of a landscaped buffer from the top of bluff line landward to the Coastal Erosion Hazard Line, 2. require the installation of drywells to capture run-off from all impervious surfaces. PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: The subject parcel is improved with a one story frame dwelling, deck and a stairway from the top of bluff area to the bottom of bluff for access to the Long Island Sound beach. The parcel is 13,831 square feet with 60 feet of road frontage along Aquaview Ave., 42+/- feet along the Long Island Sound, 300+/- feet along the eastern property line and 280+/~ feet along its western property line, as shown on the survey prepared by Michael K. Wicks, L.S. dated Sept. 28, 2009. Page 2 of 4- January 5, 2012 ZBA File#6524 - Mo¢ller CTM: 1000-21-2-15 BASIS OF APPLICATION: - Request for Variances from Art. XXII Section 280-116A(1) and Article XXIII Section 280-124 and the Building Inspector's November 1,2011 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for building permit for as built deck addition, at; 1) less than code required 100 foot setback from top of bluff, 2) less than the code required side yard setback of 10 feet. RELIEF REQUESTED: The applicant proposes to maintain the subject 16'x14' deck constructed under a 1985 building permit #14245Z (C.O. #Z13839) and reconstructed in 2009 without the required building permit(s), thus subjecting the deck reconstruction to the "as-built" status requiring area variances for; 1) a 27 foot setback from the top of bluff where the Code requires a 100 foot setback, 2) an approximately 6 foot (5.83 feet) side yard setback where the Code requires 10 feet. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: A letter dated November 22, 2011 from Suffolk County Soil and Water referencing a site inspection of the subject parcel concluded that" Overall the deck is not having a significant impact on the stability of the bluff. Approximately half of the impervious area could be contributing runoff toward the bluffedge but the bluff is currently well stabilized and not showing any signs of erosion." Suffolk County Soil and Water made the following recommendations: a drywell be installed to accept the runoff from the downspout on the northwest corner of the dwelling, there are two downspouts on the east side of the dwelling out letting directly onto the adjacent property, drywells for these two down spouts would eliminate impacting the neighboring property. FINDINGS OF FACT/REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on December 1,2011 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 variances will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The deck was constructed in 1985 and exists in its 2009 reconstructed as-built status without creating any undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or detriment to nearby properties. Waterside decks with non-conforming setbacks from the bluff exist in this neighborhood. The applicant's deck is not visible from the street and is well-screened by landscaping and vegetation from the adjoining neighbors property. 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. The deck legally existed in a nonconforming location and was reconstructed without a building permit subjecting the reconstructed deck to an as-built status in a nonconforming location which then requires the requested variances. Page 3 of 4- January 5, 2012 ZBA File#6524 - Moeller CTM: 1000-21-2-15 3. Town Law §267-b{3}{b}{3}. The variances granted herein are both mathematically substantial. The 27 foot "top of bluff' setback requires a 73% relaxation of the code required 100 foot setback and the 5.83 foot side yard setback requires a 42% relaxation of the code required 10 feet. The substantiality of the granted variances are mitigated by the acknowledgement that the subject deck legally existed under permit #14245Z (C.O. #Z13839), was reconstructed in place and in kind and does not create any new nonconformance or increase the degree of nonconformance with regard to the regulations pertaining to the subject deck. 4. 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. The letter from Suffolk County Soil and Water dated November 22, 2011 indicated that "The bluff face is well established with vegetation and there are currently no signs of any significant erosion at the site. 5. Town Law §267-b{3}(b}{5}. The difficulty has been self-created. The applicant reconstructed the subject deck without the benefit of acquiring a building permit. 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 reconstructing a 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 Schneider, seconded by Member Goehringer, and duly carried, to GRANT~ the variance as applied for, and shown on the Survey of the subject parcel prepared by Michael K. Wicks, L.S. dated Sept. 28, 2009, and the Architectural Drawings, sheets A-l, A-2, A-3 prepared by Mark S. Advocat, R.A. dated 05/20/08, revision dated 08/10/09 Conditions: 1. Create a 5 foot wide Landscaped Buffer, as defined in Section 268-3, from the top of the bluff line landward towards the Coastal Erosion Hazard Line for the width of the parcel. 2. Install drywells for all downspouts on the dwelling as per Suffolk County Soil and Water and LWRP recommendations. That the above conditions be written into the Building Inspector's Certificate of Occupancy, when issued Any deviation from the survey, site plan and/or architectural drawings cited in this decision will result in delays and/or a possible denial by the Building Department of a building permit, and may require a new application and public hearing before the Zoning Board of Appeals. 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. Page 4 of 4- January 5, 2012 ZBA File#6524 - Moeller CTM: I000-21-2-15 Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Weisman (Chairperson), Goehringer, Schneider, Din£zio, Horning. This Resolution was duly adopted (5-0), Leslie Kanes Weisman, Chairperson Approved for filing / / /O /2012