The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About6544 BOARD MEMBERS Leslie Kanes Weisman, Chairperson James Dinizio, Jr. 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 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809 ° Fax (631) 765-9064 Rr, £IVED 2 2 2012 FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETER/YIINATION NAME OF APPLICANT: Roma Baran PROPERTY LOCATION: 395 Tuthill Rd., Southold, NY SCTM# 1000-55-04-03 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 COLrNTY 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 February 28, 2012 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: The relief, permit, or interpretation requested in this application is listed under the Minor Actions exempt list and is not subject to review under Chapter 268. PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: The subject parcel is 32,670 square feet (taken from ZBA application), it has 125 feet of road frontage along Tuthill Road (western property line), the northern property lines consist of two courses, 234.99 feet and 54.66 feet. The southern property line is 212 feet and the eastern property line (rear lot line) is 112.64 feet. The parcel is improved with a one-story frame dwelling with subject existing deck addition, a pool and a barn, as shown on the Site Plan section of the Deck Replacement Plan, Sheet A-l, dated 11/18/2011, prepared by Ira Haspel, R.A. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Request for Variance from Article XXIII Section 280-124 and the Building Inspector's January l 7, 2012 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for building permit to construct a deck addition to existing single family dwelling: 1) less than the code required minimum rear yard setback of 50 feet. RELIEF REQUESTED: The applicant requests a variance for a 25 foot rear yard setback to a proposed reconstruction and remodeling of an existing deck, as shown on the Site Plan section of the Deck Replacement Plan, Sheet A-l, dated 11/18/2011, prepared by Ira Haspel, R.A. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The subject existing deck addition has a C.O., Z-23502, dated February 16, 1995. FINDINGS OF FACT/REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on March 1, 2012, at which time written and oral evidence were presented. Based upon all testimony, documentation, personal inspection of the property Page 2 of ~1.- March 15, 2012 ZBA Fileg6544 - Baran CTM: 1000-55-4-3 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)(l). Grant of the variance will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. A dwelling with a rear yard deck addition is characteristic of this residential neighborhood. There was no opposition for the requested variance from adjoining and nearby property owners. 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 rear of the dwelling and the existing deck exist within a nonconforming rear yard setback, therefore any proposed remodeling or reconstruction of this existing deck will require an area variance. 3. Town Law §267-b(3)(b)(3). The variance granted herein is mathematically substantial, representing 50% relief from the code. However, the proposed reconstruction and remodeling will not create a new nonconformance and the proposed reconstruction and remodeling will reduce the area of the deck addition by 64 square feet. 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. 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 the parcel under the Zoning Code in effect prior to or at the time of purchase. 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 the remodeling and reconstruction of an existing deck addition while preserving and protecting the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community. RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD: In considering all of the above factors and applying the balancing test under New York Town Law 267-B, motion was offered by Member Schneider, seconded by Member Weisman (Chairperson), and duly carried, to GRANT, the variance as applied for, and shown on the Site Plan section and other details of the Deck Replacement Plan, Sheet A-l, dated 11/18/2011, prepared by Ira Haspel, R.A. 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(s) granted herein as shown on the architectural drawings, site plan and/or survey cited above, such as alterations, extensions, or demolitions, 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 Weisman (Chairperson), Goehringer, Schneider, Dinizio, Horning. This Resolution was duly adopted~(5-O). Leslie Kanes Weisman, Chairperson Approved for filing,.~ /~ /2012