The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About6595 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 FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2012 OC? 2 3 ZBA FILE: 6595 NAME OF APPLICANT: Solution East LLC PROPERTY LOCATION: 1060 2~d Street (comer King Street) New Suffolk, NY SCTM: 1000-117-7-25 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 17, 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 Applicant's property is a 6,642 sq. fi. parcel in the R-40 Zone. The northerly lot line measures 101.35 feet along an adjacent parcel. The easterly lot line measures 65.51 feet along another parcel. The southerly lot line measures 101.22 feet along King St., and the westerly lot line measures 65.51 feet along 2nd. Street. The parcel is a comer lot and has two front yards. The property is improved with a single family dwelling, as shown with proposed new construction, on the survey drawn by Elizabeth Thompson, Architect, dated June 22, 2012. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Request for Variances from Article XXIII Code Section 280-124, based on an application for building permit and the Building Inspector's August 9, 2012, amended August 30, 2012 Notice of Disapproval concerning proposed addition and alteration to a single family dwelling, at; 1) less than the code required front yard setback of 35 feet for both front yards on this comer lot, 2) more than the code permitted lot coverage of 20% maximum. RELIEF REQUESTED: The Applicant requests two variances to construct a porch/deck addition with one front yard setback of 16.58 feet, and the other front yard setback of 14.75 feet, where Code requires a 35 feet setback. The Applicant also requests a variance for proposed lot coverage of 21%, where Code allows 20%.. FiNDINGS OF FACT/REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on October 4, 2012, at which time written and oral evidence were presented. Based upon all testimony, documentation, personal inspection of the property Page 2 of 3 October 18, 2012 ZBA File#6595 Solution East LLC CTM: 1000-11%7-25 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). Grant of the variances will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. This long established residential neighborhood has many buildings with non-conforming setbacks from the streets. The non-conforming front yard setback on 2"d.st.is pre- existing, and will not be changed. A wrap around porch is customary to many single family dwellings, and the porch will enhance the appearance of the building and also the neighborhood at this comer street location. 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 two non-conforming front yard setbacks on 2nd St. and on King St. are pre-existing, and therefore any construction in those areas requires variances. 3. Town Law §267-b{3)(b)(3). The variances granted herein are mathematically substantial; representing +54% variance relief from the Code required 35 feet for the front yard setback on 2nd. St., and +53% relief from the Code required setback of 35 feet for the front yard setback on King St. However, the non-conforming setback on 2nd St. is pre-existing, and will not be reduced by the porch construction. The non-conforming setback on King St. is also pre-existing, and although the proposed porch will further reduce this setback as it is measured to the lot line, a 16.7 foot area of grass remains in what functionally operates as the applicant's side yard and which is screened from the street by an existing mature hedgerow. 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 property has an established hedgerow on the lot line along most of King St. and along the length of the easterly lot line. The Applicant must comply with Chapter 236 of the Town's Storm Water Management Code. The Applicant will comply with ali of the conditions stated below. 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 additions and alterations, 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 Homing, seconded by Member Weisman (Chairperson), and duly carried, to GRANT, the variances as applied for, and shown on the site plan submitted by Elizabeth Thompson, Architect, and dated June 22, 2012 as amended and attached to an e mail from Elizabeth Thompson RA dated October 11,2012 to show the relocation of the outdoor shower from the side yard to the proposed open deck, and architectural drawings by Elizabeth Thompson RA dated 6/22/12 an labeled first floor plan, second floor plan, roof plan, north elevation (amended to remove the outdoor shower),east elevation, south and west elevations. CONDITIONS~ 1. The Applicant will install a silt fence and hay bales along the work area adjoining the adjacent northern property to contain all soils and debris on site. 2. The Applicant will comply with the asbestos removal regulations in New York State per copy of same received by the Zoning Board dated October 1 I, 2012. That the above conditions be written into the Building Inspector's Certificate of Occupancy, when issued. Page 3 of 3 October 18,2012 ZBA File#6595 - Solution East LLC CTM: 1000-117-7-25 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 ora building permit, and may require a new application and public hearing before the Zoning Board of Appeals. Any deviation from the variance(~9 granted herein as shown on the architectural drmvings, 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 .[&ature of the subject properiy that may violate the Zoning Code, other than such uses, setbackx and other features as are expressly addressed in this action. The Board reserves the right to substitute a similar dest~n that is de minimis in nature for an alteration that does not increase the degree of nonconformity. I~ole of the Board; Ayes: Members Weisman (Chairperson), Dinizio, Schneider, Horning Absent was, Member Goehringer This Resolution was duly adopted (4-0). Les te anes Welsman, Chairperson Approved for filing //9/,2--~ /2012