Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout6732 BOARD MEMBERS OF SOUL Southold Town Hall Leslie Kanes Weisman,Chairperson y>� h'� 53095 Main Road•P.O.Box 1179 �� l0 Southold,NY 11971-0959 Eric Dames # Office Location: Gerard P.Goehringer H ar Town Annex/First Floor,Capital One Bank els George Horning 54375 Main Road(at Youngs Avenue) Kenneth Schneider IyCOO Southold,NY 11971 http://southoldtown.northfork.net RECEIVED _y ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD APP 2 5 2014 Tel.(631)765-1809•Fax(631)765-9064 � So old Town Clerk FINDINGS,DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF APRIL 17,2014 ZBA FILE: 6732 NAME OF APPLICANT: John Corbley SCTM#1000-104-7-3 PROPERTY LOCATION: 680 Mason Drive(adj.to Haywater Cove), Cutchogue,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 February 25, 2014 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 April 2, 2014. 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. PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: Subject property is located in the R40 zone district and is non-conforming containing 24,831 sq. ft. It is improved with a two story single family dwelling with a front porch and accessory shed. It has 75.34 feet of frontage on Mason Drive, 324.89 feet along the eastern property line, 77.50 feet on Haywater Cove and 337.28 feet along the western property line as shown on the survey prepared by Nathan Taft Corwin, III, LS dated August 12, 2005 last revised January 29, 2014. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Request for Variances from Article XXII Section 280-116B and Article III Section 280-15 and the Building Inspector's November 12, 2013, Updated February 4, 2014 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for building permit for deck addition to existing single family dwelling, at; 1) less than the code required bulkhead setback of 75 feet, 2)upon completion of proposed deck addition existing accessory shed will be in location other than the code required rear yard. RELIEF REQUESTED: The applicant requests variances to construct a rear deck addition at 58 feet from the bulkhead where the code requires 75 feet and upon construction the accessory shed will end up partially in the side yard where the code requires a rear yard location or in the cases of waterfront properties accessories may be placed in the front yard provided they meet the principal front yard setback. Page 2 of 3-April 17,2014 ZBA#6732—Corbley SCTM#1000-104-7-3 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: During the hearing, the applicant indicated that his house was subjected to excessive flooding during Super Storm Sandy. As a result, the applicant obtained a building permit to raise the home to FEMA regulations. Prior to this change in elevation, the exit out of the rear doors was at grade onto a blue stone patio. Due to the raising of the dwelling, the rear doors are now approximately four foot above grade, thus necessitating either an elevated deck or a set of steps. Additionally, the applicant submitted the approved permit from the NYSDEC. This property received a prior variance under ZBA decision#6119 in 2008 for a reduced single side yard to 9.8 feet and total combined side yard setback of 24.5 feet. The proposed deck addition has a conforming single side yard and the combined side yards is more than the 24.5 feet granted under ZBA file#6119. FINDINGS OF FACT/REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on April 3, 2014 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). Grant of the variance will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The subject property and two other nearby properties are adjacent to dug canals which lead to each property owner's rear yard, creating non-conforming rear yard setbacks of less than the code required 75 feet. The proposed deck addition is on the rear of the dwelling and will not be visible from the road. There are several homes with similar deck setbacks in the subject neighborhood. 2. Town Law 4267-b(3)(b)(2). The benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance. The applicant could use stairs to access an at grade patio. However, for the construction of a deck raised to the existing first floor level of the house, since the house is situated at 75 ft. from the bulkhead, any seaward additions would require a variance. The construction of a new deck will place the existing conforming shed partially in a side yard and therefore requires a variance for this new nonconformity. 3. Town Law &267-b(3)(b)(3). The variances granted herein for the deck addition is mathematically substantial, representing 22.6% relief from the code for the setback from the bulkhead. However, the proposed deck will replace an on grade patio, which is to be removed, and is reasonable and functional when considering that the house had to be raised due to excessive flooding. The shed in a side yard location represents 100% relief. However, only half of the shed will be placed in the side yard due to the deck construction,and the subject shed has existed in its location for many years without any adverse conditions. 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 applicant must comply with Chapter 236 of the Town's Storm Water Management Code. 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. However, the difficulty is not self-created when considering that the applicant raised the elevation of his house because of damage caused by a storm that affected the entire eastern seaboard, and that an at grade patio is likely to be affected by flood damage in the future. 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 new first floor deck and placement of an existing shed partially in the side yard while preserving and protecting the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community. Page 3 of 3-April 17,2014 ZBA#6732—Corbley SCTM#1000-104-7-3 RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD: In considering all of the above factors and applying the balancing test under New York Town Law 267-13, motion was offered by Member Goehringer, seconded by Member Weisman (Chairperson), and duly carried to; GRANT, the variances as applied for and as shown on the survey prepared by Nathan Taft Corwin, III, LS dated August 12, 2005 last revised January 29, 2014 and per the plans prepared by Mark Schwartz, Architect dated received by the ZBA February 12, 2014 sheets A-1-3. Subject to the following conditions; CONDITIONS: 1. All storm water runoff from this home and discharge of water from the existing hot tub shall be placed in dry wells as required by Chapter 236 of the Town Law. 2. The proposed deck shall remain unenclosed. 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 buildingpermit, 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 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 Weisman (Chairperson), Horning, Goehringer, Dames, Member Schneider abstained. This Resolution was duly adopted(4-1). Leslie Kanes Weisman, Chairperson Approved for filing C� /1), /2014