Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1000-117.-10-19OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY 11971 MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Telephone: 631 765-1938 Fax: 631765-3136 LOCAL WATERFRONT REVITALIZATION PROGRAM TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MEMORANDUM To: Leslie Weisman, Chair Members of the Zoning Board of Appeals From: Mark Terry, Principal Planner LWRP Coordinator Date: July 1, 2014 Re: Coastal Consistency Review for ZBA File Ref NICOLAS DE CROISSET #6762 SCTM#1000-117-10-19 NICOLAS DE CROISSET #6762 - Request for Variances from Article XXIII Section 280-124 and Article XXII Section 280-116 and the Building Inspector's January 13, 2014, amended/renewed April 22, 2014 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for building permit for demolition of an existing single family dwelling and construction of a new single family dwelling, at; 1) less than the code required front yard setback of 35 feet, 2) less than the code required bulkhead setback of 75 feet, located at: 20 Third Street (adj. to Great Peconic Bay) New Suffolk, NY. SCTM# 1000-117-10-19 The proposed action has been reviewed to Chapter 268, Waterfront Consistency Review of the Town of Southold Town Code and the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP) Policy Standards. Based upon the information provided on the LWRP Consistency Assessment Form submitted to this department, as well as the records available to me, it is my recommendation that the proposed actions are CONSISTENT with the LWRP policies and therefore CONSISTENT with the LWRP. Policy 4.1. Minimize losses of human life and structures from flooding and erosion hazards includes the following sub -policy. 3. Move existing development and structures as far away from flooding and erosion hazards as practical. Maintaining existing development and structures in hazard areas may be warranted for: C. sites where relocation of an existing structure is not practical. The majority of the subject parcel is located within the FEMA flood zone VE and the remainder is located within the AE flood zone (see Figure 1. below). The recommendation was made considering the following: 1. Due to the size of the lot (0.225 acres) there is no ability to relocate the structure with adequate on- site sanitary systems outside of the VE (velocity hazard) flood zone. 2. The first floor elevation of the dwelling will be raised to 14.0' N. A. V. D. to mitigate storm surge/flooding impacts. Figure 1. Subject parcel. Pursuant to Chapter 268, the Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals shall consider this recommendation in preparing its written determination regarding the consistency of the proposed action. Cc: Stephen Kier' Assistant Town Attorney Office Location: Town Annex /First Floor, Capital One Bank 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) Southold, NY 11971 June 3, 2014 SO(/ry� �4UNV http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809 Fax (631) 765-9064 Mark Terry, Principal Planner LWRP Coordinator Planning Board Office Town of Southold Town Hall Annex Southold, NY 11971 MTtLR Mailing Address: 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 Re: ZBA File Ref. No. #6762 DE CROISSET, NICOLAS P00-117-10-19 Dear Mark: We have rec 'ved an application for demolition an construction of a single family dwelling. A c y of the Building Inspector's Noti of Disapproval under Chapter 280 (Zoning Code), d survey map, project descripti form, are attached for your reference. Your written eval tion with recommendati s for this proposal, as required under the Code procedures o WRP Section 268-5D s requested within 30 days of receipt of this letter. Thank you. Very truly yours, Leslie 9. Wei IN FORM NO. 3 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT P6 PO ;S_V1` SOUTHOLD, N.Y. f / NOTICE OF DISAPPROVALa- DATE: January 4 AMENDED & RENEWED: April 22, 2014 TO: Boeckman Building Construction Corp. (DeCroisset) PO Box 1453 Mattituck, NY 11952 Please take notice that your application dated December 23, 2014 For permit for demolition of an existing single family dwelling and construction of a new single family dwelling at Location of property: 20 Third Street, New Suffolk, NY County Tax Map No. 1000 —Section 117 Block 10 Lot 19 Is returned herewith and disapproved on the following grounds: The proposed construction on this non -conforming 11 105 square foot parcel in the Residential R-40 District is not permitted pursuant to Article XXIII Section 280-124 which states that lots measuring less than 20,000 square feet in total size require a minimum front yard setback of 35 feet is required. Following the proposed construction the single family dwelling will have a front yard setback of 9.3 feet. In addition the proposed construction is not permitted, pursuant to Article XXII Section 280-116B, which states; "All buildings located on lots upon which a bulkhead concrete wall riprap or similar structure exists and which are adjacent to tidal water bodies other than sounds shall be set back not less than seventy - 4— (7Gl -F--f -F— 4h< hnllnc�.ar� " Cc: File, ZBA Fee: $ Filed By: Assignment No. APPLICATION TO THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS AREA VARIANCE House No.ZtStreet �/,pj, , 0n5,gL Hamlet A4—CkV l'1lF�U� SCTM 1000 Section f/? B1ock__Z 0Lot(s)19Lot Size f e-74— Zone A�Q I (WE) APPEAL THE WRITTEN DETERMINATION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DATED BASED ON SURVEY/SITE PLAN DATED Applicants)/Owner(s): All a OL,oVs' l%� C"l AE7- Mailing Address: �3� WL�,l',%' .�'�'d I'l" �l'T. S, A4644-1 YAP,t% N -y / d Dl Z Telephone: Q!7 Y&ZAZI Fax: Email:/(/& c,?o1.�r &,&wx , C vy NOTE: In addition to the above, please complete below if application is signed by applicant's attorney, agent, architect, builder, contract vendee, etc. and name of person who agent represents: Name of Representative: /y/3y�,�/ ,Q/124AO,,e for M Owner ( )Other: Telephone:- Zla Fax: Emai1:/yiY/M.4GL2 41/A.. /Z 01V. Nor Please check to specify who you wish correspondence to be mailed to, from the above names: ( ) Applicant/Owner(s), M Authorized Representative, ( ) Other Name/ Address below: WHEREBY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR REVIEWED SURVEY/SITE PLAN DATED and DENIED AN APPLICATION DATED FOR: f Building Permit ( ) Certificate of Occupancy () Pre -Certificate of Occupancy ( ) Change of Use ( ) Permit for As -Built Construction ( ) Other: Provision of the Zoning Ordinance Appealed. (Indicate Article, Section, Subsection of Zoning Ordinance by numbers. Do not quote the code.) Article:XX111/xX /l Section: 2,9,0-1.0 R Subsection: Type of Appeal. An Appeal is made for: pcj A Variance to the Zoning Code or Zoning Map. ( ) A Variance due to lack of access required by New York Town Law- Section 280-A. ( ) Interpretation of the Town Code, Article Section ( ) Reversal or Other A prior appeal W has, () has not been made at any time with respect to this property, UNDER Appeal No(s). 634 Year(s). 2010 . (Please be sure to research before completing this question or call our officefor assistance) / Name of Owner:NlCd[A f � '�' dvl — ZBA File# 1<9-54 REASONS FOR APPEAL (Please be specific, additional sheets may be used with preparer's signature notarized): 1. An undesirable change will not be produced in the CHARACTER of the neighbor or a detriment to nearby properties if granted, because: 69.4,V7"0Y V.OliClJlyrVP W/LL A/OT /9W,00 C9 C114V&Z /& C,yARACA&Z OA "16WAO -040- AA)ZC,6L /1' Z o'Wr,�,d /AIJ AN at1.1E,P .Vagi/- co�vfoi�H>tiG ro�tiav��y, Marr 8v�cr /'�'/ To Zojvr�vG c600• W/zc XA5A-f s>y 1rh&&/)P4k19. ;7AE f'ErOWelk- Ta M"—o Opzg:rA ,q"ox, rH� .rAi>F .�,s- Tyg /.rr�iVG .t vc7v,P�. 1. 1 he oeueiit s ught by the appttcatit OT be achteve y some method feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance, because: jy, ! Or LI.C-iE /WAVY 0.riilfeS !/V .6 iii /f Is PAWAe-M,C,o. r�,� t ��- ,00hs wor ,atc �w .¢ �•eF•4fv' a�a/ O,r OJ'17' eNs X0,2 J'5 AfPeC .lL f7*VCTUI?Z-, G/ V,6/f/ 77V—e t o C47,70AI Off' AWA&R JV6,Di ARU/'4WA J'�,R>7e .fV,070- ,J A INA 3. The amount of relief requested is not substantial because: 7W A',9DNS YAR -P .1;!57VA '1 Z 77.,� 1 .go cle X,-ecw YNS 0&&VQ-WAP 7,0 MA'- PRa)OJT INc/&r-am' s czo JrwwAl -7� PR�J NT C4V. �4' a P&WC14 4. The variance will NOT have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district because: 7h/,,!5 PR,9/&rte j7XUCMW% 1PIAVOYAN ,15ZC-V,0T,P 7-0 CoAlr-ORlY p'O A51 -1A e -V 01 APH0WrS /AOR co�vprRUcp/oN, I�,poGl 1`o J'IJ�,PovNy/NG i✓�>(a�y,�o.�'� 44M517-,4r,41V1&VZ-e 5. Has the alleged difficulty been self created? D< Yes, or { ) No Why: ,ey IPRoforrNG rA�g s,TuC7-0v/* /7.7 1,1"R —WI�Jv, SIM" COnr,40'c,RHIN6 �O e�r�ary Are there any Covenants or Restrictions concerning this land? X No ( ) Yes (please furnish a copy) This is the MINIMUM that is necessary and adequate, and at the same time preserve and protect the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community. -91 Sworn to before me this 1 11 day of MLAM 20_11j,_ o Notary Public CONNIE D. BUNCH Notary Public, State of New York No. 01 BU6185050 Qualified In Suffolk County Commission Expires April 14, ZO ILI 4f: 9T Signature of Applicant or 471 ortzed Agent (Agent must submit written Authorization from Owner) APPLICANT'S PROJECT DESCRIPTION APPLICANT: W0,4461 jZ&, Qrt DATE PREPARED: Jam//6ZD/¢ 1. For Demolition of Existing Building Areas Please describe areas being removed: ,QWY4Qf1Z/WV df 45X&,V" .62 Jhw•s- 0AI, II. New Construction Areas (New Dwelling or New Additions/Extensions): 4/ 6-6-a /) 7'*M /AFL. �Xl ! _ Dimensions of first floor extension: %_ . FTtope' Dimensions of new second floor: AyMn— ? "� 44/— Dimensions of floor above second level: A11A Height (from finished ground to top of ridge): 3% 2 Is basement or lowest floor area being constructed? If yes, please provide height (above ground) measured from natural existing grade to first floor: & 0 III. Proposed Construction Description (Alterations or Structural Changes) (Attach extra sheet if necessary). Please describe building areas: Number of Floors and General Characteristics BEFORE Alterations: Number of Floors and Changes WITH Alterations: IV. Calculations of building areas and lot coverage (from surveyor): l �i �E" 93 TGr'#L ExrJ"Ao&,) Existing square footage of buildings on your property;,ll!/)1/C,• 9q/; Da 0: 91 �' .P/9d1UMA: 42 - Proposed increase of building coverage: 0,642 7h.in ry Square footage of your lot: G Percentage of coverage of your lot by building area: Q, rarA4 V. Purpose of New Construction: -rr A511" f�i1''r� B� i .11 C �L!_T �/✓ .1 'Y. 1�1� GU 11/l✓l� ZAICO "alAl A=,D/Ntz�D,� VI. Please describe the land contours (flat, slope %, heavily wooded, marsh area, etc.) on your land and how it relates to the difficulty in meeting the code requirement (s): sAWL. Y'ay T�-ZM5 xg" /5 mule rip OF ,rLlyny Jl P,0r3* 1/y7,G M&oVGL61� b & M `"p�fs . 4 Please submit 8 sets of photos, labeled to show different angles of yard areas after staking corners for new construction, and photos of building area to be altered with yard view. 4/2012 QUESTIONNAIRE FOR FILING WITH YOUR ZBA APPLICATION A. Is the subject premises listed on the real estate market for sale? Yes _ No B. Are there any proposals to change or alter land contours? No Yes please explain on attached sheet. ► r',E� G IV17VAI Td ,8Z- RWZ)2GD-1-2 /CI�' T o ,*f 7 vl/.1/>�►�1�J•ti 49C' 04E jPM 4A/.D P11r,4NC6 OF .01AM/!3LWO41 A0OIX 7�6 GIrUUNOWA�'�+'P C. 1.) Are there areas that contain sand or wetland grasses?^ Y" 2.) Are those areas shown on the survey submitted with this application? /(/Q 3.) Is the property bulk headed between the wetlands area and the upland building area? Vzr9 4.) If your property contains wetlands or pond areas, have you contacted the Office of the Town trustees for its determination of jurisdiction?J!2C5 Please confirm status of your inquiry or application with the Trustees:&AFA fJ 7:,4 Pf3/ rA7Z J!A&VR 6 and if issued, please attach copies of permit with conditions and approved survey. D. Is there a depression or sloping elevation near the area of proposed construction at or below five feet above mean sea level? Y162 E. Are there any patios, concrete barriers, bulkheads or fences that exist that are not shown on the survey that you are submitting? IV show area of the structures on a diagram if any exist or state none on the above line. F. Do you have any construction taking place at this time concerning your premises? &_If yes, please submit a copy of your building permit and survey as approved by the Building Department and please describe: G. Please attach all pre -certificates of occupancy and certificates of occupancy for the subject premises. If any are lacking, please apply to the Building Department to either obtain them or to obtain an Amended Notice of Disapproval. H. Do you or any co-owner also own other land adjoining or close to this parcel?�� If yes, please label the proximity of your lands on your survey. I. Please list present use or operations conducted at this parcel Ar 'A L and the proposed use (ex: existing single family, proposed: same with garage, pool or other) Aut orized signature and Date QUESTIONNAIRE FOR FILING WITH YOUR ZBA APPLICATION A. Is the subject premises listed on the real estate market for sale? Yes _)( No B. Are there any proposals to change or alter land contours? No Yes please explain on attached sheet.�QzE" ► ,,P P',EC IVIYVoV Ta' $� Rirl%1�0�-2 ICf' T o H p'H/•t/1/"1�/H BU Y p6PjV 4A/P A1VrA V C,6 Ar D/P're1.6 r1,0 V A04L ' 7"6 CWT O POW GVA?e C. 1.) Are there areas that contain sand or wetland grasses? Y162 2.) Are those areas shown on the survey submitted with this application? AA0 3.) Is the property bulk headed between the wetlands area and the upland building area? Vff.9 4.) If your property contains wetlands or pond areas, have you contacted the Office of the Town trustees for its determination of jurisdiction? YDS Please confirm status of your inquiry or application with the Trustees:&-ZkeJT 4RA/MAA/ pFaynlA/G and if issued, please attach copies of permit with conditions and approved survey. D. Is there a depression or sloping elevation near the area of proposed construction at or below five feet above mean sea level? ZEES E. Are there any patios, concrete barriers, bulkheads or fences that exist that are not shown on the survey that you are submitting?/V_0 Please show area of the structures on a diagram if any exist or state none on the above line. F. Do you have any construction taking place at this time concerning your premises? &0 If yes, please submit a copy of your building permit and survey as approved by the Building Department and please describe: G. Please attach all pre -certificates of occupancy and certificates of occupancy for the subject premises. If any are lacking, please apply to the Building Department to either obtain them or to obtain an Amended Notice of Disapproval. H. Do you or any co-owner also own other land adjoining or close to this parcel?�� If yes, please label the proximity of your lands on your survey. I. Please list present use or operations conducted at this parcel ArJ6 Z�,�y and the proposed use (ex: existing single family, proposed: same with garage, pool or other) Authorized signature and Date FORM NO. 4 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT Town Clerk's Office Southold, N. Y. Certificate Of Occupancy NoZ71 .... Date ............Aub..... 2?+ 19.?6 19 THIS CERTIFIES that the building located at E/S Third, St Co). bay. Street Map No...Xxx ..... Block No.. xxx.....Lot No. xxx New. Suffolk conforms substantially to the Application for Building Permit heretofore filed in this office dated ...... : Uu Y. 19 75. pursuant to which Building Permit No. dated ............JULY... 1 1�.. , 19.7 �. , was issued, and conforms to all of the require- ments of the applicable provisions of the law. The occupancy for which this certificate is issued is ..N—CBusiness building (Fishing Station) The certificate is issued to ..NeWtOn , ]ROA -315... , . QVM9z ............ , , , , , ........ (owner, lessee or tenant) of the aforesaid building. R. Suffolk County Department. of Health Approval ...N.... . ...................... . UNDERWRITERS CERTIFICATE No. N . R ........... , HOUSE NUMBER . ?9....... Street .. Third. St ... New. Suffolk ........... ................ ...........................,... .......................... a . Building Inspector C v Town of Southold Annex 1/20/2012 54375 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY No: 35400 Date: 1/20/2012 THIS CERTIFIES that the building ELECTRICAL Location of Property: 20 Third St, New Suffolk, SCTM #: 473889 Sec/Block/Lot: 117.40-19 Subdivision: Filed Map No. Lot No. conforms substantially to the Application for Building Permit heretofore filed in this officed dated 1/1/1900 pursuant to which Building Permit No. 36933 dated 1/20/2012 was issued, and conforms to all of the requirements of the applicable provisions of the law. The occupancy for which this certificate is issued is: underground electric service. The certificate is issued to De Croisset, Nicholas (OWNER) of the aforesaid building. SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH APPROVAL ELECTRICAL CERTIFICATE NO. PLUMBERS CERTIFICATION DATED 36933 1/20/12 Authorized Signature r Office Location: Town Annex /First Floor, Capital One Bank 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) Southold, NY 11971 http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809 Fax (631) 765-9064 Mailing Address: 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF APRIL 8, 2010 RECEIVEDcA- ` a3 A 1 6 2010 Southold Town Clerl ZBA FILE 6354 NAME OF APPLICANT: Nicolas DeCroisett PROPERTY LOCATION: 20 Third St. New Suffolk, NY (adjacent to Great Peconic bay) CTM#1000-117-10-19 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 H 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 December 15, 2009 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 has been reviewed under Chapter 268, Waterfront Consistency review of the Town of Southold Town Code and the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP) Policy Standards. 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 EXEMPT from LWRP coastal consistency review requirements pursuant to Section 268-3. PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: This 11,105 square foot non -conforming parcel is improved with a one story cottage style home fronting 89.47 feet on Peconic Bay, with 122 feet along Third Street, 90 feet along the northern property line and 127 feet on the easterly property line. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Request for variance from Code Section 280-15, based on an application for building permit and the Building Inspector's September 23, 2009 Notice of Disapproval concerning as -built accessory shed, 1) at less than the code required 35 foot front yard setback, 2) location of accessory shed in the side yard rather than a rear or front yard, (adjacent to Great Peconic Bay) at 20 Third Street New Suffolk, NY. CTM#: 117-10-19. RELIEF REQUESTED: The applicant requests relief from the following: Section 280-15, on waterfront lots accessory buildings may be located in the front yard, provided that such buildings meet the front yard principal setback. The present plan shows the existing shed at 30', code requires 35'. The present location of the shed is in the side yard, where a rear or front yard is required per code. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The applicant submitted a plan to the Building Department on location of proposed shed, which was submitted with this application. The survey by Nathan Taft Corwin, III Land Surveyor, dated November 19, 2009 update survey, indicates an "as -built" shed in its present non -conforming location. Page 2— April 8, 2010 ZBA File#6354-DeCroissett CTM: 1000-117-10-19, at 20 Third St., New Suffolk, NY (adj. to Great Peconic Bay) FINDINGS OF FACT/ UASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearings on this application on March 25, 2010, at which time written and oral evidence were presented. Based upon all testimony, documentation, personal inspection of the property, and other evidence, the Zoning Board finds the following facts to be true and relevant and makes the following findings: On the basis of testimony presented, materials submitted and personal inspections, the Board makes the following findings: Town Law 4267-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 "as built" shed is located in the rear of the existing off street parking area for the home. Present survey indicates a setback of 31.9' from the front property line. The parcel is located in an older non -conforming community, where lot sizes are from one quarter of an acre to three quarters of an acre in square footage. Most of this entire area of New Suffolk, was built out, prior to the establishment of the Zoning Code in the Town of Southold. The placement of this "as built" shed, although placed in the side yard area, will not cause a detriment to adjacent properties. The surrounding parcels, share the similar non -conformities, as the improvements on the subject property. Town Law 6267-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 move this shed to the rear yard area, however, this location allows for easy access to the shed, adjacent to the parking area. Also, the applicant chose this location to allow his adjoining neighbors clear view of the bay. The shed is in line with the easterly side of the home, which places the shed in the technical side yard. Town Law 6267-b(3)(b)(3) The variance granted herein is not substantial, the variance requested is a 9% relief from the code required 35 foot front yard setback. Town Law 6267-b(3)(W(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 terrain is flat and there are no drainage problems on site. The shed is landward of the existing dwelling and has no impact on the Bay Town Law 6267-b(3)(b)(5) The alleged difficulty has been self created, by building the shed in its present location. Town Law 4267-b. Grant of alternative relief, is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of easy access to his shed, 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 Goehringer, seconded by Member Weisman (Chairperson), and duly carried, to GRANT, the variance as applied for, and shown on the survey, dated January 2, 2008, updated November 19, 2009 by Nathan Taft Corwin, III, Land Surveyor. Subject to he following conditions: 1. The shed shall contain the only utility of electricity. 2. The shed shall only be utilized for storage purposes. That the above conditions be written into the Building Inspector's Certificate of Occupancy, when Issued. Page 3— April 8, 2010 ZBA File#6354-DeCroissett CTM: 1000-117-10-19, at 20 Third St., New Suffolk, NY (adj. to Great PeconicBay) 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. 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 Dinizio, Goehringer, Schneider, Weisman (Chairperson). (Absent was: Member Homing This Resolution as duly adopted (4-0). ;4� � — Leslie Kanes Weisman, Chairperson Approved for filing/-// f�/2010 RE EIVEn 0-3 A P n ? 6 JJ i Clary AGRICULTURAL DATA STATEMENT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD WHEN TO USE THIS FORM: This form must be completed by the applicant for any special use permit, site plan approval, use variance, area variance or subdivision approval on property within an agricultural district OR within 500 feet of a farm operation located in an agricultural district. All applications requiring an agricultural data statement must be referred to the Suffolk County Department of Planning in accordance with Section 239m and 239n of the General Municipal Law. 1. ' Name of Applicant: L'_ ,4A,t,11914F 2. Address of Applicant: g,71 Rz 3. Name of Land Owner (if other than Applicant): 4. Address of Land Owner: /3.S M&!W M A'P XX—A) 5. Description of Proposed Project: APAW�W p7A & &,,0 AJrK4Z .' ANZIE 6. Location of Property: (road and Tax map number) 20 /.t'D S'T.. ZZ49F27414 ' AQ O d J%7 - A0 19 7. Is the parcel within 500 feet of a fitfE operation? { } Yes )<No 8. Is this parcel actively farmed? { } Yes V No 9. Name and addresses of any owner(s) of land within the agricultural district containing active farm operations. Suffolk County Tax Lot numbers will be provided to you by the Zoning Board Staff, it is your responsibility to obtain the current names and mailing addresses from the Town Assessor's Office (765-1937) or from the Real Property Tax Office located in Riverhead. NAME and ADDRESS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. (Please use the back of this page if there are additional property owners) Signature of Applicant Date Note: 1. The local Board will solicit comments from the owners of land identified above in order to consider the effect of the proposed action on their farm operation. Solicitations will be made by supplying a copy of this statement. 2. Comments returned to the local Board will be taken into consideration as part as the overall review of this application. 3. Copies of the completed Agricultural Data Statement shall be sent by applicant to the property owners identified above. The cost for mailing shall be paid by the Applicant at the time the application is su�mitted for review. O%Z 77 041 617.20 Appendix B Short Environmental Assessment Form Instructions for Completing Part 1 - Project Information. The applicant or project sponsor is responsible for the completion of Part 1. Responses become part of the application for approval or funding, are subject to public review, and may be subject to further verification. Complete Part 1 based on information currently available. If additional research or investigation would be needed to fully respond to any item, please answer as thoroughly as possible based on current information. Complete all items in Part 1. You may also provide any additional information which you believe will be needed by or useful to the lead agency; attach additional pages as necessary to supplement any item. Part 1 - Project and Sponsor Information, Name of Action or ProjectP� `R0.1S'S�r .4FX1,P W 5 Project Location (describe, and attach a location map): D e UIVICILAO&CE 6xlz Go Brief Description of Proposed Action :A0-1Qus'dV,V_171- �G I411—W-7-5 /00A'W fA,0411J/, AW,, catisr,°vCrNgU oA,�6 r�vv,�y �jrr>Fzz s�uiu, .s�vo Cry>J. a PVW6 s AeHdWe AVAO A/f/,pR�41.1 .44 /1%,40rw .rrojeA1 W 4 -?5.p AI W'XY-1 PFJ - Name of Applicant or Sponsor: Telephone: &71 72 E -Mail: EMMA& Address: 1 VG City/PO: State: Zip Code: // oe 1. Does the proposed action only involve the legislative adoption of a plan, local law, ordinance, NO YES administrative rule, or regulation? If Yes, attach a narrative description of the intent of the proposed action and the environmental resources that may be affected in the municipality and proceed to Part 2. If no, continue to question 2. 2. Does the proposed action require a permit, approval or funding from any other governmental Agency? NO YES If Yes, list agency(s) name and permit or approval: .I27V 'V40 7;r(Jsr��S NY.TAS C J'V)1*fOL1C C7Y H�4 LYW Ae�Pr. AICD 4 e 3.a. Total acreage of the site of the proposed action? acres b. Total acreage to be physically disturbed? 0 CZ acresJ)S%JCJyJ7X,0V1,#Wo &3 c. Total acreage (project site and any contiguous properties) owned or controlled by the applicant or project sponsor? _01 Cres 4. Check all land uses that occur on, adjoining and near the proposed action. ❑ Urban ❑ Rural (non -agriculture) ❑ Industrial ❑ Commercial )(Residential (suburban) ❑ Forest ❑ Agriculture ❑ Aquatic ❑ Other (specify): ❑ Parkland Page 1 of 4 V; 5. Is the proposed action, a. A permitted use under the zoning regulations? b. Consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan? NO YES N/A 6. Is the proposed action consistent with the predominant character of the existing built or natural landscape? NO YES 7. Is the site of the proposed action located in, or does it adjoin, a state listed Critical Environmental Area? If Yes, identify: NO YES 8. a. Will the proposed action result in a substantial increase in traffic above present levels? b. Are public transportation service(s) available at or near the site of the proposed action? c. Are any pedestrian accommodations or bicycle routes available on or near site of the proposed action? NO YES 9. Does the proposed action meet or exceed the state energy code requirements? If the proposed action will exceed requirements, describe design features and technologies: C U 0 W WIG[. NO YES X .. sL1114ma e_66qtzec_?� 10. Will the proposed action connect to an existing public/private water supply? If No, describe method for providing potable water: NO YES 11. Will the proposed action connect to existing wastewater utilities? If No, describe method for providing wastewater treatment: Al )25)WL 4=&f NO YES 12. a. Does the site contain a structure that is listed on either the State or National Register of Historic Places? b. Is the proposed action located in an archeological sensitive area? NO YES 13. a. Does any portion of the site of the proposed action, or lands adjoining the proposed action, contain wetlands or other waterbodies regulated by a federal, state or local agency? b. Would the proposed action physically alter, or encroach into, any existing wetland or waterbody? If Yes, identify the wetland or waterbody and extent of alterations in square feet or acres: NO YES 14. Identify the typical habitat types that occur on, or are likely to be found on the project site. Check all that apply: $(Shoreline ❑ Forest ❑ Agricultural/grasslands ❑ Early mid -successional Wetland ❑ Urban ❑ Suburban 15. Does the site of the proposed action contain any species of animal, or associated habitats, listed by the State or Federal government as threatened or endangered? NO YES 16. Is the project site located in the 100 year flood plain? NO YES 17. Will the proposed action create storm water discharge, either from point or non -point sources? If Yes, a. Will storm water discharges flow to adjacent properties? )dNO ❑ YES b. Will storm water discharges be directed to established conveyance systems (runoff and storm drains)? If Yes, briefly describe: ❑ NO DfYES Y ot2Z NO YES s Page 2 of 4 18. Does the proposed action include construction or other activities that result in the impoundment of water or other liquids (e.g. retention pond, waste lagoon, dam)? If Yes, explain purpose and size: NO YES small to large impact impact may 19. Has the site of the proposed action or an adjoining property been the location of an active or closed solid waste management facility? If Yes, describe: NO YES occur 1. Will the proposed action create a material conflict with an adopted land use plan or zoning regulations? 2. Will the proposed action result in a change in the use or intensity of use of land? 3. Will the proposed action impair the character or quality of the existing community? 20. Has the site of the proposed action or an adjoining property been the subject of remediation (ongoing or completed) for hazardous waste? If Yes, describe: NO YES establishment of a Critical Environmental Area (CEA)? X, 5. Will the proposed action result in an adverse change in the existing level of traffic or I AFFIRM THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE AND ACCURATE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE Applicant/sponsor name: Date: 06&-0,14- 6&ZdI¢Signature: Signature: Part 2 -Impact Assessment. The Lead Agency is responsible for the completion of Part 2. Answer all of the following questions in Part 2 using the information contained in Part 1 and other materials submitted by the project sponsor or otherwise available to the reviewer. When answering the questions the reviewer should be guided by the concept "Have my responses been reasonable considering the scale and context of the proposed action?" Page 3 of 4 No, or Moderate small to large impact impact may may occur occur 1. Will the proposed action create a material conflict with an adopted land use plan or zoning regulations? 2. Will the proposed action result in a change in the use or intensity of use of land? 3. Will the proposed action impair the character or quality of the existing community? 4. Will the proposed action have an impact on the environmental characteristics that caused the establishment of a Critical Environmental Area (CEA)? 5. Will the proposed action result in an adverse change in the existing level of traffic or affect existing infrastructure for mass transit, biking or walkway? 6. Will the proposed action cause an increase in the use of energy and it fails to incorporate reasonably available energy conservation or renewable energy opportunities? 7. Will the proposed action impact existing: a. public / private water supplies? b. public / private wastewater treatment utilities? 8. Will the proposed action impair the character or quality of important historic, archaeological, architectural or aesthetic resources? 9. Will the proposed action result in an adverse change to natural resources (e.g., wetlands, waterbodies, groundwater, air quality, flora and fauna)? Page 3 of 4 11 Part 3 - Determination of significance. The Lead Agency is responsible for the completion of Part 3. For every question in Part 2 that was answered "moderate to large impact may occur", or if there is a need to explain why a particular element of the proposed action may or will not result in a significant adverse environmental impact, please complete Part 3. Part 3 should, in sufficient detail, identify the impact, including any measures or design elements that have been included by the project sponsor to avoid or reduce impacts. Part 3 should also explain how the lead agency determined that the impact may or will not be significant. Each potential impact should be assessed considering its setting, probability of occurring, duration, irreversibility, geographic scope and magnitude. Also consider the potential for short-term, long-term and cumulative impacts. ❑ Check this box if you have determined, based on the information and analysis above, and any supporting documentation, that the proposed action may result in one or more potentially large or significant adverse impacts and an environmental impact statement is required. ❑ Check this box if you have determined, based on the information and analysis above, and any supporting documentation, that the proposed action will not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts. Name of Lead Agency Date Print or Type Name of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Title of Responsible Officer Signature of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Signature of Preparer (if different from Responsible Officer) Page 4 of 4 No, or Moderate small to large impact impact may may occur occur 10. Will the proposed action result in an increase in the potential for erosion, flooding or drainage problems? 11. Will the proposed action create a hazard to environmental resources or human health? Part 3 - Determination of significance. The Lead Agency is responsible for the completion of Part 3. For every question in Part 2 that was answered "moderate to large impact may occur", or if there is a need to explain why a particular element of the proposed action may or will not result in a significant adverse environmental impact, please complete Part 3. Part 3 should, in sufficient detail, identify the impact, including any measures or design elements that have been included by the project sponsor to avoid or reduce impacts. Part 3 should also explain how the lead agency determined that the impact may or will not be significant. Each potential impact should be assessed considering its setting, probability of occurring, duration, irreversibility, geographic scope and magnitude. Also consider the potential for short-term, long-term and cumulative impacts. ❑ Check this box if you have determined, based on the information and analysis above, and any supporting documentation, that the proposed action may result in one or more potentially large or significant adverse impacts and an environmental impact statement is required. ❑ Check this box if you have determined, based on the information and analysis above, and any supporting documentation, that the proposed action will not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts. Name of Lead Agency Date Print or Type Name of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Title of Responsible Officer Signature of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Signature of Preparer (if different from Responsible Officer) Page 4 of 4 Board of Zoning Appeals Application AUTHORIZATION (Where the Applicant is not the Owner) I, Nkcrjup s of G/L+ I(i C -I residing at 1 Ir We (Print property owner's name) (Mailing Address) JN \-/ do hereby authorize \, c "n,t L— 1<\ yAAc. k (Agent) to apply for variance(s) on my behalf from the Southold Zoning Board of Appeals. (Owner's Signature) Ds,; C n-0 1.SJ N/ (Print Owner's Name) AGENT/REPRESENTATIVE TRANSACTIONAL DISCLOSURE FORM The Town of Southold's Code of Ethics prohibits conflicts of interest on the part of town officers and employees. The purpose of this form is to provide information which can alert the town of possible conflicts of interest and allow it to take whatever action is necessary to avoid same. YOUR NAME : A-11 e ,tiLCG .� i�/�l.C! �✓G (Last name, first name, middle initial, unless you are applying in the name of someone else or other entity, such as a company. If so, indicate the other person's or company's name.) TYPE OF APPLICATION: (Check all that apply) Tax grievance Variance Change of Zone Approval of Plat Other (activity) Building Permit Trustee Permit Coastal Erosion Mooring Planning Do you personally (or through your company, spouse, sibling, parent, or child) have a relationship with any officer or employee of the Town of Southold? "Relationship" includes by blood, marriage, or business interest. "Business Interest" means a business, including a partnership, in which the town officer or employee has even a partial ownership of (or employment by) a corporation in which the town officer or employee owns more than 5% of the shares. YES NO If you answered "YES", complete the balance of this form and date and sign where indicated. Name of person employed by the Town of Southold Title or position of that person Describe the relationship between yourself (the applicant/agent/representative) and the town officer or employee. Either check the appropriate line A) through D) and/or describe in the space provided. The town officer or employee or his or her spouse, sibling, parent, or child is (check all that apply) A) the owner of greater that 5% of the shares of the corporate stock of the applicant (when the applicant is a corporation) B) the legal or beneficial owner of any interest in a non -corporate entity (when the applicant is not a corporation) C) an officer, director, partner, or employee of the applicant; or D) the actual applicant DESCRIPTION OF RELATIONSHIP Submitted this 1_ day oof�/,�J�/��X 2014 Signature Print Name /-If/ CA&g�,4, �� �� APPLICANT/OWNER TRANSACTIONAL DISCLOSURE FORM The Town of Southold's Code of Ethics prohibits conflicts of interest on the part of town officers and employees. The purpose of this form is to provide information which can alert the town of possible conflicts of interest and allow it to take whatever action is necessary to avoid same. YOUR NAME: -,PE C Mo VS ET N % cr.�LAS (Last name, first name, middle iditial, unless you are applying in the name of someone else or other entity, such as a company. If so, indicate the other person's or company's name.) TYPE OF APPLICATION: (Check all that apply) Tax grievance Building Permit Variance Trustee Permit Change of Zone Coastal Erosion Approval of Plat Mooring Other (activity) Planning Do you personally (or through your company, spouse, sibling, parent, or child) have a relationship with any officer or employee of the Town of Southold? "Relationship" includes by blood, marriage, or business interest. "Business interest" means a business, including a partnership, in which the town officer or employee has even a partial ownership of (or employment by) a corporation in which the town officer or employee owns more than 5% of the shares. YES NO If you answered "YES", complete the balance of this form and date and sign where indicated. Name of person employed by the Town of Southold Title or position of that person Describe the relationship between yourself (the applicant/agent/representative) and the town officer or employee. Either check the appropriate line A) through D) and/or describe in the space provided. The town ,officer or employee or his or her spouse, sibling, parent, or child is (check all that apply) A) the owner of greater that 5% of the shares of the corporate stock of the applicant (when the applicant is a corporation) B) the legal or beneficial owner of any interest in a non -corporate entity (when the applicant is not a corporation) C) an officer, director, partner, or employee of the applicant; or D) the actual applicant DESCRIPTION OF RELATIONSHIP Submitted this /�� day ofJ►y , 204— Signatureu Print Name _A..) / c -o 1, A-$ Crto)SJ P7 0 Town of Southold LWRP CONSISTENCY ASSESSMENT FORM A. INSTRUCTIONS 1. All applicants for permits* including Town of Southold agencies, shall complete this CCAF for proposed actions that are subject to the Town of Southold Waterfront Consistency Review Law. This assessment is intended to supplement other information used by a Town of Southold agency in making a determination of consistency. *Except minor exempt actions including Building Permits and other ministerial permits not located within the Coastal Erosion Hazard Area. 2. Before answering the questions in Section C, the preparer of this form should review the exempt minor action list, policies and explanations of each policy contained in the Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Program. A proposed action will be evaluated as to its significant beneficial and adverse effects upon the coastal area (which includes all of Southold Town). 3. If any question in Section C on this form is answered "yes", then the proposed action may affect the achievement of the LWRP policy standards and conditions contained in the consistency review law. Thus, the action should be analyzed in more detail and, if necessary, modified prior to making a determination that it is consistent to the maximum extent practicable with the LWRP policy standards and conditions. If an action cannot be certified as consistent with the LWRP policy standards and conditions, it shall not be undertaken. A copy of the LWRP is available in the following places: online at the Town of Southold's website (southoldtown. northfork. net), the Board of Trustees Office, the Planning Department, all local libraries and the Town Clerk's office. B. DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSED ACTION SCTM# //7 The Application has been submitted to (check appropriate response): Town Board Planning Dept. 0 Building Dept. XRI Board of Trustees 1. Category of Town of Southold agency action (check appropriate response): (a) Action undertaken directly by Town agency (e.g. capital 13 construction, planning activity, agency regulation, land transaction) E (b) Financial assistance (e.g. grant, loan, subsidy) (c) Permit, approval, license, certification: V Nature and extent of action: ,a�M djC/T/opt/ 0,& �X//pJ�l/(� ls�d �lS.� iVew cl-el IVAIV D ,--V(1VAA1 AI,C'01✓J'f,�44r& w? em,�ul - p tU,�L1l�/G 60 / ,eele Ol eVi4,A.Ep r/v 0/✓w rl"`L &s, )aZX. 444Y.9W /-r 0 F7. c o�rrx�/BLre�v � aoz r -4" aCD�1/J'J�'lJCJ— ^IX iV 1' Ae" W.#P1'0'4 1-1,V6r. IrEH. Location of action: V,r Site acreage: Present land use: Present zoning classification:_ - .1d 2. If an application for the proposed action has been filed with the Town of Southold agency, the following information shall be provided: (a) Name of applicant: z!& W44Z A G� e1L (b) Mailing address: _ ?Zl P1 V,�121'1D� Dd? k1 V",4rW N y. (c) Telephone number: Area Code ( ) 691 7.2-7- -2103 (d) Application number, if any: Will the action be directly undertaken, require funding, or approval by a state or federal agency? Yes ❑ No ['Xi If yes, which state or federal agency? DEVELOPED COAST POLICY Policy 1. Foster a pattern of development in the Town of Southold that enhances community character, preserves open space, makes efficient use of infrastructure, makes beneficial use of a coastal location, and minimizes adverse effects of development. See LWRP Section III — Policies; Page 2 for evaluation criteria. ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Applicable Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 2. Protect and preserve historic and archaeological resources of the Town of Southold. See LWRP Section III — Policies Pages 3 through 6 for evaluation criteria ❑ Yes ❑ No ;Z Not Applicable Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 3. Enhance visual quality and protect scenic resources throughout the Town of Southold. See LWRP Section III - Policies Pages 6 through 7 for evaluation criteria Vow S—A Nn F] Nnt Annur.nhle NATURAL COAST POLICIES Policy 4. Minimize loss of life, structures, and natural resources from flooding and erosion. See LWRP Section III - Policies Pages 8 through 16 for evaluation criteria F:A F'-� F� Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 5. Protect and improve water quality and supply in the Town of Southold. See LWRP Section III - Policies Pages 16 through 21 for evaluation criteria F-72 F -D 7-1 Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 6. Protect and restore the quality and function of the Town of Southold ecosystems including Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitats and wetlands. See LWRP Section III - Policies; Pages 22 through 32 for evaluation criteria. R Yes R No D? Not Applicable r/ZA Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 7. Protect and improve air quality in the Town of Southold. See LWRP Section III — Policies Pages 32 through 34 for evaluation criteria. ❑ Yes M No ❑ Not Applicable Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 8. Minimize environmental degradation in Town of Southold from solid waste and hazardous substances and wastes. See LWRP Section III — Policies; Pages 34 through 38 for evaluation criteria. ❑ Yes Q No ❑ Not Applicable PUBLIC COAST POLICIES Policy 9. Provide for public access to, and recreational use of, coastal waters, public lands, and public resources of the Town of Southold. See LWRP Section III — Policies; Pages 38 through 46 for evaluation criteria. ❑ YeFk No 0 Not Applicable Attach additional sheets if necessary WORKING COAST POLICIES Policy 10. Protect Southold's water -dependent uses and promote siting of new water -dependent uses in suitable locations. See LWRP Section III — Policies; Pages 47 through 56 for evaluation criteria. 7 Yes ❑ No EL�Wj Not Applicable Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 11. Promote sustainable use of living marine resources in Long Island Sound, the Peconic Estuary and Town waters. See LWRP Section III — Policies; Pages 57 through 62 for evaluation criteria. ❑ Yes 11 No � Not Applicable Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 12. Protect agricultural lands in the Town of Southold. See LWRP Section III — Policies; Pages 62 through 65 for evaluation criteria. ❑ Yes ❑ NoW Not Applicable Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 13. Promote appropriate use and development of energy and mineral resources. See LWRP Section III — Policies; Pages 65 through 68 for evaluation criteria. PkI Yes ❑ No ❑ Not Applicable Created on 512510511:20 AM SOUTHOLD BOARD OF APPEALS PRIOR FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATIONS REQUEST FOR VARIANCE FOR FRONT YARD AND BULKHEAD SETBACKS FOR NICOLAS DECROISSET (1000-117-10-19) it 1. ZBA File: 6614 Approval to construct roof extension and in -ground pool less than the required 75 feet from the bulkhead (31.2 feet) 2. ZBA File: 5163 Approval for the demolition and reconstruction of two story residence in a non -conforming location less than 75 feet from the bulkhead 3. ZBA File: 6670 Approval for additions and alterations to an existing single family dwelling less than 75 feet from the bulkhead (20.2 feet) 4. ZBA File: 5966 Approval of second story additions to the existing dwelling and convert garage less than the 35 feet required setback from the front property line. (30.4 feet) 5. ZBA File: 6270 Approval of one story addition and new Bilco door and maintaining the existing non -conforming setback (4.40 feet) from the front property line 6. ZBA File: 6595 Approval of addition and alteration to a single family dwelling less than the required 35 feet setback to both front property lines. (14.75 and 16.58 feet- corner lot) 7. ZBA file: 5819 Approval of reconstruction of existing single family dwelling within 50 feet of the required front property line setback 8. ZBA file: 6205 Approval of deck addition that is a reduction in the required front yard setback from 35 feet to 9.5 feet " 3I6 7Q 1 2 - - 1 W '"' 3.1A(n 1 3.5 4.1 `� 29 9 -+`A(c 21 23 z2(u 0 18 a\ » _ 27A(e) 1.8A(c) • 1.2A ,p 90 m -- f 123 -- 122 " 2 f/I .. 29 SAY - - _ --- - ..._i...l. -- N $ PECOlJ1C 77S N 30zm § GREAT E �,,._,,,,_�� ~ -----_ --- "•"�"'OYN°"" --"-- wle'ww«,neon NOTICE COUNTY OF SUFFOLK © K rowNOF souTF+olo E d'+' --�'- w�.. (21) q.w no SECTION NO ,�, , Real Property Tax Service Agency r 117 OO 15 WWiF1MNCE KIFA.QgN.4KE CMl E ar••�,••:•------- �""'• ^ w..gwu� --"'-- ,erw ol..su.--.cr-- a oarwauTgN OFwnFortrroN aFnF . nr w.iwcE OF 11tFF(iIR GCI,/"TY T MVP 1. P"MWdTED fGLE "MEET M aw.F Rw..S..a. N r 11101 N a.o.�r v cru. -- yr o..i.u. _. -� - _ _ -..1;,,- - � _ - w.el Irlse waurcE winemon wrwlrr wx,rrEr FEwassiMr, os r"E '4� A MT. -No 1000 nr w..... -___- __ NFx anFEmrTaEavlcEwaocr P PROPERTY MAP i ' M K 1 m ^ RD - Y q "`♦e_ 1 8 2 ; [ d5 MATCH LINE 3 g 4 z.. w L j 3 r, =�� J " '$ -- m >a w .ui - w 7 FOR PCL. NO. SEE SEC. NO. 1.24c 3 QO 9 w 1104-034 b t 1.1A(c) 6 sn 1.1A(c) m TU ILL f 13.1 .9A(c) ♦ v2�S 3 RD. (SD) 10 .. j ti 9�4 20.1 ' 2D2 ¢ 11w Y O 1 •� 1.3A 4.1. r 19 LAO 7-8A � w 1� FOR PCL NO. 8 G1g "i � c 13 17.4 79.1 r $ 1.tA(e) _ 1.tA(e) a a • m 3 m N % SEE SEC. NO. 7 w g 2.eAk) 4 5 O / / 116-03-001 a 14 ♦ 5 i♦ 15 d 18 17.3 175 12A(c) +� a t ---p RD. I+M) 1 24 O tZ vPP 2 /8 17-1 r _ 25 1'4A(c) `a L1A ' s 3 ? 3A(c) a tea' 10 1= a 1s g - 162 34 CUTCHOGUE y w 19 1.4Kc) w A 28os 4 W O 5 14118.6 33 a a -.. �6 r z 14.1 22 .1 ♦ 4vF., 4 / 14 a 8 13 s 32 .� 'q. • " "a 15 4 �" HARBOR 4 Zo 7 12 M mra A gZA(c) 6 :V 31 17 w 21 71 w Z9 30 - i /r/S) x q 1 ~' Pm E9lA) u, w ♦ N6d` 47 » 9tlad � 48 � - 22w1u 48.4 10 8 P9' 34 33 c 30 g ) - 35 a, m m FlSNER , y 3 ,a, 7.1 w m 1.6A(c) 31 w • 34 3R a 1.6A(c) 6 z 32 33 s •SI.. w w y 1414ci 12 t3 21 w w + 5 w " s G) ° 112 10 9 w T sl M w 3 l 4 y 24 's�27 y1 13. 12 1t.1 132 ' , C 7 -1 1 - 32 \ � w 2 (J 29 KOURO'S RD. >~9 70 R P A 18 6 141 Q 17 i 162 16b t- 119.3 19.1 1 20.2 28.1 w Z s MR O 5T. w\ 31 1ut+G 6. 11 N' 6 e.- 23 +4 y7A(c) r -< 282 70 20.1 s 4 6^� is 1 1 m w 323 1 w 1.4A(G) Tio 12 ,6 3 " a ♦ 21 aw ©w w ~ 26.6 ~N4 NEw 142 -4 - 6 9 13 11 g - t w ST- 1.iA /AA1N 78-1 0 22 23 24 28,6 28.3 1[ of 7 >. T O 142 18.4 15 23 m 't m f N NEW SUFFOLK AVE. _ 10 21 74 s°' / 1 2 4.1 5.1 - 7 12 17 8.1 9 2 Kc) T w 15. a' 26 31 19 21 3-3A(c)N 1 1.3A(c) a w 29A(c) 32 O -1 Min 20 25 m • s Is . } 11 t -1qn Q 4!4 z,r 52 8 -_ -'irno-I w s t'r " 3I6 7Q 1 2 - - 1 W '"' 3.1A(n 1 3.5 4.1 `� 29 9 -+`A(c 21 23 z2(u 0 18 a\ » _ 27A(e) 1.8A(c) • 1.2A ,p 90 m -- f 123 -- 122 " 2 f/I .. 29 SAY - - _ --- - ..._i...l. -- N $ PECOlJ1C 77S N 30zm § GREAT E �,,._,,,,_�� ~ -----_ --- "•"�"'OYN°"" --"-- wle'ww«,neon NOTICE COUNTY OF SUFFOLK © K rowNOF souTF+olo E d'+' --�'- w�.. (21) q.w no SECTION NO ,�, , Real Property Tax Service Agency r 117 OO 15 WWiF1MNCE KIFA.QgN.4KE CMl E ar••�,••:•------- �""'• ^ w..gwu� --"'-- ,erw ol..su.--.cr-- a oarwauTgN OFwnFortrroN aFnF . nr w.iwcE OF 11tFF(iIR GCI,/"TY T MVP 1. P"MWdTED fGLE "MEET M aw.F Rw..S..a. N r 11101 N a.o.�r v cru. -- yr o..i.u. _. -� - _ _ -..1;,,- - � _ - w.el Irlse waurcE winemon wrwlrr wx,rrEr FEwassiMr, os r"E '4� A MT. -No 1000 nr w..... -___- __ NFx anFEmrTaEavlcEwaocr P PROPERTY MAP i ' M K APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS • Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman j c Ruth D. Oliva James Dinizio, Jr. Michael A. Simon Leslie Kanes Weisman http://southoldtown.northfork.net • Mailing Address: Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road - P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY l 1971-0959 Office Location: Town Annex /First Floor, North Fork Bank 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) Southold, NY 11971 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS RgECf IVSD -- TOWN OF SOUTHOLD a �3 Tel. (631) 765-1809 - Fax (631) 765-9064 FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATI .� MEETING OF FEBRUARY 28, 2008 Southold Towo 0ers ZBA # 6114 - SANFORD and ELIZABETH FRIEMANN PROPERTY LOCATION: 1165 Old Harbor Road, New Suffolk CTM 117-3-8.4 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 has been referred as required under the Suffolk County Administrative Code Sections A 14-14 to 23, and the Suffolk County Department of Planning reply dated December 10, 2007, states that the application is considered a matter for local determination as there appears to be no significant county -wide or inter -community impact. PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: The applicants' property contains a total lot area of 19,712 square feet with frontage along Cutchogue Harbor, and is improved with a single-family dwelling with garage as shown on the November 19, 2007 survey prepared by John C. Ehlers. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Request for Variances under Sections 280-116B and 280- 124, based on the Building Inspector's amended November 26, 2007 Notice of Disapproval concerning proposed additions, swimming pool, and alterations to the existing single-family dwelling, which new construction: (a) will be less than 75 feet from the bulkhead adjacent to Cutchogue Harbor and (b) will exceed the code limitation of 20% maximum lot coverage. RELIEF REQUESTED: The applicants propose to construct a 10 ft. deep roof extension over an existing irregularly shaped open deck to provide partial shade, at 45' from the existing bulkhead, and proposes a 12' x 22' in -ground kidney -shaped swimming pool set into the existing deck with a code -required 3 ft. wide deck surrounding the pool on the seaward edge, 20 feet from bluff and 46 feet from the existing timber bulkhead shown on the September 12, 2007 surveyor site plan, updated November 19, 2007 by John C. Ehlers, L.S.. This proposed construction would create a total of lot coverage at 23.2%, while the code limits total lot coverage to a maximum of 20%. Page 2 — February 28, 2008 0 Appeal No. 6114 — S. and E. Friemann CTM 117-3.8.4 AMENDED APPLICATION: During the hearing, the applicant was asked to bring the plan into more conformity with the code. The applicant on January 25, 2008 submitted a site plan prepared by Mark Schwartz, A.I.A. increasing the setback to 31.2 feet from the closest bulkhead measured from the edge of the new construction, and reducing the proposed lot coverage to 22.4%, thereby bringing the plan into more conformity with the code. LWRP DETERMINATION: A letter from the Town's LWRP Coordinator was submitted to the Board of Appeals on January 9, 2008, after review of the original variance requests, with a recommendation of inconsistency under Chapter 95, Waterfront Consistency Review of the Town of Southold Code and Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP standards.) Grant of alternative relief in the variance application, as amended January 25, 2008 will increase the setback from the proposed 29.2 feet to 31.2 feet measured between the deck and the bulkhead, and will reduce the lot coverage to 22.4%. Also, the drainage of pool water shall be contained in the existing drywell on site. Gutters and leaders shall be located on the proposed roof extension and roof runoff shall be contained. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on January 24, 2008, at which time written and oral evidence were presented. Based upon all testimony, documentation, personal inspection of the property, and other evidence, the Zoning Board finds the following facts to be true and relevant: REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION• On the basis of testimony presented, materials submitted and personal inspections, the Board makes the following findings: 1. Town Law §267-b(3)(b)(3)(1). Grant of the alternative relief as shown on the amended plan will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The proposed roof extension over the existing deck is modest in size and will have no visual impact on neighboring houses, while benefiting the applicants' family with protection from the sun and rain. The proposed pool is also relatively small and will be partially set into the existing deck, thereby reducing the size of its footprint in the rear yard. 2. Town Law 67-b 3 2 . The benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance since there is no other feasible location in which to construct a swimming pool, and the distance from the existing deck to the bulkhead is already non -conforming. 3. Town Law §267-1Z(3)(b)(3). The variances granted for relief in the amended application for the proposed new deck and pool are substantial. A 49 ft. setback to the shoreline bulkhead, represents a 34.6% variance, and when measured from the first, Page 3 — February 28, 2008 0 Appeal No. 6114 — S. and E. Friemann CTM 117-3-8.4 11 closest bulkhead at 31.2 feet, the variance represents a 59% variance from the 75 ft. minimum code requirement. The proposed lot coverage of 22.4% while the code requires a maximum of 20% results in a 12% variance. 4. Town Law §267-b(3)(b)(5). The difficulty has been self-created because the applicant has chosen to install a pool and deck without sufficient space to meet conforming setbacks and which will increase lot coverage beyond that allowed by code. 5. 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 existing bulkhead and upland retaining wall are stable and the property between them is covered with a large native vegetative buffer. The proposed additions are modest in size and any potential adverse impacts can be mitigated through the conditions described below 6. Grant of relief, as applied for and shown on the amended plans, is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of a roof extension and small swimming pool, 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 Weisman, seconded by Chairman Goehringer, and duly carried, to Grant the variances as applied for and as amended, shown on Map A-3 dated January 24, 2008 prepared by Mark K. Schwartz, Architect, subject to the following Conditions: 1. The drainage of pool water shall be contained in the existing drywell on applicants' site. 2. Gutters and leaders shall be located on the proposed roof extension and roof runoff shall be contained in the existing drywell on this site, as shown in the November 19, 2007 survey prepared by John C. Ehlers, L.S. with Nov. 26, 2007 ZBA date stamp. 3. The pool equipment shall be housed in sound -proof (sound -deadening) cabinet and located on the northeast side of the dwelling to create minimal visual and noise impacts on neighbors. 4. The existing deck that is not covered by the proposed roof extension shall remain unenclosed and open to the sky. APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman p Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road Lydia A. Tortora_ 00 P.O. Box 1179 George Horning Southold, New York 11971-0959 Ruth D. Oliva0! ZBA Fax (631) 765-9064 Vincent Orlando Telephone (631) 765-1509 http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF OCTOBER 3, 2002 Appl. No. 5163 — NATHANIEL AND SUSAN KWIT Property Location: 1000 Old Harbor Road, New Suffolk 117--12.1 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 an adverse effect on the environment if the project is implemented as planned. PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: BASIS OF APPLICATION: Building Department's April 18, 2002 Notice of Disapproval denying a permit for reconstruction of a two-story residence in a nonconforming location at less than 75 feet from the bulkhead structure and less than 50 feet from the rear property line. The existing nonconforming dwelling will be demolished. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on September 19, 2002, at which time written and oral evidence was presented. Based upon all testimony, documentation, personal Inspection of the property and the area, and other evidence, the Zoning Board finds the following facts to be true and relevant. AREA VARIANCE RELIEF REQUESTED: Applicants request a Variances under Section 100-239 reconstruction of a two-story residence Ina nonconforming location at less than 75 feet from the bulkhead structure and less than 50 feet from the rear property line. The existing nonconforming dwelling will.be demolished. REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: On the basis of testimony presented, materials submitted, and personal inspections, the Board makes the following findings: 1. Grant of the variance will not produce an undesirable change in the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The present home was moved to its existing location many years past. Because of substandard construction, applicants wish to replace the existing dwelling with a new, updated building In the same or similar footprint. 2. The benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by some other means other than an area variance. Since the applicants are going to utilize essentially the same location of the existing home, setbacks remain almost exactly the same, or mostly Page 2 — October 3, 200, Appl. No. 5163 — N. and S. Kwit 117-5-12.1 at New Suffolk similar. The reason for this location is because of topography and major landscaping on the site, as well as present location of the sanitary system. 3. No evidence has been submitted to suggest that this variance will have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood. The existing dwelling is virtually unable to be renovated, due to lack of a foundation and other substandard factors. Based on topography of the site, the key to reconstruction of the dwelling is the existing location 4. The premises is located on a well -vegetated and elevated portion of the property, updated bulkhead leading to Schoolhouse Creek. A significant alternating of the present location would only disrupt a well -manicured lot with many mature trees and landscaping. 5. Grant of this requested variance is the minimum necessary to enable applicants to enjoy a new dwelling, while preserving and protecting the character of the neighborhood, and the health, safety, and welfare of the community. BOARD RESOLUTION: In considering all of the above factors and applying the balancing test under New York Town Law 267-B, motion was offered by Member Oliva, seconded by Chairman Goehringer, it was RESOLVED, to GRANT the variance as appliedfor, and shown on the plan prepared by Samuels & Steelman of 4/17/02 (site plan with envelope). 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. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Goehringer (Chairman), Tortora, and Oliva. This Resolution was duly adopted (3-0). (Members Hom' nd Or// Indo/�� absent.) 99 77 _ BOARD MEMBERS Leslie Kanes Weisman, Chairperson Eric Dantes Gerard P. Goehringer George Homing Ken Schneider http://southoldtown.northfork.net 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 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809 • Fax (631) 765-9064 R CE{VED w- X3 I S Ef 2 4 2013 00P I.Fvd Q outhold Town Clerk FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 19, 2013 ZBA FILE: 6670 NAME OF APPLICANT: Michael and Celia Withers SCTM 1000-117-5-24 PROPERTY LOCATION: 6635 New Suffolk Road, (adj. to School House Creek) New Suffolk, 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 July 11, 2013 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 August 26, 2013. 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 • The property is a waterfront property in a Marine II district. It is an irregular shape. The property has 256.67 feet of bulkhead frontage on School House Creek. The property has 75 feet of frontage on New Suffolk Road and is bordered by another piece of property which is 75 feet wide and then continues for an additional 30 feet on New Suffolk Road. On the north side the property goes 125 feet east and then goes 125 feet north. Next the property goes 215.63 feet east. The property then goes 120 feet south and then 85.09 feet west until it hits the bulkhead. The south side of the property runs 234.56 feet from the road until it hits School House Creek. In the middle of the property is a developed lot which has 75 feet of frontage on New Suffolk Road and 155 feet on the south and north sides of the lot and 75 feet on the east side of the lot. On the property there is a 2 story frame house, an accessory frame garage and an accessory frame shed. There are also five floating wood docks and one long wood dock on School House Creek. The existing structure is 20.2 feet away from the bulkhead at its closest point. All is shown on a survey by Nathan Corwin Taff Licensed Land Surveyor dated March 14, 2013. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Request for Variance from Article XXII Section 280-116(B) based on an application for building permit and the Building inspector's June 13, 2013 Notice of Disapproval concerning a permit to construct additions and alterations to an existing single family dwelling at 1) proposed construction at less than the code required bulkhead setback of 75 feet. Page 2 of — September 19, 2013 ZBA#6670 — Wither: SCTM#1000-117-5-24 RELIEF REQUESTED: The applicant requests a variance to construct additions and alterations to the existing dwelling with a proposed setback of 35 feet from the bulkhead, where the code requires a setback of not less than 75 feet from a bulkhead. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The existing accessory shed on the property has a certificate of occupancy to be in its existing location. FINDINGS OF FACT/ REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on September 5, 2013 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 4267-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 because the proposed addition is characteristic of other residential properties in the neighborhood in both scale and design. It will not be seen from the street. This property is a unique lot in that it is a Marine II property with accompanying boat docks. Many of the houses in this neighborhood are older and are within 75 feet from a bulkhead. The proposed addition will not be less conforming to the code than the existing structure already is. 2. Town Law 5267-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 entire structure is located within 75 feet of the bulkhead and would need a variance for any proposed addition. 3. Town Law §267-b(3)(b)(3). The variance granted herein is mathematically substantial, representing 53% relief from the code. However, the proposed addition is a one-story addition located behind the house at the furthest distance from the bulkhead as possible. 4. Town Law 6267-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 and the proposed construction must retain all water on site via new drywells and must comply with all best management practices for storm water runoff during construction. 5. Town Law 4267-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 6267-b. Grant of the requested relief is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of a new 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 Dantes, seconded by Member Goehringer, and duly carried, to GRANT, the variance as applied for, and shown on the Architectural plans by Samuels & Steelman Architects dated June 4, 2013 labeled pages SP, and pages 1-3. Page 3 of 3 — September 19, 2013 ZBA#6670 — Withers SCTM#1000-U7-5-24 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 variances) 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), Goehringer, Schneider, Dantes. Absent was: Member Horning, This Resolution was duly adopted (4-0). Leslie Kanes Weisman, Chairperson Approved for filing g l N /2013 • APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman Gerard P. Goehringer James Dinizio, Jr. Michael A. Simon Leslie Kanes Weisman http://southoldtown.northfork.net Maid' Addre s: Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road • P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 Office Location: Town Annex /First Floor, North Fork Bank 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) Southold, NY 11971 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809 9 Fax (631) 765-9064 FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9, 2006 RECEIVED +_f�" Q: 35 cur, 16 2005 Q� Utitihold Town Cteri ZB File No. 5966 — MARC F. and ELLEN WIEDERLIGHT Property Location: 50 Fred Street and Fanning Road, New Suffolk CTM 117-4-22 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. PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: The applicants' 18,125 sq. ft. parcel has 125 feet along Fred Street and 145 feet along Fanning Road, and is improved with a single -story, one -family dwelling. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Zoning Code Sections 280-15, 280-122 and 280-124, based on the applicants request for a building permit and the Building Inspector's August 25, 2006 Notice of Disapproval. The reasons stated for disapproving the building permit is that the additions and alterations will constitute an increase in the degree of nonconformance when located less than 35 feet from the front lot line. The second reason was that the new construction would place the swimming pool in a yard other than the required rear yard, and the applicant removed the swimming pool from the plans. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on October 26, 2006, at which time written and oral evidence were presented. Based upon all testimony, documentation, personal inspection of the property, and other evidence, the Zoning Board finds the following facts to be true and relevant: AREA VARIANCE RELIEF REQUESTED: The applicants wish to construct a second -story addition and convert the garage, portions of which will be an increase in the degree of nonconformity when located 30.4 feet from the front lot line at its closest point. REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: On the basis of testimony presented, materials submitted and personal inspections, the Board makes the following findings: 1. Grant of the variance will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The structural alterations will not increase the dimensions or size of the structure. 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 alterations and addition will be within the building area (footprint) of the existing home without creating new nonconformities. 3. The variance granted herein is not substantial. The relief is related to the same nonconforming 30.4 ft. Page 2 — November 9, 2006 • • ZB File No. 5966 — M. and E. Wlederlight CTM No. 117-4-22 front yard for the existing 20.2 ft. wide garage, which setback will be maintained after alterations and an addition. 4. The difficulty has not been self-created, resulting from a need for additional living space. . 5. 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. 6. Grant of the requested relief is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of an addition with 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 267-8, motion was offered by Member Simon, seconded by Member Goehringer, and duly carried, to GRANT the variance as applied for, referred to in the October 26, 2006 letter from Frank Notaro, R.A. and shown on the amended 10-26-06 Drawing No. A.1-2, the 9-11-06 Drawing No. A.1, the 9-12-06 drawing No. A -SITE, and the 9-11-06 Drawing No. A.2, prepared by Arch itecnolog ies. 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. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Oliva (Chairwoman), Goehringer, Dinizio, Simon, and Weisman. This Resolution was duly adopted (5-0). �.C. Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman 11 14/06 Approved for Filing Town' Annex /First Floor, Capital One Bank 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) Southold, NY 11971 ,�O��pF SOUjyl� c4UNi s http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809 Fax (631) 765.9064 FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS, DECISION MEETING OF JUNE 16, 2009 ZBA FILE # 6270 —EFSTATHIOS and MARYANN KATSOULAS, Applicants PROPERTY LOCATION: 1175 First Street, New Suffolk CTM Parcel 117-7-27 Mailing Address: 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 RECEIVED - 70ed /0: 00 JUN 2 2 2009 Southold Town Clerk 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 December 5, 2008 stating that this application is considered a matter for local determination as there appears to be no significant county- wide or inter -community impact. PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: The subject property is a non -conforming 15,271.61 square foot lot in the Residential R- 40 District, with street frontage along First Street. It is improved with a single-family, two-story frame house with attached garage and in -ground swimming pool with wood deck as shown on the architectural plot plan by Oyster Bay Drafting dated 4/22108 page NA BASIS OF APPLICATION: Request for Variances under Sections 280-122 and ZBA Interpretation # 5039 (R. Walz) based on the Building Inspectors November 12, 2008 Notice of Disapproval concerning proposed additions and alterations to the existing dwelling, which new construction will constitute an increase in the degree of front yard setback and lot coverage non - conformances. RELIEF REQUESTED: The applicants propose to add an 8.11ft x 9.2 ft one story addition and new Bilco doors to their dwelling in order to expand their living space. The addition will maintain the pre-existing non -conforming front yard setback of 4.40 feet. Pursuant to ZBA interpretation in Walz (#5039) such additions and alterations will constitute an increase in the degree of non- conformance. In addition, the Building Inspector's Notice of Disapproval noted the existing lot coverage of 24.8% will increase to 25.5% with the proposed additions while the code permits maximum lot coverage of 20%. These calculations were based upon plans by Oyster Bay Drafting dated 4/22/08. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: At the public hearing on April 23, 2009, the Board requested that the applicant submit a letter from Oyster Bay Drafting: and/or a licensed architect or engineer or a new survey showing the existing and proposed lot coverage since it was not clear from the plans submitted. On June 3, 2009 that Board received a letter dated May 27, 2009 that was signed and stamped by Dennis Mele, licensed architect, noting an existing lot coverage of 24.3% and proposed lot coverage of 24.8%. REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: On the basis of testimony presented, materials submitted and personal inspections, the Board makes the following findings: Page 2 — E. and M, Katsoulas ZBA # 6270 — June 16, 2009 CTM 117-7-27 s 1. Town Law §267-b(3)(b)(3)(1). Grant of the variances will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The proposed addition in the side yard of the house will not be seen from the street because it is screened by another part of the existing house and is well screened from the neighbor along the side yard by an existing side yard fence. The proposed addition is small at only 74.61 square feet and only one story while the house itself is two stories. 2. Town Law 4267-b(3)(b)(2). The benefit sought by the applicants cannot be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance because the construction is already over the permitted lot coverage and has a pre-existing non -conforming front yard setback, so any addition will require a variance. 3. Town Law 6267-b(3)(b)(3). The variance granted herein in terms of the proposed lot coverage is not substantial because it is an increase of only 0.5%. The variance for maintaining the 4.40 ft. front yard setback is not substantial in so far as the proposed addition will maintain this pre-existing non -conforming setback and because it is a technical interpretation since the small addition is not proposed in the front but rather along the side of the house. 4. Town Law 6267-b(36)(5). The difficulty has been self-created because the applicants already enjoy the benefit of lot coverage beyond that which is permitted by code through a previous ZBA variance (#5522 June 3, 2004). 5. Town Law 4267-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. 6. Town Law 6267-b. Grant of the requested relief is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicants to enjoy the benefit of a slightly expanded living space in their dwelling, 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 Weisman, seconded by Chairman Goehringer, and duly carried, to GRANT the variances as applied for and shown on the architectural drawings by Oyster Bay Drafting (Sheets N 1-4) dated 4122108 and lot coverage calculations as confirmed by Dennis Mele, Architect in his letter dated May 27, 2009 received by the Board of Appeals on June 3, 2009, and with an attached table of zoning calculations which amend the calculations that appear on Sheet N-1 of the architectural drawings. 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. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Oliva (Chairwoman), Goehringer,�Simonsma I Resglut' s duly adopted (4-0). /�i' // RARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN Approved for Filing 6/ '7v /201X BOARD MEMBERS Leslie Kanes Weisman, Chairperson James Dinizio, Jr. Gerard P. Goehringer George Horning Ken Schneider sovjyo� N11 Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road • P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 1] 971-0959 Office Location: Town Annex /First Floor, Capital One Bank 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) Southold, NY 11971 http:/Jsoutholdtown.northfork.net ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD RCU?. Tel. (631) 765-1809 • Fax (631) 765-9064 -4--'3$ OC 2 3 2012 FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATIONQ, MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2012 So old Town ZBA FILE: 6595 NAME OF APPLICANT: Solution East LLC PROPERTY LOCATION: 1060 2"d Street (corner 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. ft. 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 2"d. Street. The parcel is a corner 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 corner lot, 2) more than the code permitted lot coverage of 201/o 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: 1000-117-7-25 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 5267-b(3)(b)(U. 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 corner 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 5267-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 2"d. 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 2"d 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 all 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 5267-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 Horning, 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 a 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: I. 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 11, 2012. That the above conditions be written into the Building Inspector's Certificate of Occupancy, when issued. Nage 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 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 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), Dinizio, Schneider, Horning. Absent was: Member Goehringer. This Resolution was duly adopted (4-0). a Leslie Kanes Weisman, Chairperson Approved for filing fO /;-Z, /2012 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS • Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman Gerard P. Goehringer James Dinizio, Jr. Michael A. Simon Leslie Kanes Weisman htq)://southoldtown.northfork.net • Mailing Address: Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road - P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 Office LocatiQp: Town Annex /First Floor, North Fork Bank 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) Southold, NY 11971 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809 • Fax (631) 765-9064 FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2006 ZB File No. 5819 — James and Karen Speyer Property Location: 2100 Jackson Street, New Suffolk CTM 117-10-18.1 RECEIVcD 4-14Z4�e St)V610ld T4K7 (Jett. 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 an adverse effect on the environment if the project is implemented as planned. PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: The applicant's 43,415.97 sq. ft. parcel has 120.21 feet along Jackson Street and 371.62 feet along Fourth Street. The property is improved with a one and story two frame, single- family dwelling with accessory shed and garage, as shown on the January 28, 2005 survey prepared by Joseph A. Ingegno, L.S. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Building Department's October 19, 2005 Notice of Disapproval, amended January 6, 2006 and February 3, 2006, citing the Walz Interpretation (Sections 100-242A and 100-244), and Section 100-242A, in its denial of an application for a building permit. The reason stated by the Building Inspector in the denial is that after demolishing portions of the existing two-story dwelling, the reconstruction in the same place, and new additions and alterations, will constitute an increase in the degree of nonconformance when located at less than 50 feet from both streets. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on March 2, 2006, at which time written and oral evidence were presented. Based upon all testimony, documentation, personal inspection of the property, and other evidence, the Zoning Board finds the following facts to be true and relevant: AREA VARIANCE RELIEF REQUESTED: The applicants wish to construct a reconstruct a substantial portion of the existing single-family dwelling, and to add a minor extension, within 50 feet of the front yard property lines, as shown on the site plan prepared by Samuels & Steelman, Architects dated 1/6/2006 (Project 0419). REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: On the basis of testimony presented, materials submitted and personal inspections, the Board makes the following findings: 1. Grant of the variance will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The applicants are proposing to replace the additions built many years ago with new construction, preserving and restoring the original historic, mid -nineteenth century design with a gabled roof as opposed to a flat roof, in the same footprint of the existing home. Also proposed is a new bay window and covered, open porch for enjoyment of the southern vistas. The applicant states that the new construction will result in improvements very much like the existing house in architectural form and mass, and will require upgrades by the Health Department for a new sanitary system meeting current codes. The height Page 2 — March 9, 2006• ZB File No. 5819 — J. and K. Spey CTM No. 117-10-18.1 for the new construction will be 297" to the top of the ridge. The setbacks will not be reduced to less than the existing nonconformities on the northern or western yards, and the footprint of the existing home will be utilized, except that a single -story, open covered -porch will be added at the south side of the home. 2. The benefit sought by the applicants cannot be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicants to pursue, other than an area variance. While applicant's wish to preserve and restore the architectural integrity of the existing home, the code requires approval from this Board before a building permit may be issued. The home contains additions that were poorly built and placed in a location that does not conform to the current zoning code. With the proposed reconstruction of similar architectural design as the existing dwelling, proper structural supports and building standards will be met. 3. The variances granted herein are substantial, in that the nonconforming setback areas for the new construction, as a replacement, are substantially less than the code requirements. 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 road services three existing houses and the new construction will be screened. 5. Grant of the requested relief is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of reconstruction of a major portion of the existing house, and a minor 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 Simon, seconded by Chairwoman Oliva, and duly carried, to GRANT the variance as applied for, as shown on the site plan prepared by Samuels & Steelman, Architects dated 1/6/2006 (Project 0419). 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. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Oliva (Chairwoman), Goehringer, Simon and Weisman. Member Dinizio was absent. This Resolution was duly ado ted (4-0). Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman 4/x/06 Approved for Filing APPEALS BOARD MEMBER Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Ruth D. Oliva James Dinizio, Jr. Michael A. Simon Leslie Kanes Weisman Mailing Address: Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road - P.O. Box 1 179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 Office Location: Town Annex /First Floor, North Fork Bank 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) Southold, NY 11971 http://southoldtown.northfork.net ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD RECEIVED Tel. (631) 765-1809 - Fax (631) 765-9064 PNOV 3 2008 10 FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS, AND DETERMINATION MEETING HELD OCTOBER 16, 2008 Southold Own Clerk ZBA # 6:70.5 - RONALD POLLIO PROPERTY LOCATION- 165 Second Street, New Suffolk CTM 1000-117-10-20.5 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 received September 15, 2008 stating that this application is considered a matter for local determination as there appears to be no significant county -wide or inter -community impact. PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: The subject property is a non -conforming 6,999 square foot parcel in the R40 District, measuring 70.00 feet along Second Street to the east, 100.00 feet to the northern boundary, 100.00 feet along the southern boundary, and 70.00 feet along the western boundary. The lot is improved with a single-family dwelling, as shown on the survey by John C. Ehlers, L. S. dated June 25, 2008, BASIS OF APPLICATION: Request for a Variance under Section 280-124, based on the Building Inspector's July 18, 2008 Notice of Disapproval concerning a proposed deck addition on a nonconforming 6,999 square foot parcel, which new construction will be less than the code required minimum of 10 feet on a single side yard setback and less than 35 feet on the minimum front yard setback. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on September 25, 2008, at which time written and oral evidence were presented. Based upon all testimony, documentation, personal inspection of the property, and other evidence, the Zoning Board finds the following facts to be true and relevant: • 0 Page 2 — October 16, 2008 ZBA # 620 b— Ronald Pollio, Applicant CTM 1000-117-10-20.5 RELIEF REQUESTED: The applicant seeks variances for a 12 ft. wide by 24 ft. deep deck addition witht reduced south side setback from 10 feet to 6.5 feet, and a reduction of front yard setback from 35 feet to 9.5 feet. REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: On the basis of testimony presented, materials submitted, and personal inspections, the Board makes the following findings: 1. Town Law §267-b(3)(b)(3)(1). Grant of setback variances will not have an adverse environmental effect on the character of the neighborhood or be a detriment to nearby properties. An existing high hedge on the south side of the property will screen the deck from the neighbor's property. Increasing the non -conformity in the front yard will add only a 7.4 foot extension of a 36.3 foot east side of the house. 2. Town Law 4267-b(3)(b)(2). The benefit of an expanded and renovated house cannot be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than area variances. Any expansion of the existing deck would require a variance. 3. Town Law§267-b(3)(b)(3). The variance is not substantial. The reduction of the front yard setback applies on. The existing front yard setback will be extended but will not exceed the existing nonconforming setback. 4. Town Law §267-b(3)(b)(5). The need for a variance was self-created only so far it is a consequence of a decision to extend an existing side deck on a narrow nonconforming lot. 5. Town Law §267-b(3)(b)(4). No evidence has been submitted to suggest that grant of this relief will have an adverse impact on physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood. Owners of the three adjoining houses have indicated their support of the application. 6. Town Law §267-b. Grant of the relief requested is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of his property, 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 Simon, seconded by Member Weisman, and duly carried, to 0 Page -9 — 0-*ober 16, 2008 ZBA # 6205 - Ronald Pollio, Applicant CTM 1000-117-10-20.5 10 GRANT the variances as applied for, as shown on Project 0821 Site Map A-1, prepared by Peconic Permit Expediting dated 7-21-08, subject to the following CONDITIONS: 1. Relocation of the existing outdoor shower (to a conforming location), and 2. Retention of the vegetative screening on the south side of the property. That the above conditions be written into the Building Inspector's Certificate of Occupancy, when issued. 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. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Oliva (Chairwoman), Dinizio, Simon and Weisman. This Resolution was duly adopted (4-0). Chairman Goehringer was absent. RUTH D. OLIVA, Vice Chairwoman Approved for Filing 10/ 3c /2008 r ��h ::%�"'' .�:_ 4 t 1 ►[dietse_:: ,_s... -::.:F %£fit .. a....A J" (3) Nichloas De Croisset May13, 20141 Looking Werst i V (4) nichlas De Croisset May 13, 20141 Looking West r (4) nichlas De Croisset May 13, 20141 Looking West bal (5) Nichlas De Croisset May 13, 20141 Looking North q , c (7) Nicholas De Croisset May 13,20141 Looking NE (8) Nichlas De Croisset May 13,20141 Looking NW (9) Nichloas De Croisset Mayl3, 20141 Looking NE (10) nichlas De Croisset May 13, 20141 Looking NW 011 �.M n� r (11) Nichlas De Croisset May 13, 2014 1 Looking NE (12) NichlaS De Croisset May 13, 20141 Looking NW mmNicholas »cme May 13,20141 bmq As d�� ) . .!. (14)ns»c mr May ,o#/Looking »A TOWN � flUT D ?Y RECORD CARD R ,2 OWNER STREET VILLAGE DISTRICT SUB. LOT ./�� t v , j�,� , FORMER OWNER N E ACREAGE �- Sr2 ` W C4:: TYPE OF BUILDING RES. SEAS. VL. FARM I IND. I CB. I MISC. LAND IMP. TOTAL DATE REMARKS p 'i .•� `�!' C 0N L C `apo 3 aD t11.,6,�.J, ,t Q .� �� D D � .D b !.� ° 8'FL � t2 l! 9C,� rrh vt yf �'�:r�r;r�: S��,a�. �. c�iy�e.11 %i��. _ �'c► „� ��., �, 36o a s dt o e 2 13 7L _ a 004 P-rlkJ' SEV& 80/ B LDING I ION# 7//,!r) 7 7.s j3 -t D /'kf, , a VU/1.P A0/7 -1a., E, C NORMALLO, ABOVE ' _ i ar ,cre Va1 e Per A e ` aluev1n Tillable 1 l .�� !aZ „ 3 a Tillable 2,�-- Tillable, 3 Wcodland r Swampland Brushland House Plot Tp.t1l' "�' O -w __ - _ s� #a `i J'lE:.`i'...�` ��������fif ��t ��r+��1i� a,_ �. 1 sem. £a I 4 u ,u4(c) GREAT PECONIC 4 (Lo Nicola 9, 4e- 10 er0 — I0- a0.g NOTICE COUNTY OF SUFFOLK Q u. Ma IF SOl AM V#4 ulxa.e.. at rUSTRCTs E •^� •�•' 1. �"` `" `°'"` °"TR1iSr Red Property Tax SeNCe Agency r mrxt U. --. -- s"m s g.n YWtEXM6E. LLTbG7C1�SAlE W d. ul p wa am ,go%" L . — KT -- PPE a Rm w UMMU7Ma1 K WT PwTv, aF 71E car," Canw M""* 4N 1 u3m � w 6Mk1 IN –^--.-- �rt w utq . sLRTlllx OOUMY Thi LM 6 PNOIalTm • • vc N.FBTs M ��.: as 1 �•� '° '� rrtl�OUi VWM PFAILSSKH oc M s P �' ow mom V. �•-.. �— - NRwm USIau7El1 WA PWPEM YAM f91Nfi Acorn. tlNt K07C YtCWANX 047, MA +�� it to - 2&-T 4'-5" ❑ ❑ ❑ I ❑ ❑ --- PILE FOUNDATIONS fi — COLUMN/ BRACING - -'— - ❑ UNE OF DECK ABOVE LINE OF STRUCTURE - ABOVE --------- -- 13 13 13 A' N 'MEOH C14AS@ it to - ❑ ❑ ❑ I --- PILE FOUNDATIONS fi 1..1 ❑ ❑ UNE OF DECK ABOVE --------- -- Ground Floor TOSHIKO MORI ARCHITECT PLLC 6 (o %6 QtZCSjv JUNo� 1014 B®,q R,D oF p P pFA`S LONGITUDINAL SECTION 28-T T-10' 9-0' 28'-T 2T-3' First Floor 28'-5" 4-10" L Mezzanine de CROISSET SCHEMATIC PLANS SCALE: 1/8" = V-0" MARCH 07, 2014 1a-10' 1r-o� 2(Y-10' -------- --------------------------------------------------- LONGITUDINAL SECTION TOSHIKO MORI ARCHITECT PLLC 6-6' a'a NOTE: ALL ELEVATION MARKERS ARE MEASURED IN REFERENCE TO SEA LEVEL EL: +36'-8' . TOP OF ROOF ` EL +22'-6' A.F.F. EL: +14'-6" A.F.F. EL 10'-V _ a / MIN. UNDERSIDE STRUCTURE ' ---i�� ---------------�—�—------------ ;------------J�-��-----`�------ EL: FEMA FL DUNN E EL: +5'-6' GRADE I i I I PILE FOUNDATIONS I' —� EL: �00' �'- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- LEVEr____ CROSS SECTION REQ AAC,S� TKO MO �F l,c T � � V�9�4259 F de CROISSET SCHEMATIC PLANS SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" MARCH 07, 2014 EL: +361-8" WEST ELEVATION CHIMNEY EAST ELEVATION TOSHIKO MORI ARCHITECT PLLC EL: +36'-8" TOP OF ROOF EL: +22'-6" A.F.F. A.F.F. ' L EL 10-0 MIN. UNDERSIDE STRUCTURE EL: 8'40' _ FEMA FLOOD LINE EL: +5'-6" > GRADE NOl— ALL ELEVATION MARKERS ARE MEASURE I IN REFERENCE TO SEA LEVEL zu M SOUTH ELEVATION I 9'4r NORTH ELEVATION CHIMNEY OPERABLE WINDOW EL: +36-8' TOP OF ROOF EL: +22'-6' A.F.F. EL: +14'-6' A.F.F.' EL: 10-0' MIN. UNDERSIDE STRUCTURE EL: 8'-0" FEMA FLOOD UNE EL: +5'-6' GRADE EL +35-8' TOP OF ROOF — EL: +14'-6' ; — _ A.F.F. i� EL 19-0' MIN. UNDERSIDE STRUCTURE' EL: 8'-0" FEMA FLOOD UNE " EL: +5'-6' s- GRADE de CROISSET SCHEMATIC PLANS SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" MARCH 07, 2014 TOSHIKO MORI ARCHITECT PLLC de CROISSET SCHEMATIC PLANS SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" JAN 31, 2014 TOSHIKO MORI ARCHITECT PLLC '44"" Mp'9i Cy���. � A ©:V 014259 y0 �OF NE_.R de CROISSET SCHEMATIC PLANS SCALE: 1/8' = V-0" JAN 31, 2014 JACKSON 1} • � h to aLn � R' m `^ aa� o 'o m aka D X CJ A �, O 'y �b y EX15TINO 5EPTIG 5Y5TEt (/ TO BE REMOVED SEE NOTE No. 6 r TF'ST HOLE DATA _ NEST HOLE DUG BY McDONALD GEOSCIENCE ON MARCH 1. 2014) -� EL. 5.4' 0• / DARK BROWN LOAM OL ROWN CLAYEY SAND SC 4.6' ATER IN BROWN CLAYEY SAND SC 7' ATER IN BROWN FINE SAND SP 13' PROPOSED SEPTIC SYSTEM DETAIL (NOT TO SCALE) DISTRIBUTION POOL OF 5 POOL SYSTEM SEPTIC TANK—U1 1. MINIMUM SEPTIC TANK CAPACITIES FOR 3 BEDROOM HOUSE IS 1,250 GALLONS. 1 TANK; 10' DIA., 3' DEEP 2. CONCRETE SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF 3,000 psi AT 28 DAYS. 3, WALL THICKNESS SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 3", A TOP THICKNESS OF 8' AND A BOTTOM THICKNESS OF 4", ALL WALLS. BOTTOM AND TOP SHALL CONTAIN REINFORCING TO RESIST AN APPLIED FORCE OF 300 psf.. 4. ALL JOINTS SHALL BE SEALED SO THAT THE TANK IS WATERTIGHT. 5. THE SEPTIC TANK SHALL BE INSTALLED AT LEVEL IN ALL DIRECTIONS (WITH A MAX. TOLERANCE OF t1/4") ON A MINIMUM 3' THICK BED OF COMPACTED SAND OR PEA GRAVEL. S. A 10' min. DISTANCE BETWEEN SEPTIC TANK AND HOUSE SHALL BE MAINTAINED. GROUND WATER ELEV. 0.8' LEACHING POOLS (5 1. MINIMUM LEACHING SYSTEM FOR A 1 TO 3 BEDROOM HOUSE IS 250 sq ft SIDEWALL AREA. 5 POOLS; 2' DEEP, 8' dia. 2. LEACHING POOLS ARE TO BE CONSTRUCTED OF PRECAST REINFORCED CONCRETE (OR EQUAL) LEACHING STRUCTURES, SOLID DOMES AND/OR SLABS. 3. ALL COVERS SHALL BE OF PRECAST REINFORCED CONCRETE (DR EQUAL). 4. A 10' min. DISTANCE BETWEEN LEACHING POOLS AND WATER LINE SHALL BE MAINTAINED. 5. AN 8' min. DISTANCE BETWEEN ALL LEACHING POOLS AND SEPTIC TANK SHALL BE MAINTAINED. SURVEY OF PROPERTY SITUATE NEW SUFFOLK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SUFFOLK COUNTY, NEW YORK S.C. TAX No. 1000-117-10-19 SCALE 1"=30' JANUARY 2, 2008 JANUARY 20, 2008 VERIFIED HIGH WATER MARK MAY 9, 2009 STAKE PROPERTY LINES NOVEMBER 19, 2009 UPDATE SURVEY JANUARY 6, 2013 ADDED 1st FLOOR EL. do FLOOD ZONE FEBRUARY 3, 2014 UPDATE SURVEY MARCH 24, 2014 ADD PROPOSED HOUSE JUNE 2, 2014 REVISE SEPTIC SYSTEM AREA = 11,105 sq. ft. (TO BULKHEAD) 0.255 OC. CERTIFIED TO: NICOLAS DE CROISSET FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY OF NEW YORK NOTES. 1. ELEVATIONS ARE REFERENCED TO N.A.V.D. 1988 DATUM EXISTING ELEVATIONS ARE SHOWN THUS:" EXISTING CONTOUR LINES ARE SHOWN THUS:— — — —s— — — — 2. THIS PROPERTY IS IN FLOOD ZONE VE (EL 8) AS SHOWN ON FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP No. 36103CO501 H ZONE VE: COASTAL FLOOD WITH VELOCITY HAZARD (WAVE ACTION); BASE FLOOD ELEVATIONS DETERMINED 3. MINIMUM SEPTIC TANK CAPACITIES FOR 3 BEDROOM HOUSE IS 1,250 GALLONS. 1 TANK; 10' DIA., 3' DEEP 4. MINIMUM LEACHING SYSTEM FOR 3 BEDROOM HOUSE IS 300 sq ft SIDEWALL AREA. 5 POOLS; 2' DEEP, 8' dia. PROPOSED FUTURE 50% EXPANSION POOL OPROPOSED 8' DIA. X 2' DEEP LEACHING POOL 0 PROPOSED 1,250 GALLON SEPTIC TANK 5. THE LOCATION OF WELLS AND CESSPOOLS SHOWN HEREON ARE FROM FIELD OBSERVATIONS AND/OR DATA OBTAINED FROM OTHERS. 6. EXISTING SEPTIC SYSTEM STRUCTURES SHALL BE PUMPED CLEAN AND REMOVED IN ACCORDANCE WITH S.C.D.H.S. STANDARDS. 7�, 1OAR® ®F APPIzALS UNAUTHORIZED ALTERATION OR ADDITION TO THIS SURVEY IS A VIOLATION OF SECTION 7209 OF THE NEW YORK STATE EDUCATION LAW. COPIES OF THIS SURVEY MAP NOT BEARING THE LAND SURVEYOR'S INKED SEAL OR EMBOSSED SEAL SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED TO BE A VALID TRUE COPY. CERTIFICATIONS INDICATED HEREON SHALL RUN ONLY TO THE PERSON FOR WHOM THE SURVEY IS PREPARED, AND ON HIS BEHALF TO THE TITLE COMPANY, GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY AND LENDING INSTITUTION LISTED HEREON, AND TO THE ASSIGNEES OF THE LENDING INSTI- TUTION. CERTIFICATIONS ARE NOT TRANSFERABLE. THE EXISTENCE OF RIGHTS OF WAY AND/OR EASEMENTS OF RECORD, IF ANY, NOT SHOWN ARE NOT GUARANTEED. PREPARED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR TITLE SURVEYS AS ESTABLISHED BY THE L.I.A.L.S. AND APPROVED AND ADOPTED FOR SUCH USE BY THE NEW YORK STATE LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION.'^. Of Nzh, * k N.Y.S. Lic. No. 50467 Nathan Taft Corwin III Land Surveyor Title Surveys — Subdivisions — Site Plans — Construction Layout PHONE (631)727-2090 OFFICES LOCATED AT 1586 Main Road Jamesport, New York 11947 Fax (631)727-1727 MAILING ADDRESS P.O. Box 16 Jamesport, New York 11947