HomeMy WebLinkAbout6922 BOARD MEMBERS �� ®f $®fir Southold Town Hall
Leslie Kanes Weisman,Chairperson �i''4 .0 53095 Main Road•P.O.Box 1179
le ,`® 4 Southold,NY 11971-0959
Eric Dantes Office Location:
Gerard P.Goehringerik
G Q ,� Town Annex/First Floor,Capital One Bank
George Horning A.
�� 54375 Main Road(at Youngs Avenue)
Kenneth Schneider ®lyc®U A . 01 Southold,NY 11971
' / ' IVED ; 3
http://southoldtown.northfork.net �—
1111 0
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS M Y 2U
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD .
Tel.(631)765-1809 •Fax(631)765-9064 outhold Town Clerk
FINDINGS,DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION
MEETING OF MAY 19,2016
ZBA FILE# 6922
NAME OF APPLICANT: Lisa B. Gillooly
PROPERTY LOCATION: 450 Harbor Road(corner King Street) (adj.to Orient Harbor), Orient NY
SCTM# 1000-27-4-7
SEQRA DETERMINATION: The Zoning Board of Appeals has visited the property under consideration in this
application and determines that this review falls under the Type II category of the State's List of Actions, without
further steps under SEQRA.
SUFFOLK COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE CODE: This application was referred as required under the Suffolk
County Administrative Code Sections A 14-14 to 23, and the Suffolk County Department of Planning issued its
reply dated February 31, 2016 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 January 14, 2016. 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 to construct the accessory garage is
CONSISTENT with LWRP policy standards and therefore is CONSISTENT with the LWRP. The "as-built" deck
and stair are INCONSISTENT with LWRP policy standards and therefore is INCONSISTENT with the LWRP.
The "as-built" 8' high fence is INCONSISTENT with LWRP policy standards and therefore is INCONSISTENT
with the LWRP. The applicant agreed to remove the existing 8'high "as-built" fence. The "as-built" deck
conforms to the rear yard setback set forth in the bulk schedule. These facts and the conditions imposed herein
render the proposed actions CONSISTENT with the LWP policy
PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: The parcel is a non-conforming 16,350 square foot waterfront parcel
located in an R-40 zone. The parcel has 105.46 feet of bulkhead frontage on Orient Harbor. The property runs
144.80 feet along King Street and 100.00 feet along Harbor Road. The property runs 176.13 feet on the West side.
The parcel is developed with a split level frame house, (3) Wood decks, and an in-ground pool. All is shown on a
survey by Nathan Taft Corwin L.L.S. dated June 13, 2015.
BASIS OF APPLICATION: Request for Variances from Article XXIII Section 280-124, Article III Section 280-
15C&F and Article XXII Section 280-105A and the Building Inspector's October 19, 2015 Notice of Disapproval,
last amended March 4, 2016 based on an application for building permit to construct an accessory garage and "as
built"fence, at; 1)Accessory garage proposed at less than the code required front yard setback of 40 feet from both
Page 2-May 19,2016
ZBA File#6922—Gillooly
SCTM#1000-27-4-7
streets, 2)Lot coverage at more than the code maximum allowed of 20%, 3)"as built" and proposed fences at more
than the code maximum height allowed in a front yard of 4 feet on both streets.
RELIEF REQUESTED: The applicant requests variances to construct an accessory garage that will result in a
front yard setback of+/- 10 feet and +/-28 feet where code requires a 35 foot front yard setback. The proposed
construction will result in lot coverage of 27.8% where code limits lot coverage to 20%. The applicant proposes to
construct a five foot tall fence in the front yard where code permits four feet.
AMENDED APPLICATION: During the hearing, the applicant was asked to bring the plan into more conformity
with the code. The applicant on April 27, 2016 (date)submitted a site plan removing the wood decking around the
existing pool and replacing it with an on grade patio. This results in proposed lot coverage at 23.2%. The applicant
also amended the site plan to show a code conforming garage size of 660 square feet and the proposed accessory
garage drawings to show a conforming height of 18 feet, thereby bringing the plan into more conformity with the
codes.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Several neighbors testified that they opposed the proposed construction. A
signed petition was presented in opposition of the proposed construction. The applicant presented a trustees permit
that permitted the applicant to do work on the"as-built"bulkhead.
. The applicant has a ZBA variance to construct a 5' high fence around the"as-built" swimming pool. The proposed
fence will surround the front yard of the property and not just the swimming pool. The applicant testified that she
will be installing plantings in order to have additional screening around the pool area.
FINDINGS OF FACT/REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION:
The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on January 7, 2016,February 4, 2016,and
April 7, 2016, at which time written and oral evidence were presented. Based upon all testimony, documentation,
personal inspection of the property and surrounding neighborhood, and other evidence,the Zoning Board finds the
following facts to be true and relevant and makes the following findings:
1. Town Law $267-b(3)(b)(1). Grant of the variance(s) for the front yard setback and lot coverage will not
produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The
neighborhood consists of small non-conforming lots improved with single-family homes. Other accessory garages
and structures exist in this neighborhood, and the proposed accessory garage is code conforming in size, height and
the front yard location on the subject waterfront property. The proposed 5' high fence will produce an undesirable
change in the character of the neighborhood since nonconforming fence heights in front yards is not typical in the
neighborhood.
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 applicant has a small water front lot and is burdened
by two front yards; therefore any proposed accessory garage will require the benefit of an area variance. The
existing lot coverage is already non-conforming; but the applicant is not proposing significant additional
nonconformance due to the removal of an existing pool deck. The benefit of a 5 foot tall fence can be achieved by
building a code conforming 4 foot tall fence and using landscape plantings to create the visual privacy the applicant
desires to achieve.
3. Town Law $267-b(3)(b)(3). The variance(s) granted herein for the +/- 10 foot and +/- 28 foot front yard
setback for the proposed accessory garage are mathematically substantial, representing 72% relief and 20%% relief
from the code. However,the proposed location for the garage places it at the greatest possible distance from Orient
Harbor and the applicant agreed that the garage ridge will run East to West and will be no higher than the code
conforming maximum height of 18 feet so as to mitigate the visual impact of the garage from Harbor Road. The
variance granted for lot coverage is mathematically substantial representing 16% relief from the code. However,
the applicant is removing a raised wooden deck therefore the proposed garage will not substantially
Page 3-May 19,2016
ZBA File#6922—Gillooly
SCTM 4 1000-27-4-7
increase the non-conforming lot coverage The variance proposed for the 5' fence is mathematically substantial
representing 25%relief from the code.
4. Town Law §267-b(3)(b)(4) No evidence has been submitted to suggest that a variance in this residential
community will have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood. The
applicant must comply with Chapter 236 of the Town's Storm Water Management Code.
5. Town Law $267-b(3)(b)(5). The difficulty has been self-created. The applicant purchased the parcel after the
Zoning Code was in effect and it is presumed that the applicant had actual or constructive knowledge of the
limitations on the use of the parcel under the Zoning Code in effect prior to or at the time of purchase.
6. Town Law $267-b. Grant of relief as amended for the garage's front yard setbacks and the total lot coverage is
the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of an accessory garage
while preserving and protecting the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the
community. Grant of the relief as requested for the proposed 5 foot high fence is not minimum action necessary
and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of fencing 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 Schneider, and duly
carried,to
GRANT the 2 front yard and lot coverage variances as amended, and shown on the site plan by Joseph Fischetti,
PE dated April 27, 2016 and stamped received by the ZBA on April 29, 2016, and the garage plan and section
dated April 20, 2016.
And to DENY the 5 foot high fence variance as applied for
CONDITIONS:
1) The town engineer shall ensure that the entire property complies with Chapter 236 of the Town's Storm Water
Management Code.
2) The accessory garage ridge shall run East to West and the height to the ridge shall be no higher than thel 8 feet
maximum permitted by code.
3. The accessory garage shall remain unheated and unfinished, shall contain no plumbing, and may not be used for
any purpose other than storage
That the above conditions be written into the Building Inspector's Certificate of Occupancy, when issued.
Any deviation from the survey, site plan and/or architectural drawings cited in this decision will result in delays
and/or a possible denial by the Building Department of a building permit, and may require a new application and
public hearing before the Zoning Board of Appeals.
Any deviation from the variance(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.
Pursuant to Chapter 280-146(B) of the Code of the Town of Southold any variance granted by the
Board of Appeals shall become null and void where a Certificate of Occupancy has not been
Page 4-May 19,2016
ZBA File#6922—Gillooly
SCTM# 1000-27-4-7
procured, and/or a subdivision map has not been filed with the Suffolk County Clerk,within three
(3)years from the date such variance was granted. The Board of Appeals may, upon written
request prior to the date of expiration, grant an extension not to exceed three (3) consecutive one
(1)year terms.
Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Weisman (Chairperson), Schneider, Dantes, Horning, Goehringer. This
Resolution was duly adopted (5-0).
cc-_-)t; /
Leslie Kanes`Weisman, Chairperson
Approved for filing,j/a� /2016