Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-12/08/1993APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Serge Doyen, Jr. James Dinizio, Jr. Robert A. Villa Richard C. Wilton Telephone (516) 765-1809 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MINUTES REGULAR MEETING WEDNESDAY~ DECEMBER 8~ 1993 SCOTT L. HARRIS Supervisor Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1800 7:15 p.m. Work Session - File Reviews - No action was taken. 7:30 p.m. Regular Meeting - Call to Order by Chairman A Regular Meeting was held by the Southold Town Board of Appeals on WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 8, 1993 commencing at 7:30 p.m. at the Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York 11971. Present were: Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman/Member Serge J. DOYen, Member james'Dinizio, Jr., Member Robert A. Villa, Member Richard C. Wilton, Member Linda Kowalski, Clerk Approximately persons were present in the audience at the commencement of the meeting. I. The following matters were held for PUBLIC HEARINGS, noted as follows: 7:32 p.m. No.. ROBERT AND~ACQUELYNOBERLIN. 101 of area. The isnot a corner lot two streets. This property technically does not have an established "rear yard" defi~edbythe code. Location of Property: 805 Oak Avenue, GoOse Bay Estates, SoUthold, NY; County Tax 'Map District 1000, Section 77, Block 2, Lot 20.1. The subject premises isl0cated in the R-40 Zone and contains an area of 19,200+- square feet. Page 2 Minutes Southold TOWn Board of Appeals RegUlar Meeting of DeCember 8, 1993 I. PUBLIC HEARINGS ~continued}: 7:35 p.m. Appl. No. 4205 - SALVATORE VINDIGNI. Variance to t~e ~oning Ordinahce, Article IIiA, Section 100-30A.3 for permission to constrUct addition which will exceed the 20% lot coveragelimitation. Location of PropertY: 1440 Gittette Drive,'East Marion, N~; County Tax Map District~'1000, Section 38, Block 2, Lot I5; also referred to as Lot No. 19 on the Map of. Marion Manor filed March 18, 1953 in the Suffolk Count~ Clerk's Office. This p~operty is located in the R-40 LOW-Density Residential Zone District and has a total lot area of 10,0-00 sq. ft. Matthew Hallock, Contractor, aPPeared in hehalf of the applicant. (Please see coPY of the written branS6ript of this hearing prepared under separate cover and attached for reference, if needed.) FOllowing. testimony, the Board adoPted the following findings and determination: (Continued on next page) Page 3 - Minutes Southotd~T0w~ Board of Appeals Regular Meeting of DecemJ0er 8, 1993 I. PUBLIC HEARINGS, continued: 7:40 p.m. Appl. No. 4203 - ROBERT E. BIDWELL. AppliCation fOr Special Exception under Article III, Section t00~31B-13 of the ZOning Ordinance', for apprOVal of winery uses eXisting building and proposed building. The site planshoWs hat'the property is Situated alOng th~ south side of C.R. 48, CUtchogue, NY, ts zoned-A-C AgricultHral-ConservatiOn and is fied on Suffolk County Tax Maps as District 1000, to meet with the Planning Board on the proposed layout in the' pending site plan (with the nearest carryover date Of January 12, t994). 7:50 ).m. Appl. No. 4204 - JOHN. CROKOS. Variance to the Zoninq , SeCtion t00'239.4A(t) for PermiSSion to locate and related structures within 100 feet of the top of the bluff along theLOng Istan~ SQ~,n~. Location of PrOperty: 2~10 Gr~dview Drive, Orient, NY; CoUnt~ Tax MaP Parcel No. 1000-14-2-3.11. Keith Keller of Sandgren-Keller Associates appea~e~ in behalf of the appticant~ FolloWing tes'timon~, 'the heating'was concluded (Closed~, pending- deliberations later this evening. 8:00. p.m. .Appl. No. 4t95 - PETROL STATIONS LTD. and~ct i uPdates. ) No appearance was made bp J. or the owner in behalf of this application as B~ard further request.sa writ~.en ~p~a~e'~rom the 1.applicant's attorney in Order to' finalize' this aPPliCatiOn within' a ~easonab~e ~ime, ~ ~ 8:0~ a:nd :'con. ~.m. No. 4199 - PETERPSYLLOS. Cat~ndar in p~o see ~ for Verbatim statements.)' FollOWing testimony, pending det~ati0ns and ( made after the remaining '- was ~6nCluded.) 8:05 p.m. Appt. No. 4206 - GA~Y AND CAROL FISH. use Page 4 Minutes So~thotd TOWn Board of Appeals Regular Meeting of December 8, 199 located in the R-40 Residential Zc Chairman declared the hearing conc later in the meeting. End of Public Hearings. me District. Gary Fish ion. (Ptease see copy of ared Under separate cover and )' F0i!~wing testimony, the luded Pending deliberations APPROVAL OF MINUTES: On motion by Chaii-man Goehringer, seconded byMe~ber'Dinizio,~it wa~ RESOLVED, to approve the MinUtes of the November 8, t993 Regular Meeting of the Board as s~itted. VOTE OF THE BOkRD: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Do~en, Dinizio, Villa and. Wilton. This ~es~tUtion was duly' adopted. following pages: UNLISTED ACTION (atso posted on Town Clerk Bulletin Board): Appi. No. 4206. - Application of GARY AND CAROL FISH for a SpeCial Exce~tio~ t~ Permit Acc~ssor~Apa~ent (acceSsory to the existing single-family oecupa~c~). DELIBERATIONS/DECISIONS (from earlier hearings), continue~ on folIOwing pages. Page 5 Minutes Southold Town Board of Appeals December 8, 1993 Regular Meeting ACTION OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS Appl. NO. 4199: Matter of the Application of PETER PSYLLOS. Variance to the Zoning Qrdinance, Article III, Section 100'33 and Article XXIII, Section 100-231 for permission to locate PropoSedtennis court structure enclosed with ten-foot high fencing inthe front yard area. Location of Property: 2867 Ruth Road, Mattituck, NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-106-1-1.11. WHEREAS, after due notice, p~hlic hearings were held on November 8, 1993 and Deceraber 8, 1993, and which time. all those who desired to be heard were heard and their testimony recorded; and WHEREAS, the Board has carefully considered all testimony and dOcUmentation submitted concerning this application; and · WHEREAS, Board Members have personally viewed and a~e familiar with the premises in question, its present zoning, and the surrounding areas; and W~EREAS, the Board made the following findings of fact: 1. This Lon is a request for a variance from Article 100-3i, and Article XXIII, Section 100-231 which that an acCessOry tennic court st~et~re be area. The applicationfor a building appeal is based shows that the accessory tennis enclosure) str~cture is to be The area is technically one of two front yards due to the fact that this parcel is ~ corner lot fronting along two access roads ( 2. The premises in question is-located in the Residential line, 57.5 feet from the westerly property line, and. 217.8 feet Page S Appl. No. 4199 Matter of PETER PSYLLOS Decision Rendered December 8, 1993 from the southerly (front) property ~ine along a private right-of-way. It is noted that a small shed is located in the center of this southerly right-of-way (ref. survey dated October 27, 1987 prepared by Young & Young). 3. For corner lots of this nature, Section 100-232 provides that the rear yard may be defined as "one yard other than the front yard shall be deemed to be a rear yard, and the other or other side yards .... " It is the position of the Board that the layout of the land as a corner lot that lends to the difficulties in locating a permitted tennis court while at the same time meeting the yard and setback regulations. 4. for record_purposes, it is-notedthat this building is proposed for accessory use incidental and used by the residents and occupantsof this dwelling, and-may not be used for profitable or gainful purposes. This use of this structure may not be enlarged, re-located, or otherwise altered. 5. The proposed structure will be in conformance with the height requirements pertinent to accessory structures. 6. The hearing record is extensive and confirms opposition from owners (Brady) of the adjacent (adjoining) parcel on the west side of the applicant's property, and other concerns - some related to this project and some unrelated. Full consideration has been made of the entire hearing record by Board Members, and additional screening has been made a condition or. this variance. There is a fence presently located between the two parcels. The neighboring (Brady) residence is more than 250 feet distant from the applicant's proposed tennis-court location. The neighboring (Brady) accessory building, also situated in the front yard, was the subject of a variance request in 1986 to be located 100 feet from the front (southerly) property line. ~his accessory building was limited to storage purposes incidental to the residency of the owners of the property (ref: Appeal No. 3469, Condition No. 1). 7. Also noted for record purposes is Appeal No. 3532 (A. Burns) renderedby the Board of Appeals on September' 11, 1986 authorizing the location of an accessory tennis court in the front yard area. Under today's zoning regulations, this particular accessory structure, which is located two lots west of the applicant herein, would not require a variance. Section 100-33C (added by Local Law ~33-1992) permits accessory buildings/structures to be located in tke front yard, provided that such buildings and structures meet the front-yard setback requirements. With the exception of the applicant:s lot and one other non-waterfront lot (all, however, witk.water views of the L.I. Soung) in this immediate neighborhood, accessory Page 7 - Appl~ No. 4199 Matter of PETER PSYLLO$ Decision Rendered December 8, 1993 buildings and structures would be permitted to be located in the front yard area. 8. It is the position of the Board in considering this application that: (a) the circumstances are uniquely related to the property and there is no method feasible for appellant to pursue other than a variance - particularly since the property does technically have two "front yards." "~-~ ~" ~b~'-'t~e-reli~f~i~'~no~'Substantial in ~relation to the requirements and will be distant from neighboring buildings; the setbacks for .the tennis court of 45 feet from the westerly property line, approximately 45 feet from the easterly (front) property line, and not closer than 34 feet from the southerly (front) property line is feasible under the circumstances; (c) the variance requested does not involve an increase of dwelling unit or use density; (d) the relief requested will not cause a substantial effect on available governmental facilities since the structure is a permitted use under Section 100-31C[4), and will be used only incidentally to the residents and occupants of the dwelling; (e) the relief requested is not unreasonable due to the uniqueness of the property and the immediate area; (f) there is no alternative for' the applicant to pursue other than a variance; (g) the variance will not in turn be adverse to the safety, health, welfare, comfort, convenience, or order of the town, or be adverse to the neighboring properties because night use is not proposed.and lighting is not permitted <ref: Section i00-31C(4-b) of the Zoning Code>. Accordingly, on motion by Member Villa, seconded by Member Wilton, it was RESOLVED, to GRANT permission to locate a proposed tennis court structure, net to exceed 60 feet by 120 feet, in the southerly front yard area, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. Evergreens or similar trees or bushes (.such as rhododendrons, etc.) shall be planted along (within) the · applicant's south ~erly property l~ne at a m~nLmum height of three Page 8 - Appl. No. 4199 Matter of PETER PSYLLOS Decision Rendered December 8, 1993 (3) feet, and six (6) feet apart,, for the full length {150 feet}; and 2. The fence height of the tennis court shall not exceed 10 feet above ground, as proposed; and 3. There shall be no lighting for after-dark use as regulated by s~hsection 4-b of Section 100-31 of the Zoning Code; and 4. The se%backs of this accessory structure shall be not closer than 45 feet to the westerly property line, 34 feet to the southerly property line, and approximately 45 feet to the easterly front property line; and 5. As much as possible of the natural wooded, or heavy brush areas to the west and to the south of the proposed tennis court shall remain. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Dinizio, Villa, Wilton, Doyen, and Goehringer. This resolution was duly adopted. Page 9 - Mi,'.n~tes Southold Town Board of Appeals Regular Meeting of December 8, 1993 FINDINGS AND DETER~INATIO~ Appt. No. 4206-SE. Application of GARY AND CAROL FISH for a Special Exception as provided byArticte IIIA, Section t00-30A.2B for presentlyoccupied as a dwelling with garage. Location of Proper~y.: 955 Deep HolelDrive, Mattituck, NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. t00~, Section 115, Block I3, Lot 9. This property contains a iotare~ of approximately t5, Q00 sq. ft. and is locatedin the R~40 Residential Zone District. WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on December 8, 1993, at whichtime all persons were given an opportunity to be heard and theirteStimony considered; and WHERE~S, the Board has carefully considered all testimony and documentation ~0mitted concerning this application; and WHEREAS, the Board made the following Findings of Fact: 1. appellant is a Special Attic SeCtion le III, (14) for permlss~o~ to establish "AccessOr~'~Apartment, in the which is withinth~ sam~ f6°tprint~of tbs as more ParticUlar!Ysh~wn."on the map and fi6°r plan s,,h~itte~under this aputicati0n. The question is located R-40 and'co~tains a total lot 0~ sq. ft. and 100.0 ft. ai6ng the-weste~ Drive <ref~ s~fve~ MarCh 29, 1991 bY Roderick VanTUyl, PoC.> 3. The subject premises is improved with a one and ,framed dwelling structUre with athacked garage on %he , and a raised, open'deck attached to the rear of the dwelling. The setbacks' or'the principal building footprint is sho~n to be 14 feet at the north Matter of GARY AND CAROL FISH Appl. No. 4206 - Special Exccption side, 13 feet at the south side, 50 feet from the front property line, and 46+- feet from the rear property line. 4. The requested '~ccessory Apartment" is shown to be proposed at 550 square feet of livable floor area on the first floor level (which is within the existing garage area attached to the dwelling). The remaining floor area to be retained as the principal single-family residence of the ownerls) will be 1885 square feet: 1260 on the first floor plus 625 feet on the second level. Town assessment records show that the dwell~ing is presently 1599+- square feet of living area plus the garage. This proposal meets the requirement of subsection (d) which requires-the accessory apartment not be tess than 450 square feet of livable floor area, and subsection (.e) which requires that the livable floor area of the remaining unit be not less than 60 percent of the total dwelling, as exists. 5. Article IIIA, Section 100-30A.2(B-1) <ref. Article III, Section 100-31B(14)>, permits the establishment of this use as an accessory to the residency of the owner in the subject dwelling, and further subject to conditions (a) through (q). It is noted for the record that the following Certificates of Occupancy and Building Permits were issued for the dwelling construction: a) Building Permit No. 2586 issued 11/18/64 for an addition to dwelling; and b) Certificate of Occupancy %Z-19905 dated May 15, 1991 for a single-family dwelling built prior to April.9, 1957; and c) Building Permit No. 19797 for an open deck addition issued 4/22/91. 6. Since the applicant is proposing up to five occupants: three for the existing dwelling and two for the accessory apartment, five (5) parking spaces will be required and located perpendicular to the existing garage area. 7. It is the position, of the Board Members that all the conditions and standardsestablished by the zoning code for an accessory apartment are satisfied and acceptable. 8.- In considering this Special Exception application: (a) the Boardhas given consideration, among other things, to Sections {A} through {p} as provided by'Article XXVI, Section 100-264 of the_Zoning Code~ (.b) the Board has deteamined that the use requested will not prevent the orderly and reasonable use of adjacent properties or of properties in adjacent use Page ll- December ~ 1993 Matter of GARY AND CAROL FISH Appl: No. 4206 - Special Exception districts; (c) it is detez~uined that the use will not adversely affect the safety, welfare, comfort, convenience or order of the town - provided all other rules and regulations are complied with at all times; (d) the use is in harmony with and will promote the general purposes and intent of zoning. Accordingly, on motion by Chairman Goehringer seconded by Member Wilton, it was " RESOLVED, that the request for a Special Exception for an "Accessory Apartment" in the Matter of GARY AND CAROL~FISH under Appl. No. 4206, RE'AND HEREBY IS APPROVR. D SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. Compliance with subsections a thru q of Section 100-31B(14), Article III, of the Zoning Code; 2. The size of the main dwelling unit shall not be reduced to less than 60 percent of the total existing floor area, or 960+- square feet; 3. The accessory 'apartmentshall not exceed 40 percent of the livable floor area of the existing dwelling unit <600 sq ft.>. ' 4. Physical access to the accessory apartment is permitted from the rear of the dwelling (existing garage area). There shall, however, be no outside stairwells for either unit <only an interior stairs or other interior access for entering or exiting the residence> as required by Subsection (i) Section 100-31B(14). ' 5. This conversion shall be subject to inspection by the Building Inspector and renewal of the certificate of occupancy or certificate of compliance annually, with a written notice furnished to the Chairman or Clerk of the Board of Appeals for recordkeeping purposes. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen, Dinizio, Villa, and Wilton. This resolution was duly adopted. Page 12 - Minutes Southold Town Board of Appeals December 8, 1993 Regular Meet±ng Appeal No. 4205. Upon application of SALVATORE VINDIGNI~ Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article IIIA, Section 100-30A~3 for permission to construct addition which will exceed the 20% lot coverage limitation. Location of Property: 1440 Gillette DriVe, East Marion, NY; County Tax Map District 1000, Section 38, Block 2, Lot 15; also referred to as Lot No. 19 on the Map of Marion Manor filed Marck 18, 1953 in the Suffolk County Clerk's Office. This'property is located in the R-40 Low-Density Residential Zone District and has a total lot area of 10,000 sq. ft. WHEREAS, a p~hlic hearing was held and concluded on December 8, ~1993; and WHEREAS, at said hearing all those who desired to be heard were heard and their testimony recorded; and W~RREAS, the Board has carefully considered all testimony and documentation submitted concerning this application; and WHEREAS, the Board Members have personally viewed and are familiar with the premises in question, its present zoning and the surrounding areas; and WHEREAS; the Board made the following Findings of Fact: 1. This application is for a variance from the lot coverage requirements, of the zoning code limitation at twenty (20%) percent of the total lot area. 2. ProPosed in this project is a fully enclosed addition of 410 square feet, dimensions for which are 12 feet deep by 31 feet long, exclusive of step area which may be permitted as per Section 100-230C. 3. The Board finds: (a) the circumstaD~s are unique to the property whick is due to its size of 10,000 square feet, as approved by the Southold Town Planning Board, (ref: Map of Marion Manor, Lot No. 19); Page 13 - Appl. No. 4205 Matter of SALVATORE VINDIGNI Decision Rendered December 8, 1993 (b) the relief requested is not substantial in relation to the other properties in the area; the increase requested is 410 square feet over the existing coverage of 2,090 square feet, for a total of 2500 square feet, exclusive of step area; (c) the relief, as requested, will not alter the essential character and is found to be in harmony with the intent of zoning, and complying with all other zoning regulations; (d) there is no other method feasible for appellants to pursue other than a variance; (e) the benefit,~.when weighed, is greater to .applicant and is the minimum necessary; (f) the relief requested will not create an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties by the grant of the variance since the addition is in line with the established rear yard setback of the existing dwelling; (g) the proposed variance will not have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district since there are no sensitive wetland areas in close proximity and there is no plan to increase use density on this property; (h) in view of all the above factors, the interests of justice will be served by granting the relief requested for an additional 410' square feet, plus if necessary a step area of up to 60 sq. ft. Accordingly, on motion by Member Dinizio, seconded by Chairman Goehringer, it was RESOLVED to GRANT the variance fOr a fully enclosed 410 sq. ft. addition to dwelling (for living area or porch area as may be needed) under Appeal No. 4205. Vote of the Board: Doyen, Villa and Wilton. Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Dinizio, This resolution was duly adopted. Page 14 - Minutes Southold Tmwn Board of Appeals December 8, 1993 Regular Meeting ACTION OF THE BQARD OF APPEALS Appl. NO. 4202: Matter of the Application.of ROBERT AND JACQUELYN OBERLIN. Variance to the ZoningOrdinance, ArticleIIIA, Section 100~30A~4 <100-33> for aPProval Of an existing accessory utility~.storage shed which is located in the southerly front yard area. The subject premises is not a corner lot but f~cnts along two streets. This property technically do~s not have an established "rear yard" defined by the code. LocatiOn of Property:~805 Oak Avenue, Goose Bay Estates, Southold, NY; County Tax Map District 1000, Section 77, Block 2, Lot 20.1. The subject premises is located in the R-40 Zone and contains an area of i9,200+- square feet. WHEREAS, after due notice, a public hearing was held on December 8, 1993, and at said hearing all those who desired to be heard were heard andtheir testimony~recorded; and WHEREAS, the B~ard has carefully considered all testimony and documentatiQn submitted concerning this application; and WHEREAS, Board Members have personally viewed and are familiar with the premises in question, its present zoning, and the surrounding areas.; and WHEREAS~ the. Board made the following findings of fact: 1. This is an appeal of a Notice of Disapproval issued b~ the Buitdin¢ applicant h~s aP~lie~ for a ect variance) for a detaChed accessory storage shed 'loCated in the northe~iy front ~ard area. 2. The] of t9,200+- sq. ft. This parcel consists Of a single combination of lot numbers referred to aS 225, 226,-227, 248, 249~ 250, and part Of 224T228~247, 251 as shown on the "~ap of Goose Bay Estates filed in the suffolk County~Cterk,s office as Map No. I176 on November 13, 1934. This 1Qt area is a merger of the Old l~ts and is kiu0Wnto be in common Ownership' for man~ years. The Map of Goose Bay Estates is not listed on the "Exceptions List" of the Code at Section 100-12. ~£~ge 15 Appl. No~. .4202 Matter of ROBERT OBERLIN Decision Rendered December 8, 1993 3. The map submitted with this application also shows an existing one-and one-half story,' single-family dwetlinq structure set back 41 feet from the most northerly (fr6nt) property line and 18+- feet from the easterly (side) property. Located just south is a concrete patio and the subject 8 ft. by 10 ft. shed which is shown to be approximately 10 feet from the easterly side property line. 4. The rear yard for this particular parcel layout is not defined by the zoning code since there are two front yards and two side yards, and the property is not a "corner lot." (Corner lots arepermitted to establish a rear yard in one of the remaining two side yards). The Board Members agree that the difficulties in locating an accessory storage building are uniquely related to the land for the reason that the rearyard is truly one of the two front yards (to the back portion of the dwelling), as located. 5. Also noted is the fact that this building is proposed for accessory use incidental to the residence nature of the property fur storage of the owners' miscellaneous items, lawn equipment and the like. The applicant is aware that this building may not be used, enlarged, or in the future converted for gainful purposes (such as living area, rental for non-owner storage, etc.), and/or not used as a separate principal.use. 6. The proposed building will be in conformance with the height requirements {one-story and less than 18 feet total from ground to peak]. 7. It is the position of the Board in considering this application that: (a) the circumstances are uniquely related to the property and there is no method feasible for appellant to pursue other than a variance - particularly since the Property does technically have two "front yards" - to the north of the residence and to the south, and the remaining yard areas are side yards; (b) the relief is not substantial in relation to the requirements and will be at a distance of 10+- feet from the easterly property line; (c) the variance requested does no~ involve an increase of dWelling unit or~ use density; (d) the relief requested will not cause a substantial effect on available governm~ntaI facilities since th~ structure is for storage purposes incidental to the resi6ence; Page lS - ADpl. N~~ 4202 Matter of ROBERT OBERLIN Decision Rendered December 8, 1993 (e) the relief r~quested is not unreasonable due to the uniqueness of the property and the immediate area; (f) the variance will no~ in turn be adverse to the safety, health, welfare, comfort, convenience, or order of the town, or be adverse to neighboring properties; Accordingly, on motion by Chairman Goehringer, seconded by Member Wilton, it was RESOLVED, to GRANT approval of the requested 8 ft. by 10 ft. accessory shed, as requested under Appl. No. 4202 the Matter of the ApPlication of ROBERT OBERLIN. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Dinizio, Villa, Wilton, Doyen, and Goehringer. This resolution was duly adopted. Page t7 - Minutes Southold Town ~Board of Appeals December 8, 1993 Regular Meeting ACTION OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS Appl. NO. 4204. Upon Application of JOHN CROKOS. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XXIIi, S---~t~-23914A(t) for permission to 2110 Grandview'Drive, Orient, NY; County Tax MaP Parcel No. 1000-i4~2-3.11. WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on December 8, 19,93 at whiCh time all those who desired to be heard were heard and their testimOny, recorded; and WHEREAS, the Board has carefull~ considered all testimQn~ and docUme~tati°n submitted concerning this application; WHEREAS, Board Members have personally viewed and are familiar with the premises in question, its Present zoning, and the sUrroUnding areas; and WHEREAS, the Beard made the following findings of fact: t. AREA VARIANCE. This is an application received. Novem- ber 17, 1993 for a fUrther (additional) Variance under A~ticte cXXIII, Section 100,239.4, subsection A(1), for approval Of new °nstruction within 10~0'feet of ~the bluff, or bank,~along the L~ng Island SOUnd.. The Building Inspector's NOtice of DisaPproval upon Which this new APpeal is based is dated November 17, 1993. 2. CODE REQUIRE~RNT. Article XXIII, Section I00-239.4A of ~heZOning cOde~requ~reSalI buildings a~d structures located on lots upon which there exists a bluff or bank landward of the shore or beach shall be set back not less than one hundred (I~0) feet from the top of such bluff or bank. 3. PROPERTY DATA. The premises in question is situated north Of Grand View Drive in Orient and is sh0wn as Lot 97'on the Page 18 Appl. No. 4204 Matter of JOHN CROKOS DeCision Rendered December 8, 1993 lends to the limitations for Placement of all t!rpes of construction. 4. EXISTING CONSTRUCTION. permit for the constrUctiOn of a subs issued (No. 21494), for a garage, decks'~ extending from elevate~ landscaping survey showing the foUndation, as 8, I993 and shows the concrete foUndation to take full advantage of the waterviewS Of'the Sound. The front yard setback at its shown to be 50 feet fron corner foundation, and the further fro~t the westerly side' of the foundation is shown to be 82 feet., more or less {slightly), from Grand View Drive. The'setbackSmeaSUre~ fromthe northeasterly On JUne 23, 199~,.a building dwelling was platioL~s second October point. The distance between the coastal erosion hazard line at .the nearest point-is approximately75 feet. Chapter 37 Of the Southold Town Code'Prohibitsconstructi0n andanY type~ of soil disturbance along, or seaward Of, the '~oastat zone hazard line." 5. PROPOSAL. Proposed in this locate the northwesterl ~ corner of a and deck areas ~, to patio and at 62 feet from the top of the bluff or bank. The fence enclosed is and Will need tobe clarified and further tO issuance in Writing prior o~"a'~id~gpermit for these structures if~ Within 18~ feetof the bt~ffO~ b~nk. 6. PRIOR VARIANCE. The record shows that ~o~ember 199-2, an to~tb~s ] one corner of the dwe~lingwhich was within That' determinatidn ~estricted the i a-~roposed' poot,~fence enclosure and decks above gro%,ndtevet, at not closer than 75 feet to the top or'the btUff or bank. 7. SITE INSPECTION(S). (a) An inspection of the sit~ reveals that most of the bluff face is stabilized'by Shrubs. From the street, the lot's elevation rises several ~eet and flatt~ns out over most of the land, 25 to 26 feet above mea sea leVel. There is presently a slight berm across the bluff top edge; the existing grade is Page 19 - Appt. No. 4204 Matter of JOHN CROKOS Decision Rendered December 8, 1993 away from the bluff face. The bluff areas must be protected, and berm at the top edge would help to ensure no oVer-bank runoff. Also, measures will need to be ~aken to either trUck the ~1 water off site, or properly install drywetldrains. (b} Research of town records shows that there are other in the i~,ediate lots in the area with nonconforming Setbacks vicinity; i.e. Lot 5 (Monacelli) for Construction at 80~- feet from the top of the bank; Lot 3.8 (Hungerford} at 8Q - 854- feet; Lot 24 (Cipitelli BrOs. Realty) 70+- feet; Lot 3.9 (formerly Betancourt) at 50+- feet. 8. EFFECTS OF P~LIEF REQUESTED. It is the position of the Board that: (a) the size of the dwelling lends to the difficulties in locating other buildings cr structures on this parcel; (b} the setback at 62 feet is quite substantial in relation t° therequirements, that is, 38 percent of ~he requirement; (c) the grant of the entire relief will alter the essential characte~ of the neighborhood; (d) it is persenal knowledge, and through town properties f~Onting along the Long Island Sound. (e) the difficulties claimed are self-created since the size of the dwelling is substantial and is Iocated on an angle"tOwards the water; (f) there is an alternative for appellant to pursue, to construct a smaller'Sized pool and reduced deck area~; ' (h) in view of all the above, the interests of justice will be serv~ by denying the relief, as requested, and granting alternative relieE, as noted below.. 9. ALTERNATIVE. Alternatively, the Board finds that a Page ~20 - Appt~ No. 4204 Matter of JOHN CROKOS DeciSion Rendered December 8, I993 10. EFFECTS OF ALTERNATIVE. It is the positionof the Board that in considering this alternative: a) the benefit to the applicant, as weighed against the detrimentto the health, safety, welfare of the c~,~,unity, is greater, and is not unreasonable in light of limited upland area available for residential use; b) the benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved.by a method, feasible for his t0 pursue, other than an area variance; c) the alternative relief is not s~hstantial in relation to the re~airements; d) the relief requested will not'have au adverse effect or impact on the physical or enviro~mLental' conditions in the neighborhood or district;. e) the difficulties created are related to the uniqueness of the land and are not personal to the landowner; f) the relief as alternatively granted will not be adverse to the presezvationand protection o,f the charactez of the neighborhood and the heal,h, safety, and wetEare of the community. Accordingly, on moti~nb~Member Dinizio, Member Vilia, it was seconded by RESOLVED, to DENY the relief requested i~ the application, and be it further RESOLVED, to GRANT alternative relief for a setback at not closer than seventy (70) feet from the top of the bluff (bank) to all'structures, retainin~ watls~andbUildings, SUBJE~TI~TOT~E FOLLOWING: I. That the drywelts be installed for or roof runof face and all water shall be' (or removed); 2. That the relief alternatively granted is l~ted to this particular, application made under section. 100-23914A'of ~he zoning code as pertains tO the bluff setback (and shall not apply to side yard reducti~nS~ lot C~verageinexc~ss of 20%, or other variations from the code in the event of future code' m6difica- tions). Page 21 - Appl. No. 4204 Matter of JO~ CROKOS Decision Rendered. December 8~ 1993 3. That there be no land disturbance to or close to the bluff (bar~) area, and that haybales shall be temporarily' placed north of the area under construction while construction 'activiTies are pending, Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Dinizio, Wilton, Doyen, Goehringer, and Villa. This resolution Was dut~ adopted. Page 2~ Minutes Southold Town Board of Appeals Regular £~eeting of December 8, 1993 HEARINGS CALENDAR FOR JANUARY 12~ 1994: On motion by Chairman G~ringer, seconded by Member DiniZio, it was RESOLVED, to authorize advertisement of the following matter~ for publichearings to be held at a RegulrMeeting of the BOARD OF APPEALS at the Southold T°wn ~ati~ 53095 Maim Road, SoUthold, NY 1197'1, 0nWEDNESDAY, JANUARY 12, i994:' to ledate deck a~tion along an existing~'sideporch area. A porti6n 0fth~ proPOSed deck is proposed with a reduced rear yard Setback. The parcel contains an area of 13,500+- square 'feet and zs the R~40· LOW-D~nsit¥ Residential Zone'DistriCt. Location o~ PropertY: 535 Meadow Lane, Cutch0gUe, NY; CoUnt~ Tax Map District I~00, SectiOn 116, BloCk 2~ LOt 20. 2. No. 4208- to the Lot 16. ,~Fishers. 4, Block 4, .34%-"aCre parcel is and is R~t20 z~ng. -.PAM~ S. VALENTINE of that t0-00z2 pr~mises cO~tains a'totaI lot area of approximately 9,5G0 sq. ft. and is 'situated in the R-~0 Residential Zone 'District. Page 23 - Minutes Southold Town Board of Appeals December 8, 1993 Regular Meeting (Resolution for Hearings to be held January 12, 1994, continued:) Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen, Dinizio, Villa and Wilton. This resolution was duly adopte~. CHAIRMANSHIP FOR 1994: Motion was made by Member Wilton, seconded by Member Doyen, to reappoint GERARD P. GO_E~RI~GER as Chairman of the SOuthold Town Board of Appeals for the xear 1994, and to further urge and respectfully request tbs Southold Town Board concur with its own resolution for salary and reappointment of GERARD P. GOEHRINGE~ as CHAIRF~AN for 1994 at its reorganization meeting to be held Jantmr~ 4, 1994. VOTE OF THE BOARD: Ayes: Messrs. Dinizio, Doyen, Wilton, and Goehringer. (Member Villa abstained sinc? h? is ~t this time being considered for the Chairmanship by the lncomzng new Town Board Members and new Supervisor-Elect.) This resolution was duly adopted 4-0. The Chairman declared the meeting adjourned at this time. 1/12/94 Respectfully submitted, Linda Kowalski, Clerk Southold Town Board of Appeals