The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About7216 BOARD MEMBERS Southold Town Hall Leslie Kanes Weisman,Chairperson ��oF $o(/ry0 53095 Main Road•P.O. Box 1179 !� Southold,NY 11971-0959 Patricia Acampora Office Location: Eric Dantes Town Annex/First Floor, Robert Lehnert,Jr. �p� 54375 Main Road(at Youngs Avenue) Nicholas Planamento �lycom Southold,NY 11971 http://southoldtownny.gov ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS RECEIVED TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Q, �i`t(A(� 9-N3 W Tel.(631) 765-1809•Fax(631) 765-9064 Ot DEC 2 4 2018 FINDINGS,DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION So hold Town Clerk MEETING OF DECEMBER 20,2018 ZBA FILE: 7216 NAME OF APPLICANT: Anthony Pirozzi Jr. PROPERTY LOCATION: 1769 Smith Road, Peconic,NY SCTM No. 1000-98-4-20 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 lI 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 August 9, 2018 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 November 26, 2018. Based upon the information provided on the LWRP Consistency Assessment Form submitted, as well as the records available, it is the Coordinator's recommendation that the proposed action is EXEMPT from Coastal Consistency Review. PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: The subject property is a non-conforming 29,037 square foot parcel in the Residential R-40 Zoning District. The parcel measures 64.3 feet along the northerly property line, measures 398.80 feet along the easterly property line, measures 79.32 feet along the southerly property line which is adjacent to Hog Neck Bay, and measures 429. 90 feet along the westerly property line as described in the latest survey dated June 28, 2018 prepared by John Minto, Land Surveyor. The parcel contains a two-story frame dwelling with an attached porch, an in-ground swimming pool and shed also depicted on a survey prepared by John Minto Land Surveyor, dated June 28, 2018. It should be noted that the recently submitted survey does not depict all of the three de minimus approvals (See List under Additional Information) that were granted by the Chairperson after the applicant received variance relief in October 2017. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Request for a Variance from Article XXIII, Section 280-124 and the Building Inspector's July 16, 2018, Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a building permit to construct deck addition to existing single family dwelling, at; 1) located less than the code required minimum combined side yard setback of 35 feet; at: 1769 Smith Road, (Adj. to Hog Neck Bay)Peconic,NY. SCTM#1000-98-4-20. Page 2, December 20,2018 #7216, Pirozzi SCTM No. 1000-98-4-20 RELIEF REQUESTED: The applicant requests a variance to construct on open deck on the northeast side of the two-story frame residence, which would give the construction a combined side yard setback of 14.5 feet where 35 feet is required. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Letters were received from the neighbor to the east of the subject property opposing the application, and listed in her objections concerns numerous variances already granted on the property, and her uneasiness with the size and location of the deck being built close to her property. There were prior variances issued on the property; one of which was granted to a prior owner in 2009 for relief of two nonconforming side yard setbacks, and the second variance for relief of a single nonconforming side yard setback granted to the present owner in 2016. In addition to variances granted, the current owner received three (3) de minimus approvals for proposed changes in design as follows; (1) permission to alter the roof plan of the two story addition on December 4, 2017; (2) permission to reconstruct an existing porch while maintaining a side yard setback of 10.4 feet on April 17, 2018; and (3)on May 24, 2018, permission was granted to construct a wrap-around porch. At the hearing, the owner stated that there is no hardship relating to the variance request. Furthermore, the applicant agreed to plant a vegetated buffer on the east side of the property to screen the proposed work. FINDINGS OF FACT/REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on December 6, 2018 at which time written and oral evidence were presented. Based upon all testimony, documentation, personal inspection of the property and surrounding neighborhood, and other evidence,the Zoning Board finds the following facts to be true and relevant and makes the following findings: 1. Town Law §267-b(3)(b)(1). Grant of the variance will produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The location of the proposed deck is almost on the property line, and adjacent to the neighboring residence. There is ample room on the property for a deck in a conforming location. 2. Town Law§267-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 existing structure already required variance relief for the new construction already under way. The applicant can achieve an open deck on other portions of the property that would not require variance relief. 3. Town Law §267-b(3)(b)(3). The variance granted herein is mathematically substantial, representing 50.75% relief from the Town Code. 4. Town Law §267-b(3)(b)(4). 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. 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. The applicant has also been granted variance relief and numerous de minimus relief(3) for this property in its current configuration. Page 3,December 20,2018 #7216, Pirozzi SCTM No. 1000-98-4-20 6. Town Law 4267-1b. Grant of the requested relief is not the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of a non-conforming use of the property and/or area variances, 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 Lehnert, seconded by Member Acampora, and duly carried,to DENY the variance as applied for Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Dantes(Vice Chair), Acampora, Planamento and Lehnert. This Resolution was duly adopted(4-0). (Chairperson Weisman absent) q::�4- 4 Eric L. Dantes Vice Chair Approved for filing 0--/ �-( /2018