Debate continued over Landry application

Chairwoman Joann Piccozzi said that the Landrys’ proposed garage is “adding a little too much volume to that small piece of property” during the October 21 work session. Board member Doug Matz looks on.

The ongoing debate over the Landry application continued in the October 21 and October 28 Zoning Board sessions. The board could only reach a consensus on the Landry’s variance request for a pool and patio, leaving board member Peter Ruig at odds with the other members over the construction of the three-car garage. 


LANDRY — HEIGHTS


The Landrys have asked for variances to reconstruct their already non-conforming Zone A residence. They plan to build an attached three-car garage with second floor living space, requiring a 9.9-foot variance from the north sideyard line and 11.6 feet from the south. The patio for the pool they hope to build would require 4.4-foot and 6-foot sideyard variances.


In the October 21 work session, Mr. Ruig laid out his perspective on the Landry application. “I don’t feel that a blind adherence to the setback regulations is the job of the ZBA” he said. “I feel there are extenuating circumstances here which should be considered.” By rejecting the variance request, the Landrys would likely build the garage in a conforming location. This, Mr. Ruig went on to say, would block the last water views on Clinton and would be very unattractive from the street. Letters of support were submitted for the variance request from seven neighbors.


The major objection to the variance came from the Landry’s neighbor David Diwik, who argued that the proposed construction would replace the view from his bedroom window with a 40-foot wall, thereby significantly decreasing the value of his house. “This concern is very appropriate and certainly needs to be taken very seriously,” said Mr. Ruig. He suggested that if Mr. Landry re


Board chairwoman Joann Piccozzi later took issue with the idea that Mr. Diwik was the only neighbor who objected to the variance request. She referenced a letter from the Shelter Island Heights Property Owners Association stating that the organization couldn’t make a decision on the issue because the board members were split, some in favor of and some opposed to the variance. Ms. Piccozzi said this was evidence that there were objections within the organization. Mr. Ruig and board member Patricia Shillingburg disagreed, saying that because they couldn’t decide, the association chose not to take a position.


Doug Matz expressed mixed feelings about the construction, and mentioned that he went by the site to get a better understanding of how the different views would be impacted. He said, “I really didn’t leave there with a concrete feeling one way or the other what was best for the neighborhood.” Mr. Ruig agreed that “it is a toss-up, in many ways.”


Ms. Shillingburg believed that a three-car garage, “right there on Clinton Avenue … is not appropriate for the Heights setting. It’s just too big. If it could be a two-car garage I would be much more comfortable.” Ms. Piccozzi agreed, saying “It’s just adding a little too much volume to that small piece of property, … maybe it just needs to be reconsidered and reduced in scale slightly. … If we have to deny the variance so they have to sit down and talk, then maybe that’s the path that we have to take.”


At the October 28 hearing, the board continued its discussion and agreed that the requested variance for a pool and deck was not acceptable, since both could be scaled back to fit within a conforming location. They did agree, however, that the Landrys’ proposal to enclose the porch on the south side of the property was acceptable. Ultimately, Mr. Ruig said that the garage was in harmony with the community, while Ms. Piccozzi and Ms. Shillingburg said that the proposed garage was not in harmony with the community. “I think that it can be done in a different manner which is more accommodating and less of a variance needed,” said board member Doug Matz.


Ms. Shillingburg commented, “This has been the most difficult of my 10 years on the Zoning Board to deal with, because I think we were given,” pausing to gather her words, “an unacceptable application with an unacceptable alternative, because it’s just too big … wherever you put it.” 


Board attorney Laury Dowd said she would draft a resolution and present it to the board for changes and comments.


BEVILACQUA — GARDINER’S BAY


Mr. Louis Bevilacqua is seeking a variance for the renovation and expansion of his nonconforming structure at 65 Dinah Rock Road. The variances are for additions 9.5 feet from the north and 16 feet from the south side yard lines.


Matt Sherman of Sherman Engineering and Consulting presented the application on behalf of Mr. Bevilacqua in the October 28 Zoning Board hearing. “This is a substantial addition,” he said as he explained the plans. The size of the house would go from the current 3,800 square feet to 6,800 square feet. “We’re pretty much doubling the house.” 


He said that the house would be substantially larger than neighbors’ houses, but that the house wasn’t getting any closer to the property line than it already was. Plans include a one-and-a-half story accessory garage, which fits within the property setback, as well as an attached garage.


The board members expressed their concerns. Ms. Piccozzi said, “Matt, this is a substantial [addition].” She said that the additions would create a vast wall the neighbors would have to look at. Ms. Dowd asked whether there was any screening between the neighbors, and Mr. Sherman responded that there was not. “You’re really asking too much of a neighbor, I think,” said Ms. Piccozzi.


One of the concerns related to installing two garages, and whether the additional garage would be used for living space. Mr. Bevilacqua assured the board that the accessory garage would not contain living spaces, and that it would only provide storage for Mr. Bevilacqua’s boats, sails and, as Mr. Bevilacqua put it, “Toys, if you will.”


He said that the expansion is both in anticipation of retiring and moving primary residences to Shelter Island as well as one day having space for his kids and grandchildren. He noted that in his plans he took pains not to expand the house laterally towards his neighbors, so as not to intrude any more than it already does.


Ms. Piccozzi asked that Mr. Sherman provide Google Map satellite imagery to show the proximity of the neighbor’s houses. 


The matter was closed except for written correspondence.


CARRIER — HEIGHTS


Mr. and Mrs. Thomas Carrier have asked for a variance to add a 10- by 25-foot covered porch to the north side of the house to replace the existing uncovered deck. The porch is 25 feet from the northerly and 16 feet from the easterly front yard lines.


The matter was closed except for written correspondence. 


AMICO — MONTCLAIR


Thomas Amico’s application hearing was rescheduled after an error was discovered in the legal notice. The notice neglected to lay out one of the requested variances, so a new notice will have to be sent out for a November 11 hearing.