Tuthill Drive house plan draws fire

Board Chairwoman Joann Piccozzi expresses a concern, shared by board member Doug Matz, about the home’s size.
Just one application was discussed at the January 27 ZoningBoard session. Nonetheless, it drew a crowd large enough to fillnearly every seat at Town Hall. The Reporter counted 26 people atthe public hearing for Michael McLean’s proposed home in Shanty Bayon Big Ram Island.
McLEAN – SHANTY BAY
Shanty Bay Properties, managed by Michael McLean, submittedplans to construct a home at 44 Tuthill Drive, zoned AA revertingto A residential on the Shelter Island zoning map, on a25,646.5-square-foot (0.59 acre) lot. It would be 20 feet from thefrontyard line on Tuthill rather than the required Zone A setbackof 40 feet. The proposed house will also require a wetlands permitfrom the Town Board because it would be within the 100-footwetlands setback.
Sean Walter, representing Shanty Bay Properties, began bytelling the board that the proposed house’s dimensions would meetevery other building code requirement, including height, size andlot coverage limits, but not the frontyard setback and the wetlandsrequirement. The project has already received its Department ofEnvironmental Conservation wetland permit, he added.
He also noted that Mr. McLean had reduced the overall size andscope of the house since his earlier application, which was heardon July 15, 2009, to try to accommodate neighbors’ comments andconcerns. “This house is quite a bit smaller than the house thatwas in the original plan, he told the board.
Architect Charles Thomas said the home would be 24 feet, 2inches from grade at its highest point on the Tuthill street side.The water side of the house, which is more exposed because of thesloped building site, would be 31 feet high at its tallest point.The first floor of the house has a living area of 1,922 squarefeet, the second an area of 1,326 square feet and a finishedbasement section of 1,000 square feet.
The nearly 79-foot length of the house would be broken up alongthe the facade with indented sections. It has a maximum width of28.6 feet and total lot coverage, with a deck and pool, of 3,096square feet. This constitutes 12.07-percent lot coverage, which Mr.Thomas said is typical for the area.
Mr. Thomas went on to explain that, without any variance orwetlands permit, the lot would be unbuildable because the setbacksnearly overlap.
Zoning Board Chair Joann Piccozzi argued that the lack of abuildable lot was a self-created problem, since Mr. McLean knew thebuilding requirements when he purchased the lot. This sentiment waslater repeated by Gair Betts, who represented the Tuthill DriveAssociation and expressed the organization’s opposition to theproject.
Mr. Walter said that the requested variance would not be adetriment to the neighborhood – other houses in the area are closeto the road. He specifically noted that Martin and Rose McAndrews’residence, adjacent to the proposed home, is 20 feet from TuthillDrive, and that Stan and Jane Church’s house is 25 feet from theroad.
Mr. Thomas also compared the height of the McAndrews’ home,which he said was 32 feet high, to that of the proposed home, 24feet, 2 inches along the road.
Mr. Walter said that these comparisons were important to refutethe idea that the house “would be too close to the road, tooominous, that there is no precedent for a house being set 20 feetoff of the frontyard setback.
“I don’t think that has really been said, responded Ms.Piccozzi. “I think a house of this size might be what we need toaddress here, not the fact that the neighbor’s house is 20 feet.She noted that originally that neighbor’s home was 6 feet from theroad, but that the owners moved it back to 20 feet.
Board member Pat Shillingburg explained, “There is concern onthis board about the size of the house, and in the neighborhoodwhere it is, the houses are generally quite a bit smaller. Thishouse, as it’s proposed, is not in keeping with the character ofthe neighborhood ¦ and it’s big, and it’s going to be20 feet from the road. She went on, “We all know on this Islandwhat a mass 30 feet from the road looks like, and we’re notcomfortable with that. If it’s 20 feet, we’re really notcomfortable.
Board member William Johnston III asked if the applicant couldadjust the plans to make the home more narrow.
Mr. Walter responded, “I know that my client is willing to workwith the Town Board and the Zoning Board ¦ if there’ssomething that can be done, certainly we’ll take it back and we candiscuss it.
Mr. Johnston went on, “Because I thought when you folks werehere last time that we had a little problem with the 20-footsetback, and we asked you to downsize the house. Yes, you downsizedthe length, but you didn’t bring the width in.
Board member Doug Matz added, “My concern is that you’ve got alot here ¦ with a building envelope that currentlydoesn’t exist, and you’re trying to put a fairly substantial houseon the property, which is a very large non-conformity. He said thatthe board would feel more comfortable with a smaller house.
Mr. McLean has requested an adjournment which, if approved bythe board, will postpone a continuation of the hearing until March24.