Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-10/19/1978 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS ROBERT W. Gl LLISPIE, JR., CHAIRMAN CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR. SERGE DOYEN JR TERRY TUTHILL ROBERT J. DOUGLASS Southold Town Board of Appeals SOUTHOLD, L. I., N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 MINUTES Southold Town Board of Appeals October 19, 1978 A regular meeting of tbs Southold Town Board of Appeals was ~eld at 7:30 P.M. (D.S.T.), Thursday, October 19, 1978, at the Tow~ Hall, Main Roadt Southold, New York. There were present: Messrs: Robert W. Gillispie, Jr., Chairman; Charles Grigonis, Jr.; Serge Doyen, Jr.; Terry Tuthill; and Robert J. Douglass. Also p~esent was Douglas Love, Long Island Traveter-Mattituck Watchman. On motion by Mr. Gillispie, seconded by Mr. Tuthill, it was P~SOLV~D that the Southold Town Board of Appeals approve minutes of the September 28, 1978, meeting. Vote of the Board: Tuthili and Douglass. Ayes: Messrs: Gillispie, Grigonis, Doyen, Appeal No. 2469. Application of Daniel and THE CHAIRMAN: Sure, but I think I am about to ~ate what our conclusions are, but we will be glad to hear from you. MR. FRANKLIN BEAR: May I speak before you render your decision? THE CHAIRMAN: The Board has been studying ail the~evidence that exists here in the file and ha~s also consulted with'Town. Counsel in connection With the objection to the use of this property, and it is our opinion, and I think I speak for the whole Board~ ..... POSTPONED DECISION: Laura Shybunko, 5 Hilltop Court, St. James, New York, (Anthony P. DeRiggi, Esq.) ~SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -2- October 19, 1978 MR. BEAR: The reason I wanted to speak was there was a story in the NEWSDAY one day last week. I'm sure you probably saw it. I would like to read a couple of paragraphs from it. The Dateline is Melville. "What appears to be a major victory for Long Island Land Planners. A BrookLyn Appellate Court has ruled a home cannot be built on a sub-standard Land parcel on Bagetelle Road, Huntington, just north of the Babylon-Huntington town lines. Despite the fact that a sub- division map has been filed to build that home. It is a most signifi- cant decision for all Long Island, said Lee Koppelman, Executive Dir- ector of the Long Island Regional Planning Board. The land parcel in question was on a map of a 1938 subdivision for 52 homes on quarter acre parcels." It occured to me that this might be something that should affect your decision. THE CHAIRMAN: I don't think so Mr. Bear because you have already appealed the rulin~ of the Board of Appeals of the Board of Health Services to the Courts and been denied. This has already received upper level treatment fram the DEC relative to the bog there. It is my opinion and CounseL's opinion that this is a matter beyond us at the moment. Those who are responsible for determining if there is adequate water available ~a~e deemed there is. What the judge says about a 1938 subdivision in Huntington has no bearing on this matter at all. Is there anything else you might like to say? MR. BEAR: No, I just thought you might like to hear abo~ut this. MR. TUTHILL: I have given this quite a bit of thought during the past three weeks, studied the information, and I have no reserva- tions about adopting the resolution to approve the request for the applicant. After investigation and inspection the Board finds that the appli- cant wishes to red~ce his front yard setbacks to 35 feet on Wampum Way and Tepee Trail and wishes to reduce his side yard setback to 19 feet, The findings of the Board are that the minor relief required by this reduction of front and side yards is immaterial so far as the character of the neighborhood is concerned. The objections to this application have been properly taken care of by other agencies concerning water and sewer. The Board finds that strict application of the Ordinance would produce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship; the hardship created is unique and would not be Shared by all properties alike in the immediate vicinity of the property and in the same use district; and the variance will not change the character of the neighborhood and will observe the spirit of the Ordinance. On motion by Mr. Tuthill, seconded by Mr. Gillisple, it was RESOLVED that Daniel and Laura Shybunko, 5 Hilltop Court, St. James New York, be GRANTED permission to reduce the front yard setbacks to 35 'SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -~3-i October 19, 1978 feet on Wampum Way and Tepee Trail and reduce the side yard setback to 10 feet. Location of Property: Lot No. 5, Nunnakoma Waters, Southold, New York, subject to the following condition: (1) Approval of the Suffolk County Planning Commission Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Gil!ispie,~ Grigonis, Doyen, Tuthill and Douglass. PUBLIC HEARING: Postponed decision upon application of Betsy Latham, Private Road, Orient, New York, for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance for permission to divide property with insuf- ficient frontage and area. Location of property: Private Road, Orient, New York, bounded on the north by Wilsberg; east by G. E. Latham, Jr.; south by Private Road; west by Long Island Lighting Company. THE CHAIRMAN: This is a postponed decision upon the application of Mrs. Latham, No. 2466 dated August 16, 1978, and at that hearing the~e was an application to divide a parcel owned by Betsy Latham into two pieces both of which would have been smaller than the ~pre.se~t minumum requirement of the Zoning Ordinance. Accordingly, it was suggested with Mr. Douglass~ assistance I believe, that the lots be enlarged by including part of the property which is owned by Betsy Latham and George La,ham, Jr., across the right-of-way to the south. The survey which incorporates these changes is dated September 27, 1978, and indicates both of these lots will be slightly more than 40,000 square feet, when divided. The westerly lot will have 40,134 square feet, and the easterly lot with the house on it will have 40,064 square feet. The house lot will extend across the right-of-way. We noticed going over this application tha~ there is no application for access which should be included. I think the decision of the Board should be subject to dividing this property as divided on survey of Van Tuyl dated September 27, 1978, and subject to obtaining approval of access from this Board in a separate application and recording both the division and access involved on the deeds being created in connection with this. All of this should be done within 6 months. Do you understand this? You should obtain approval of access, because you have other land that is involved. MR. DOUGLASS: The Town Attorney informed us that you have to apply independently for that 16 foot right-of-way to give access to this new piece of property. MRS. BETSY LATHAM: I was at my lawyer's today, and he said he would take ca~e of it. Filing it properly and all. MR. CHAIRMAN: Who is your attorney? MRS. LATHAM: Mr. Glickman. After investigation and inspection the Board finds that the '$OUTH~LD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -4- October'.~.~, 1978 applicant wishes to divide her property with insufficient frontage on a Private Road in Orient, New York. The applicant has been able to create two, 40,000 square foot lots by crossing a right-of-way and including part of property owned by the applicant and George E. La~k~, Jr. to the south. The Board finds that strict application of the Ordinance would produce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship; the hardship created is unique and would not be shared by all properties alike in the immediate vicinity of the property and in the same use district; and the variance will not change the character of the neighborhood and will observe the spirit of the Ordinance. On motion by Mr. Douglass, seconded by Mr. Grigonis, it was RESOLVED that Betsy Latham, Private Road, Orient, New York, be GRANTED permission to divide property with insufficient frontage as requested. Location of property: Private Road, Orient, New York, bounded on the north by Wilsberg; east by G. E. Latham, Jr.; south by Private Road; west by Long Island Lighting Company, upon the following conditions: (1) Property will be divided as shown on survey of Van Tuyl dated September 27, 1978. (2) Applicant applying for approval of access over 16 foot right-of-way. (3) Suffolk County Planning Commission. Approval Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Gillispie, Grigonis, Doyen, Tuthill and Douglass. PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2478 - Upon application of Russell Tabor and Sons, Main Road, Orient, New York for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-31 and Bulk Area Schedule to divide property with insufficient area and front and rear yard setbacks and for a variance in accordance with Town Law, Section 280A for approval of access. Location of property: Main Road, Orient, New York~ bounded on the north by Main Road and Tabor; east by Tabor and Schriever; south by Tabor and Schriever; west by Village Lane and Tabor. The Chairman opened~ the hearing by reading the application for a variance, legal notice of hearing, affidavits attesting to its publi- cation in the official newspapers, and disapproval from the Building Inspector. The Chairman also read a statement from the Town Clerk that notification had been made to: Wendell B. Tabor; Ward R. Tabor; and William Schriever. Fee paid $15.00. THE CHAIRMAN: The County Tax Map indicates this property is 'SOUT~LD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -5- October 19, 1978 directly across the street from the Congregational Church in Orient. It is in fact on the corner of Village Lane and Main Road and bordered by lots in many cases considerably smaller all down Village Lane except that the church property across the street is larger in-size. Is there anyone present who would like to speak for this application? WARD R. TABOR: Yes, I would. THE CHAIRMAN: As I understand it from the application, access will be deeded. I don't think that is necessary. I think the Board would prefer, if we have any influence on the matter, that you use Ward Tabor's driveway for access to this land-locked 33,000 square foot parcel whiCh is to be created because of the additional curb cuts. If the 15 foot access were placed ~djoin~n~L~:~build~g o~.~h~h~us~l®t~it~la~re- quire another curb cut of 15 feet directly opposite the church and' there is enough traffic there now. From our standpoint, we would prefer you use the right-of-way ~h~ now exists. You may then provide in deeds when this is conveyed and have it be a matter of record for whoever owns the 33,000 square feet now or in the future. Is that agreeable? MR. TABOR: Yes, but could we make a 15 foot right-of-way to the west of the property and not use it ~ntil the future? At some time in the future we might want to sell this property to someone outside the family, and we might ~o%~ wish them to use my driveway as an access.~ Or could this be changed in the future? THE CHAIRMAN: I don't know why you couldn't have two accesses. The 15 feet you suggest, in which case it would be deede~~.~l~to~he property owners behind you and also the present right-of-way. ~s i under- stand it th~s is preferable to you. You wi~sh to maintain the right to extinguish the right-of-way over your property in the future~ MR. TABOR: That's right. If the property ever changed hands, we would want to make provisions for that. MR. DOUGLASS: Another thing that came into my mind;_Wa~d when we were looking at it, was what would happen if you opened the 15 feet you are talking about and close your present driveway? Then you could run a driveway to your house off the new 15 foot right-of-way and have grass across the entire front of your house. MR. TABOR: I ha~e too much to mow now. The only thing is, I have the asphalt driveway now, and I would hate to dig it up. It might be possible in the future to do as you suggest. THE CHAIRMAN: Is the westward edge of your property right there at the back of the garage where those trees are growing? MR. TABOR: Yes. THE CHAIRMAN: The trees would have to be removed for the new right-of-way. I think the Board could do it as you sugge~st. 'SO~T~OLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -6- October 19, 1978 MR. TABOR: Yes, be there and possibly never be touched. Just be on paper so it could be taken advantage of. · HE CHAIRMAN: So you would deed the 15 feet to the back lot, and grant a right-of-way provisionally, extinguishable, at any time over your driveway. When you fix up the rest of the right-of-way it will be a "T-Shaped, arrangement? Do you think this will take care of it? Is there anyone else who wishes to speak for this application? MRS. JANET TABOR: I don't know if you are aware that the property we have been speaking about is owned by my husband, F~ed, and his brother, Wendell Tabor. THE CHAIRMAN: I was going to ask who owned it. MRS. TABOR: They own the property together. Wendell has written a letter which states: "To Whom It May Concern: I, Wendell Tabor, do hereby relinquish my one-half (1/2) interest in the parcel of land located in Orient, N. Y., to Fred and Jane Tabor. Said parcel ~s north by Ward Tabor, south and east by William Schriever, west by Wendell Tabor and Fred Tabor. Further identified on Suffolk County Tax Map as 1000-018-05 part of lot 009. signed Wendell Tabor." THE CHAIRMAN: I think all of this should be recorded. Yes, we would like to have a copy for the file. Is there anyone else who wishes to speak for this? WILLIAM SCNRIEVER: I would like to speak sometime. I already have a letter on this application there. I don't wish to speak for or against this. THE CHAIRMAN: Do you wish me to read the letter you have there? MR. SCHRIEVER: N~ necessarily. It just says that I have a business there and a subdivision there and I do not have any objection to their division, and hope they have not objection to what I am doing. THE CHkt~RMAN: Do they have any objection to what you are.doing? Ml%~ $~C~RIEVER: As far as I know, they don't. THE CHAIRMAN: ~his is a letter from William Schriever addressed to the Board of.Appeal, s. The Chairman read this letter into the record. A copy is annexed hereto and forms a part hereof. I think this clarifies tion? (there was no response) MR. SCHRIEVER: Before you make your motion, I brought a map into the office this afternoon which shows an adaptation of the division of this SOUTH~LD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -7- October 19, 1978 lot which I thought the Board might consider. THE CHAIRMAN: I don't think it is relevant to this application? MR. SCHRIEVER: The reason I suggested it, is that if the variance is granted for the area that is presently proposed on the application then to make the area smaller by this change, would require a new appli- cation. So if the area granted were small enough to accom~'~a%e%this,. ~he~,~wo~d~accommodate both, and that would leave the parties with this chd~ce. That is my suggestion. (Looking at Mr. Schriever's Map) THE CHAIRMAN: Well, it seems to me that this suggestion should come from the owners of the lots. MR. SCHRIEVER: The reason I am making this suggestion is because of the fact that my subdivision provides this strip to widen the pro- perties which this would then fit into. THE CHAIRMAN: You would deed them the properties? MR. SCHRIEVER: Yes. So I would like to deed this little triangle to Wendell. If he had the other property to straighten out the line. THE CHAIRMAN: It looks like a quadrangle instead of a triangle. Are we talking about the 3,959 square feet? F~~. SCHRIEVER: The one they now own is the trapezoidal piece. If you e~end that line parallel to the road. THE CHAIRMAN: I think that could done by a separate transaction. I do not think it would require action by the Board of Appeals. MR. SCHRIEVER: When you grant a variance ~ouc~rant it for a certain area. Then if you exchange properties after that, you would then void~ ~ the action. THE CHAIR~N: It becomes a matter of record. ~t is added or subtracted from the property. As far as our records are concerned, we do not keep tract of all the deeds. MR. SCSRI~VER: If you granted a variance for a 20,000 square foot e ~ p~r~ ~.$-~you could not decrease it? THE CHAIRMAN: Right. MR, SCHRIEVER: That is my point, if you grant this f~r 33,000 square feet and this plan creates one of 27,000 square feet, it would be a decr~ase~n~q~e~ootage. Therefore, it would require coming back before this board. It is,relevant to the subdivision itself, it is just relevant to the area. /not THE CHAIRMAN: I think we better consider what is ~n the application. '$0UTH~LD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -8- October 19, 1978 Whatever is done later is not the matter in front of us tonight. Nor can we legally change the application tonight. Is there anyone who wishes to speak against this application? (there was no response). After investigation and inspection the Board finds that the applicant wishes to divide 1.3 acres into two parcels. One parcel will have 24,500 square feet and the other parcel will have 33,000 square feet. The findings of the Board are that in the block of properC-y extending from Main Road to Orchard Street, most of the properties bordering on the street are less than 40,000 square feet with the exception of the Schriever subdivision. The Board finds that strict application of the Ordinance would produce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship; the hardship created is unique and would not be shared by all properties alike in the immediate vicinity of the property and in the same use district; and the variance will not change the character of the neighborhood and will observe the spirit of the Ordinance. On motion by Mr. Douglass, seconded by Mr. Grigonis, it was RESOLVED that Russell Tabor and Sons, Main Road, Orient, New York, be GRANTED permission to divide property with insufficient area and front and rear yard setbacks~and GRANTED recognition of access. Loca- tion of property: Main Road, Orient, New York, bounded on the north by Main Road and Tabor; east by Tabor and Schriever; south by Tabor and Schriever; west by Village Lane and Schriever, upon the following condi- tions: (1) The applicant is acquiring a right-of-way from Ward Tabor to the 33,000 square foot lot over an existing black topped driveway which passes to the West of Ward Tabor's house. A further means of access to this property is being provided by a 15 foot access for a distance of 125 feet bordering on the westerly line of Ward Tabor's property. ~ke access provided over Ward Tabor's driveway is provisional and may be revoked by the present or future owner of the Ward Tabor property. (2) Ail deeds relative to the division and access should be filed with the Board of Appeals within six (6) months. (3) Suffolk County Planning Commission Approval. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Gillispie, Grigonis, Doyen, Tuthill, and Douglass. PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2482 - Upon application of Harry M. Jaquillard, 13100 Main Road, Mattituck, New York, for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article VII, Section 100-71 and Bulk Schedule for permission to construct an addition to a greenhouse with insufficient side yard area. LocatiQn of property: Main Road, Mattituck, New York, bounded on the north by Main Road; east by W. L. SO~THO~D TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -9- October 19, 1978 Grabie; south by John Wickham; west by R. C. Kopf. The Chairman opened the hearing by reading the application for a variance, legal notice of hearing, affidavits attesting to its publi- cation in the official newspapers of the Town, and disapproval from the Building Inspector. The Chairman also read a statement from the Town Clerk that notification had been made to: W. L. Grabie, R. C. Kopf, and John Wickham. Fee paid $15.00. THE CHAIRMAN: This property is located in Mattituck on the Main Road on the south side shortly before you come to the curve. The addition that Mr. Jaquillard wishes to put on his building would not eli- minate his driveway. He would still have more than an 18 foot driveway to the west of the building and to the east of the building. This drive- way continues around the entire operation. Is there anyone who wishes to speak for this application? (there was no response.) Is there anyone who wishes to speak a~ainst this application? (there was no response.) Are there any questions from the Board? After investigation and inspection the Board finds that the applicant wishes to construct a green house on the easterly side of his garden shop. The findings of th~ Board are that this addition will not seriously affect the driveway on the easterly side of building and is contiguous to his garden shop. There will still be an 18 foot driveway around this property. The Board finds that strict application of the Ordinance would produce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship; the hardship created ts unique and would not be shared by all properties alike in the immediate vicinity of the property and in the same use district; and the variance will not change the character of the neighborhood and will observe the spirit of the Ordinance. On motion by Mr. Grigonis, seconded by Mr. Doyen, it was RESOLVED that Harry M. Jaquillard, 13100 Main Road, Mattituck, New York, be GRANTED permission to construct an addition to his garden shop with insufficient side yard area as requested. Location of property: Main Road, Mattituck, New York, bounded on the north by Main Road; east by W. L. Grabie; south by John Wickham; west by R. C. Kopf, subject to the following: Approval of the Suffolk County Planning ~ommission. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Gillispie, Grigonis, Doyen, Tuthill and Douglass. PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2477- Upon application of James Melrose, 39 Robinson Road~ Greenport, New York, for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-31 and fOOTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -10- October 19, 1978 Bulk Schedule for permission to construct a house with insufficient front and rear yards. Location of property: Robinson Road, Greenport, New York, bounded on the north by Robinson Road; east by Troyan; south by Sterling Basin; west by R. Melrose. The Chairman opened the hearing by reading the application for a variance, legal notice of hearing, affidavits attesting to its publi- cation in the official newspapers, and disapproval from the Building Inspector, The Chairman also read a statement from the Town Clerk that notification had been made to: Robert G. Melrose and John Troyan. Fee paid $15.00. THE CHAIRMAN: There is a letter from H. W. Davids, P. E. Chief Engineer, Bureau of Environmental Health addressed to Mr. James Melrose reiative to his application ~0' Construct an individual sewage disposal system on property on the east side of Robinson Road, Greenport, New York, which readS in part: "At the hearing held on September 15, 1978, you had an opportunity to present your appeal to the department's ruling on the Subject application. In accordance with the provisions of Section 220~of Article 2 of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code, the de- termination of the Board of Review is as follows: Based on the infor- mation submitted, to approve the application, installing the sewage disposal system the furthest possible distance from Sterling Basin but not less than 70 feet. Since the determination of the Board Of Review submitted to the Commissioner's office on September 26, 1978, has not been reversed or modified by him, it is therefore deemed to be the determlnati~n of the Commissioner." We have in addition a letter from the Regional Permft Administrator, New York State Depar~tment of Environ- mental COnsarvation to Mr. Melrose, which states: "This is to inform you that we.~have reviewed the notification letter filed on July 28, 1978, ba~o% bee~ !.~§~ or modified by him, it is therefore deemed to be the determi~a ~n~of the Commissioner." We also have a letter from the Regional Per~ ~dministrator, New York State Department of Environmental Cons~rva~io~ ~. Melrose, which reads in part: "This is to inform you that we !h ~ reviewed the notification letter filed on July 28, 1978, and have de~e~ in~d that it will not be necessary to file a permit appli- cation or s~cure'a ~idal wetlands permit to construct a one-family dwelling ~ south side Robinson Road (lot 7, Sterling Harbor Home Sites), ~own of Southold. Assuming you have obtained all other , you may ~roceed with your project adhering to the s ~nditions (if any) found on this letter. Home is to be 35 feet behind iline 0f mean high water." Signed Daniel J. Larkin. Is there anyone present who wishes to speak for this application? MR. ROBERT MELROSE: Needless to say I am in favor of the appli- cation. I have discussed this matter with Mr. Troyan, who owns the property on the other side. He has no objection a~d Offered to have someone come down here to represent him tonight. THE C~RMAN: Is this the lot that Stuart Dorman acquired in the late 50's. I ~hink he wanted it for a harbor for his boat. We have the old file here. This is from the action of June 30, i959 in which states no dwelling is planned to be erected on the premises. It is 'S~UT~LD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -tl- October 19, 1978 believed the purchaser plans to use the property to construct docking facilities thereon so the p no structure being built the varying Section 1000A and de the Ordinance as applied for Later, Mr. Dorman asked to b at that time to a boathouse to build a house on it, and permission. Is.there public more than 70 feet from mean anyone who wishes to speak a response). The property is residence. will you? ~emises would remain as they presently are, ~eon. Application is specifically granted ~ying the variance to the other sections of , without prejudice to future applications. aild a boathouse. We restricted the property ~nd docking facilities. Now you are asking ~ou have DEC permission and Board of Health ~ater there? Any cesspool will be placed high water (Sterling Ha~or). Is there ~ainst this application? (%here was no to be used for the construction of a one-family You won't have any trouble with the side yard restrictions THE CHAIRMAN: How wide is the property where you are going to build a house? MR. MELROSE: The lot has two dimensions since it is a tapered lot. The minimum distance is 25 plus 47 which is 72 feet. THE CHAIRMAN: That iS the minimum? MR. MELROSE: At the lower end it is considerably wider because the lot is pie shaped. THE CHAIRMAN: In other words, you will have no problem in getting a house in there. At the time this lot was created, the side yard re- quirements were 10 and 15 feet totali~325 feet. MR. MELROSE: That is what I am planning on. THE~CHAIRMAN: The front yard setback is now 50 feet and a lot of the old lots cannot be used that way. After investigation and inspection the Board finds that the applicant wishes to Construct. aene family dwelling on a pie-shaped parcel of propert~ on the south side of Robinson Road and requirers front and rear yard setbacks. At the time the lot was created the side yard setbacks were 10 and 15 feet totaling 25 feet. The Board agrses with the reasoning of the applicant. Th~ Board finds that strict application of the :Ordinance would produce practioaI~ difficulties or unnecessary hardship; the hardship created is unique and would not be shared by all properties aIike ~n the immediate vicinity of the property and in the same use district; and the variance will not change the character of the neighborhood and will observe the spiri~ of the Ordinance. On motion by Mr. Gillispie, seconded by Mr.-Grigonis, it was P~SOLVED that James Melrose, 39 Robinson Roa~ Greenport, New b~ ~N~.pe~m~s~o~ ~o ~co~st~ a-~use with insufficient front ~S'OUTHOLD TOWN BOARD~OF APPEALS -12- October 19, 1978 and rear yards. Location of property: Robinson Road, Greenport, New Y~rk, bounded on the north by Robinson Road; east by Troyan; south by Sterling Basin; west by R. Melrose, subject to the following conditions: (1) Construction shall be done according to restrictions set forth by the Board of Health and DEC. (2) The house shall be located no closer than 24-1/2 feet to Robinson Road. (3) Approval of the Suffolk County Planning Commission. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Tuthill and Douglass. Gillispie, Grigonis, Doyen, PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2476 - Upon application of William and Peggy White, First Street, New Suffolk, New York, for- a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article VI, Section 100-61 and Bulk Schedule for permission to divide property with insufficient frontage. Location of property: First Street, New Suffolk, New York, bounded on the north by Frances Majeski; east by First Street; south by Main Street; west by J. Kinczell. The Chairman opened the hearing by reading the application for a variance, legal notice of hearing, affidavits attesting to its publi- cation in the official newspapers, and disapproval from the Building Inspector. The Chairman also read a statement from the Town Clerk that notification had been sent to: Athanas Zamphiroff, Mr. and Mrs. J. Kinczell, and Mr. Marion Majeski. Fee paid: $15.00. THE CHAIRMAN: Provided with this application is a sketch which indicates that.the property in question is approximately 119 feet by 75 feet which works out to approximately 8,945 square feet. It isn't shown on the application how the division is to be made. Is there any- one present here who wishes to speak for this application? WILLIAM WHITE: I would like to divide the property in half. Approximately 75 feet by 55 feet. THE CHAIRMAN: We weren't sure how you wanted to do it. Offhand, I would say this line drawn here is the outline of the building in the northeast corner of the property. MR. WHITE: I don't believe we made a sketch of the property. THE CHAIRMAN: Oh, that's right. This is a survey of Van Tuyl without a date. Where are the cesspools for these two properties which will be ~reated if this is granted? MR. WHITE: They are both separate. The cottage has its own cesspools. Our residence and the store has its own system. They are both within the property lines of what I wish to do. THE CHAIRMAN: In other words, if this property were divided in SOUTH~LD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -13- October 19, 1978 half at 75 feet in depth and approximately 59 feet in width for the cottage on Main Street, the cesspool for the cottage will be on its own property. Vice versa for the store. That building which is leaning in the back yard, is that the approximate area where the cesspools are located? MR. WHITE: No, the store has its own cesspools located in the driveway. The cottage has the pools right along side of the house on the east. THE CHAIRMAN: How about the little concrete block addition on the southerly side of the store. MR. WHITE: That is a cooler. That was for scallops many years ago before I even bought the property. We don't even-use it anymore, but it is there. THE CHAIRMAN: When you divide this property, how much room do you have on the south side of this cooler? MR. WHITE: Approximately 15 feet, I would say. THE CHAIRMAN: You have enough room to get a truck by it? A cesspool truck? Does anyone else have any questions? (there was no response.) Does anyone wish to speak agalnst this application? (there was no response.) Your proposal as I understand it is to sell the co~age? MR. WHITE: Yes sir, we cannot sw~ng both of them. THE CHAIRMAN: You are going to continue to run the business? MR. WHITE: We would really like to find someone we could rent it to. We have been living upstairs and renting the business. That business is 7 days a week and 20 hours per day. MR. TUTHILL: Are you open during the w~nter? MR. WHITE: No, just strictly during the summer. THE CHAIRMAN: So the plan is to sell both the business and the cottage after the division of the property? MR. WHITE: Yes. ~fter investigation and inspection, the Board finds that the applicant wishes to divide his property which contains a summer cottage and a seasonal business. The Board a~rees with the reasoning of the applicant. The findings of the Board are that the character of the area will not be diminished by this division of the property. There will be no change in the outer appearance of the .properties. For economic reasons the applicants request this division. The Board finds that strict application of the Ordinance would ~OUTH~LD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -14- October 19, 1978 produce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship; the hardship created is unique and would not be shared by all properties alike in the immediate vicinity of the ~r~er~t~%~ and in the same use district; and the variance will not chan~e t~e character of the neighborhood and will observe the spirit of the Ordinance. On motion by Mr. Gillispie, seconded by Mr. Douglass, it was RESOLVED, that William and Peggy White, First Street, New Suffolk, New York, be GRANTED permission to divide property with insufficient frontage as requested. Location of the property: First Street, New Suffolk, New York, ~bounded on the north by Frances Majeski; east by First Street; south by Main Street; west by J. Kinczell, subject to the followin~: Approval of the Suffolk County Planning Commission. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Gillispie, Grigonis, Doyen, Tuthill and Douglass. PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2475 Upon application of Raymond and Adah Redfield, 255 Willow Street, Roslyn Heights, New York, for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-31 and Bulk Schedule for permission to divide property with insuf- ficient area and width. Location of property: Paradise Shores Road, Southold, New York, bounded on the north by Private Road; east by Daiker; south by O'Toole; west by Private Road. The Chairman opened the hearing by reading the application for a variance, legal notice of hearing, affidavits attesting to its publica- tion in the official newspapers, and disapproval from the Building Inspector. The Chairman also read a statement from the Town Clerk that nQtification had been sen~ to: Bertram Daiker and Mr. and Mrs. John O'Toole. Fee paid $15.00. THE CHAIRMAN: When we found this place, we found Mr. O'Toole and he explained it ~to us. Is Mr. O'Toole here? JQHN O'TOOLE: Yes, I am. Needless to say, I am in favor of it, since ! am the one who is going to receive the property. THE:CHAIRMAN: You have been using it for all these years? Cuttin~ the g~ass and whatever else was requir~d~It ..... ~ ~ is a very nice looking piece of property. Your neighbor lets his grow with trees. As far as we can see there would be no Other change. Is there anyone else who wishes to speak for this application? (there was no response). Is there anyone who wishes to speak against this application? f~here was no response.) After investigation and inspection the ~o.ard finds that the applicant wishes to convey a portion of his property 10 feet by 48 feet ~O~THOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -t5- October 19, 1978 to his neighbor who has been using this portion of the property for the past 18 years. The findings of the Board are that this will not change the character of the neighborhood in any way. The Board finds that strict application of the Ordinance would produce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship; the hardship created is unique and would not be shared by all properties alike in the immediate vicinity of the property and in the same use district; and the variance will not change the character of the neighborhood and will observe the spirit of the Ordinance. On motion by Mr. Tuthill, seconded by Mr. Douglass, it was RESOLVED ~&t Raymond and Adah Redfield, 255 Willow Street, Roslyn Heights, New York, be GRANTED~perm~ssion to divide property with insuf- ficient area and width as~re~U~sted. _Lo~a~ign of property: Paradise Shores Road, Southold, New York, bounded on the north by Private Road; east by Daiker; south by O'Toole; west by Private Road, subject to the followIng: Approval of the Suffolk County Planning Commission Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Gillispie, Grigonis, Doyen, Tuthill and Douglass. PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2480 Upon application of Sarah Rauch, 1223 Cornegia Avenue, Par Rockaway, New York, (John S. Sherwood, as Agent), for a special exception to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-30 B 9 (a) for permission to construct a storage b~i~ding with shower, a bulkhead, ramp and mooring float. Location of property: Gull Pond Lane, Greenport, New York, bounded on the north by Germansky and others; east by Fordham Canal; south by Rutkowski and others and west by Gull Pond Lane. The Chairman opened the hearing by reading the application for a special exception to the Zoning Ordinance, legal notice of hearing, affidavits atte~sting to its publication in the official newspapers, and disapproval from the Building Inspector. The Chairman also read a state- ment from t~he T~%~n Clerk that notification had been made to: Violet Germansky and others, Helen Rutkowski and others. Fee paid,Si5.00. The notice to the neighbors indicates that the special relief is requested to conStruct a 12 bY 15 foot storage bulkhead, ramp and mooring float. ~S Stated in the s note, it is part of property that was surveyed for Ci~ others. Van Tuyl surveyed it.'6n January 7, 1975. This is located on filled land which is not Suitable for residential use~; however, it is the duty of the Board to determine the most appropriate use of the land whic'h is not suitable for residential use. By way of precedent, we have already granted a special exception on ~the adjoining property to the south for approximately what this applicant requests. SOfT'OLD TO~N BOARD OF APPEALS -16- October 19, 1978 Is there<anyone present who wishes to speak for this application? JOHN SHERWOOD: As agent for Mrs. Rauck, who is enjoying a vaca- tion an Europe, I would like to speak in favor of the application. I have the site plan ready and will present it to the Planning Board for their consideration, and I hope their approval at the first opportunity. THE CHAIRMAN: As far as the site plan is concerned, then we do not have to get involved with setbacks, dimensions or anything. MR. SHERWOOD: Unless you would care to? think THE CHAIRMAN: I don't think so. I don't/we did in the other application of Harold Stetler on the property to the south of this. We left it up to the Planning Board. The resolution which granted the s~%in~side~f~this lot reads as follows: THEREFORE IT WAS RESOLVED that Reg~n~id-Hud~on a/c Claire Brody and others, 136 Front Street, Greenport, New York, be GRANTED permission to set aside Lot B as applied for in accordance with applicant's metes and bounds as 'described in the survey referred to above subject to the following conditions: (1) Cove- nanted agreements restricting or prohibiting this property for residential use, without prior approval of the Board of Appeals, shall be filed in the County Clerk's Office. (2) That before the applicant may be permitted dockage and mooring privileges for small boats as an accessory use, a special exception shall be applied for from the Board of Appeals. (3) Site plan approval shall be obtained from the Planning Board. (4) Any sanitary facilities installed on this property shall be subject to the approval of the Board of Health. (5) That this approval shall be sub- ject to applicant obtaining proper documents from the State and County Environmental Control Commissions. That is the governing document. In this application, the same conditions would apply. Is there anyone else who wishes to speak for this application? (there was no response). Is there anyone who wishes to speak against this application? (there was no response.) Are there any questions? MR. DOUGLASS: Mr. Sherwood, in this you apply for a certain lengthldock and so much float, but you also apply for bulkhead. In the adjoining property, I have pictures of the next door neighbors, and I would like to know the situation of the dock and the bulkhead. Into the channel? MR. SHERWOOD: The bulkhead will be at or above high water mark. The dock will be similar to the one on the south. Half of the dock will be on the upland and half down to low water. The ramp will then go down frOm the dock down to the floating dock. MR. DOUGLASS: In other words, you do not intend to protrude out into the channel more than the neighboring properties. MR. SHERWOOD: No, it will be the same situation. The end result will be that the two floating docks will be along side of each Other. THE CHAIRMAN: These will be parallel to the shore and will not protrude any more into the channel than the adjoining one. $OUT~OLD TOW~ BOARD OF APPEALS -17- October 19, 1978 ~. SHERWOOD: Well, they say a picture is worth a thousand words, so here is what the plot plan looks like. The dimensions are such that it won't go beyond the floating dock itself. MR. DOUGLASS: I took this specifically at dead low so we could see where the stoppage of the dock was and where the float started. Thinking mainly of how far out into the channel you would go. MR. SHERWOOD: We are aware of that, and we would not go out beyond the one located to the south. THE CHAIRM~N: This would require 8 piles to which is attached a 6~by_80 foot fixating dock which is approximately 30 feet from the top of the bank. The way that bank slopes you would not think it is 30 feet. This proposal woul~d almost be identical to the one next door. Are there any other questions? Is there anyone present who wishes to speak against this application? (there was no response.) After investigation and inspection, the Board finds that the applicant requests permission to use property for dockage and mooring privileges for 2 yachts. The findings of the Board are that the appli- cant is aware that this lot may never be used for residential use and the proposed site plan appears to be well suited to the lot. The applicant proposes to dock no more than 2 pleasure boats. The applicant understands that this is for non-commercial use only. The Board finds that strict application of the Ordinance would produce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship; the hardship created is unique and would not be shared by all properties alike in the immediate vicinity of the property and in the same use district; and the variance will not change the character of the neighborhood and will observe the spirit of the Ordinance. On motion by Mr. Douglass, seconded by Mr. Gillispie, it was RESOLVED that Sarah Rauch, 1223 Cornegia Avenue, Far Rockaway, New York, (John S. Sherwood, as Agent), be GRANTED permission to con- struct a storage building with shower, a bulkhead, a ramp and mooring float as requested. Location of property: Gull Pond Lane, Greenport, New York, bounded on the north by Germansky and others; east by Fordham Canal; south by Rutkowski and others; west by Gull Pond Lane, subject to the following conditions: (1) That the accessory building to be erected shall be no larger than 12 feet by 16 feet. (2) No personal property may be stored anywhere on the premises except in the storage building. (3) Dockage and mooring facilities shall be limited to the accommodation of not more than two (2) non-commercial pleas~.a boats wk~ch shall be no larger than 40 feet in length. " ~oUTH6LD TOWN BOAPD OF APPEALS -18- October 19, 1978 (4) Covenanted agreements restricting or prohibiting this property for residential use, without prior approval of the Board of Appeals, shall be filed in the County Clerk's office. (5) That before the applicant may be permitted dockaqe and mooring privileges for small boats as any accessory use, a s~ecial exception shall be applied for from the Board of Appeals. (6) Site Plan Approval shall be obtained from the Planning Board. (7) Any sanitary facilities installed on this property shall be subject to the approval of the Board of Health. (8) That this approval shall be subject to applicant obtaining proper documents from the State and County Environmental Control Com- missions. (9) This application is subject to the approval of the SuffOlk County Planning Commission. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Gillispie, Grigonis, Doyen, Tuthill and Douglass. PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2481 - Upon application of Jean Case, New Suffolk Lane, Cutchogue, New York; Bruce McLean Case, New Suffolk Lane, Cut~o.gUe~ New Yor~; and Walter Teresko, New Suffolk Lane, Cutcho- gue, New York, iRichard F. Lark, Esq.) for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-31 and Bulk Schedule for permission to divide property with insufficient frontage. Location of property: N~w Suffolk R~ad, Cutchogue, New York, bounded on the north by James Horton; east by John Wickham; south by other land of Teresko; west by New Suffolk Road. The Chairman opened the hearing by reading the application for a variance to the Zoning Ordinance, legal notice of hearing, affidavits attesting to its publication in the official newspapers, and disapproval from the Building'Inspector. The Chairman also read a statement from the Town Clerk that notification had been made to: James Horton, John Wickham, Esther Teresko, William Beebe. Fee paid $15.00. '~} CHAIRMAN: The basic relief requested is a variance so that Jean Case and Bruc~ McLean Case may sell a strip 125 feet wide bM 500 long to Walter Te~esko at the rear of ~heir present proper~ty, w~eca letter h~re from Mr. John Wickham, who has n~ object'on to ~his aPpiY~a- tion. Is there anyons present who wishes to speak for. this application? RICHARD F. LARK, ESQ: For the Applicant. I won't belabor the point. I think all of the reasoning of the applicants is stated in the petition, Mr. Chairman. I would point out however, there are 2 reasons they are here. One, they cannot satisfy the 150 foot width requirement SOUTH~LD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -19- October 19, 1978 for a building lot, which is impossible in this situation because the lot is only 125 feet wide, as you can see from the survey and inspecting the property. The other is, t~at if the Board does grant her appiication, to sell the property to the co-applicant, Mr. Teresko, she will be left with a lot less than 40,000 square feet, to wit: 24,000 square feet. I think you can see from inspecting the property and looking where the proposed division line i~ 200 feet to the rear, it does leave her the residence and accessory building, which is the barn for her dwelling purposes which is in conformity with that established neighborhood. That would then enable Mr. Teresko to purchase the bulk of the pr.emises. As I understand it, he would be purchasing 61,000 square feet which he intends to use as indicated in the application for an expansion of his plant farm. Primarily to plant shrubs and things of that nature used in his business. If the Board has any question, Mr. Teresko, Mrs. Case and her son are all present. THE CHAIRMAN: I don't have any questions. It is certainly well prepared. From this survey it is obvious that the property to be created is in a residential area. The lot to be created on behalf of the Cases' is approximately the same size or larger than the adjoining lots in either direction. To the south, 20,000 square feet in eack of the lots. To the north, 21,0QO, 16,000, 26,000 square feet. So this is in con- formity with the adjoining p~operty and also will not increase the density. It will tend to maintain the density at a low level. Are there any other questions? Is there anyone present Who wishes to speak against this application? (there was no response). After investigation the Board finds that the applicants wish to divide their property into a house parc~l-~con~ainin~$~OQ feet and the remaining 61,000 square feet will be sold to Mr. Walter TereskQ for use in his plant farm business. The size of the residence lot is in conformity with the adjoining property and also will, not increase the density of the area. The Board agrees with the reasoning of the applicants. The Board finds that strict application of the Ordinance would produce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship; the hardship created is unique and would not be shared by all properties alike in the immediate vicinity of the property and in the same use district; and the variance will not change the character of the neighborhood and will observe the spirit of the Ordinance. On motion by Mr. Grigonis, seconded by Mr.~ Doyen, it was RESOLVED that Jean Case, New Suffolk Lane~ Cutchogue, New York; Bru~e .~ea~ :Case, New suffolk Lane, CUtchogue, New Y0~k~ and walker Teresko, New Suffolk Lane, Cutchogue, New York, be GRANTED permission to divide property with insufficient frontage. Location of property: New Suffolk Road, Cutchogue, New York, bounded on the north by James Horton; east by John Wickham; south by other land of Teresko; west by New Suffolk Road, subject to the following: Approval of the Suffolk County Planning Commission. SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -20- October 19, 1978 Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Gillispie, Grigonis, Doyen, Tuthill and Douglass. PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. ~2483 - Upon application of Susan Jacobs, Soundview Avenue, Mattituck, New York, for a variance in ac- cordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 160-32 for permission to construct an accessory building in the front yard area. Location of property: Soundview Avenue, Mattituck, New York, bounded on the north by Long Island Sound; east by Saltaire Civic Association; south by Soundview Avenue; west by J. McLaughlin. The Chairman opened the hearing by reading the application for a variance to the Zoning Ordinance, legal notice of hearing, affidavits attesting to its publication in the official newspapers, and disapproval from the Building Inspector. The Chairman also read a statement from the Town Clerk that notification had been made to: Joseph McLaughlin and Saltaire Civic Association. THE CPL~IRM~N: Is there anyone present who wishes to speak for this application? SUSAN JACOBS: I think the application states it all. I have no backyard. THE CHAIRMAN: When we drove out there we saw that you had a wooded front yard toward the ~ro~d. ~ a car was parked there in a clearing. I believe the property is about 101 feet wide. MRS. JACOBS: It varies from 100 to 110 feet. THE CHAIRMAN: Is that where you propose to put the storage building. Is it to be a garage or just an ~st®rag~ building? MRS. JACOBS: It will be a 10 foot by 12 foot storage shed, and will be set back approximately 70 feet back from the road. MR. TUTHILL: Where it is cleared? MRS. JACOBS: No, I plan to take down a couple of trees just to the east of that. THE CHAIRMAN: Further north? MRS. JACOBS: No, further east. I don't want to see it either. can just be there. THE CHAIRMAN: Then it would be all riqht with you if we re~ that it be at least 50 feet back from Soundvil~w Avenue? ..... MRS. JACOBS: Oh sure. SOUTH~LD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -21- October 19, 1978 THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone else who would like to speak in favor of this application? (there was no response.) Is there anyone who would like to speak against this application? RICHARD MENARD: I represent the Sattaire Civic Association. would just like to ask how~far the shed would be from the easterly boundary line. We have a beach right-of-way there. THE CHAIRMAN: I thought that the man who used to haul the garbage was on the easterly boundary? MRS. JACOBS: No, there is a 30 foot right-of-way before his property. THE CHAIRMAN: Where you have a 30 foot right-of-way there, I would think Mrs. Jacobs would want to keep this off the right-of-way. MRS. JACOBS: I am not concerned about that, but it will be at least 15 feet in from t~eir fence. THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone who wishes to ask any questions or speak on this application? (there was no response.) After investigation and inspection the Board finds that the applicant wishes to erect an accessory shed in her front yard area. The findings of the Board are that the applicant has plenty of area between her house and Soundview Avenue to place a i0 by 12 foot storage shed among the trees. The Board is in agreement with the reason.lng of the Applicant. The Board finds that strict application of the Ordinance would produce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship; the hardship created is unique and would not be shared by all properties alike in the immediate vicinity of the property and in the same use district; and the variance will not change the character of the neighborhood and will observe the spirit of the Ordinance. On motion by Mr. Tuthill, seconded by Mr. Gillispie, it was RESOLUED, that Susan Jacobs, 605 Soundview Avenue, Mattituck, New York, be GRANTED permission to erect an accessory building in the front yard area as requested. Location of property: Soundview Avenue, Matti- tuck, New York, bounded on the north by Long Ill,land Sound; east by Sal- taire Civic Association; south by Soundview Avenue; west by J. McLaughlin, subject to the following conditions: (1) The accessory building shall be no larger than 10 x 15 feet. (2) The accessory building shall be located at least 50 feet from Soundview Avenue and at leas~ 15 feet from the easterly side yard. (3) Approval of the Suffolk County Planning Commission. SOUTH~LD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -22- October 19, 1978 Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Gillispie, Grigonis, Doyen, Tuthitl and Douglass. PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2479 - Upon application of Henry Luce, III, Fishers Island, New York, (Eric Haas, Esq.) for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-30 C 2 for permission to construct a fence around an underground pool. Location of property: Fishers Island, New York, bounded on the north by Private Road; east by Simmons; south by Block Island Sound; west by Coffee. The Chairman opened the hearing by reading the application for a variance to the Zoning Ordinance, legal notice of hearing, affidavits attesting to its publication in the official newspapers, and disapproval from the Building Inspector. The Chairman also read a statement from the Town Clerk that notification had been made to: Sanford G. Simmons and Oneleee M. ~offee. Fee paid $15.00 MR. DOYEN: Mr. Haas, Mr. Luce's attorney, called the day before yesterday to advise me that Mr. Luce would be unable to attend this hearing. Ne wan%ed to know if that would prejudice Mr. Luce's case. I informed him that his mere presence would not make any difference one way or the other on the case unless he had something else to offer. He wanted to know that the Board would not ~e~r~u~iC~d~ec~~. -L~ce could not be present at the meeting. THE CHAIRMAN: I think you have marked the wrong lot here. It borders on Long Island Sound. THE SECRETARY: Doesn't this go both sides of the right-of-way. Mr. Sherwood helped me. THE CHAIRMAN: I could be. I don't think there is a house here. MR. DOYEN: If there ever was an application to grant the elimina- tion of a fence, this is it. First of all, I believe a fence protects the children of a family. There is a fence before you get to the pool. There is no way a child from that family can get to that pool. If they put up %he fence, a child could climb over the bluff and get to the pool. He could lose his life by climbing the bluff just as easily as climbing over the fence to the pool. A child cannot wander around there and not get into more trouble than falling into a pool. MR. DOUGLASS: It depends where he puts the fence. MR. DOYEN: When a small child wanders around that property, he can fall down that cliff and get killed. MR. DOUGLASS: Not if the fence is before the Cliff. S~UTH6LD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -23- October 19, 1978 MR. TUTHILL: I would not want to go too close to that cliff. THE CHAIRMAN: I agree with the fact that the location is very remote. In fact more remote than Mr. Schmid's location. MR. DOYEN: But there is even protection for children in the household. That is the point I want to make. I am always interested in that point when someone tells me that they don't need a fence. Another aspect is if the pool is empty. That is a da~ger. An adult can fall into an empty pool. THE CHAIRMAN: One of the things that influenced our fencing provision is someone just jumped into a pool that was not quite full. He died after jumping into the shallow end of the pool. Is there any- one else who has any comments concerning this application? (there was no response.) Is there anyone who wishes to speak against this appli- cation? (there was no response.) If not, I will have to speak against it. I don't think it is the function of this Board to vary a safety regulation Which is basically what the request is in this application. An Ordinance passed by the Town would require more extraordinary circum- stances than what exist here to eliminate the requirement for a fence. After investigation and inspection, the Board finds that the applicant permission to eliminate a swimming pool fence, Private Road, Pish~ Island, New York, in a remote location at the easterly end of the Island~ The findings of the Board are that the applicant owns a swiauming (constructed prior to the fencing regulation) situated between an y landscaped home and Block Island Sound. Access is by means driveway off a private road several miles from the center Island. Large areas of a tract and nearby areas are covered With dense native underbrush, and the pool is partly pro- tected from casual intrusion by a steep bank to the south toward the beack. We agree that the remote location of the pool and its surroundings reduces the possibility of accidents involving casual intruders. A number of pools in the Town of Southold are located similarly to achieve privacy by m~ans of some or all of the methods noted by the applicant. No one has ever been granted a fencing variance. A fence would not have prevented the only Southold Town fatality. (the man jumped into a par- tially filled pool.) It is the obligation of the Board of Appeals to require all ~easonable safety precautions. Accordingly, the Board finds that the hardship is not unique or unusual and ~ha~ ~e aesthetic considerations noted by the applicant are outweighed, in our opinion, by the need to implement the safety, health and weilfare of the residents of the Town as set forth in the opening paragraphs of the Zoning Ordinance. The Board finds that strict application of the Ordinance would not produce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship~ the hardship created is not unique and would be shar'ed by all properties alike in the immediate vicinity of this property and in the same use district; a~d the variance will change the c~aracter of the neighborhood, and will not observe the spirit of the Ordinance. ~OUTH6LD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -24- Octobez 19, 1978 On motion by Mr. Grigonis, seconded by Mr. Tuthill RESOLVED that Henry Luce, III, Fishers Island, New DENIED permission to eliminate a swimming pool fence. Lo~ property: Fishers Island, New York, bounded on the north Road; east by Simmons; south by Block Island Sound; westb~ Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Gillispie, Gri Tuthitl and Douglass. A request from Meyer Rosenberg has been received r it was York, be ~ation of by Private Coffee. onis, Doyen, lative to Appeal No. 2379 asking that the Board rescind their motion of January 12, 1978, relative to constructing a dwelling with insufficient width of lot. On motion by Gillispie, Seconded by Mr. Grigonls, it was RESOLVED that the Board of Appeals rescind their decision of January 12, 1978, on appeal No. 2379 as requested by Meyer Rosenberg in his letter to the Board of October 13, 1978. A copy of this motion will be sent to the Planning Board. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Gillispie, Grigonis, Doyent Tuthill and Douglass. A letter was received from Stern, Gillies & Kurtzberg, 320 Conklin Street, Farmingdale, New York, relative to Appeal No. 2215, Doris Carpenter. Mr. Gillies wanted to be sure there was no time limit connected with the decision on this matter. The secretary was asked to write to Mr. Gillies and advise him that there is no time limit. On motion by Mr. Giltispie, seconded by Mr. Tuthill, it was RESOLVED that there were six (6) Sign Renewals reviewed and approved as submitted. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Gillispie, Grigonis, Doyen, Tuthill and Douglass. On motion by Mr. Gillispie, seconded by Mr. Douglass, it was RESOLVED that the next meeting of the Southold Town Board of Appeals will be held at 7:30 P.M. (E.S.T.), Thursday, November 9, 1978, and set the f~lQwing t±mes on that date as time and place of hearing upQn tke follOw±ng applications: S~UT~6LD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -25- October 19, 1978 7:30 P.M. (E.S.T.) Informal discussion with Andrew Wallin relative to the establishment of a home occupation business and direct mail business at his residence on Gull Pond Lane, Greenport, New York. 7:45 P.M. (E.S.T.) Upon application of North Fork Bank and Trust Company, 245 Love Lane, Mattituck, New York, (Abigail A. Wickham, Esq.) for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article VII, Section 100-71 and Bulk and Parking Schedule for permission to construct an addition on the Southold office. Location of property: Main Road, Southold, New York, bounded on the north by Main Road; east by Rudolph Bruer; south by Grace R. Edson, Lewis Edson and Deborah D. Edson; west by Grace R. Edson. 7:55 P.M. (E.S.T.) Upon application of Joseph Kubacki, Nokomis Road, Southotd, New York, (Abigail A. Wickham, Esq.) for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-31 and Bulk and Parking Schedule for permission to construct a house with in- sufficient front yard setback. Location of property: Nokomis Road, Southold, New York, bounded on the north by Nokomis Road; east by Stanley a~nd Joyce Gar~n; south by Russel Freund; west by Antoine H. Van den Heuvel. 8:10 P.M. (E.S.T.) Upon application of Evelyn C. Olsen, Main Road~ Laurel, New York, for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article VI and Bulk and Parking Schedule for permission to construct an addition to an existing building. Location of property: Main Road~ Laurel, New York, bounded on the north by Main Road (State Road 25); east by Sophie Kander; south by Katherine B. Tuthill; west by H. Pollak. 8:25 P.M. (E.S.T.) Upon application of Richard Wall, 2715 Nassau Point Road, Cutchogue, New York (William J. Jacobs, as Agent), for a variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section i00-32 for per- mission to construct an accessory building in the front yard area. Lo- cation of property: Nassau Point Road, Cutchogue, New York, bounded on the north by Felix R. Palmeri; east by Little Peconic Bay; south by Bernard E. Goerler; west by Nassau Point Road. 8:35 P.M. (E.~S.T.) Upon application of Olympia Kouros, Main Road, Mattituck, New York, for a variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, S~ction 100-31 and Bulk and Parking Schedule for permission to divide propsrty into 3 lots with insufficient area and width. Loca- tion of property: Bunny Lane and Kouros Road, New Suffolk, New York, bounded on %he north by Kouros Road; east by Bunny Lane; south by Joseph Arena; west by Salvadore Caridi. 8:50 P.M. (E.S.T.~ Upon application of Ernest E. Wilsberg and Harold W. Wilsberg, Olejule Lane, Mattituck, New York, (Richard J. Cron, Esq.) for a variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-31 and Bulk and Parking Schedule for permission to c~eate a lot with insuf- ficient area. Location of property: Lot No. 6, Long Pond Estates, Southold, New York. S~UTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -26- October 19, 1978 The meeting was adjourned at 11:30 P.M. Respectfully submitted, BABETTE C. CONROY Secretary PPROVED