Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZIEGLER, RUTHFRANK A. KUJAWSKI, JR., President ALBERT J. KRUPSKI, JR., Vice-Presidem JOHN M. BREDEMEYER, III JOHN L. BEDNOSKI, JR. HENRY P. SMITH TELEPHONE (516) 765-1892 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, $3095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 July 31, 1989 Mr. and Mrs. Richard Zeidier PO Box 165 Laurel, N.Y. 11948 Dear Mr. Zeidler: During our inspection of your property on July 20, 1989, the sand area along the pool had some beach grass but not enough to prevent future erosion of the property. The low area, which is vegetated by predominantly weeds, must also be planted with beach grass to comply with the Trustees conditions of your permit. If the area in question is unclear, Trustee Bredemeyer will be in contact with you to specify the location. FAK:jas CC: Trustees Mr~. and Mrs. Bertram Walker Town Board Bldg. Dep't. Very truly yours, ~ Frank A. Kujawski, Jr. President Board of Trustees P. O. Box 1169 Peconic Bay Boulevard Mattituck, N.Y.-il952 August 4, 1989 ~": --,, LT~ Mr. Frank Kujawski, President SOUTHOLD BOARD OF TRUSTEES Town Hall -- Main Road Southold, New York - 11971 Dear Mr. Kujawski: My husband and I were gratified to hear you tell the Town Board that you were going to send a letter to Mr. Richard Zeidler in- sisting that he comply with the Trustees' mandate to plant beach grass, (Spartina Patens) in the eye view easement. We appreciate your concern and look forward to early implementa- tion on his part. /~.S' v~erY trul~ Margery M. Walker (Mrs. Bertram W. Walker) Mr. Victor Eessard ~' Southold Town Building Department Main Road - Town Hall Southold, New York - 11971 Dear Mr. Lessard: gust P. O. Box 1169 Peconic Bay Blvd. Mattituck, N.Y.-Il952 4, 1989 Since you were not able to attend the work session of the Town Board held August 1, 1989 and our 'situation' was again discussed, I am enclosing several documents that substantiate our statements at that time. I am also sending duplicates to the Town Attorney who, according to Mr. Horton, told him to issue the certificate of occupancy to the Zeidler's. Many qu~stions come to mind, i.e. -- 1. Why .would the town attorney request a C.O. be issued? Is this within his pur- view if the matter has not been litigated in the town court? 2. e If the Town T~ustees feel the stipulation re..the beach grass was not complied with, why did they suggest the c.o. be issued? A~d, is this within their put ...... view?. If Mr. Goeringer, the chairman of the Z.B.A., has not seen the latest survey nor inspected the site, how could. Mr. Horton claim the Z.B.A.'s mandates had been satisfied? If the letter from Alden Young, Sr. specifically states the 18% coverage only included the house, pool and gazebo, andthus eliminateS.the decking, walkways and.brickwork around the pool, was it not obvious that the lot coverage calcu- lation was incomplete? That a true total would be a violation? At the Z.B.A. hearing of 6/19/86, you and Mr.'Goeringer made it very clear that the pool and the brick work around it, (~ich made it an attachment), were part of the house and, therefore, had to be included in the lot coverage calcu- lation. Why did Mr. Horton issue the C.O. in your absence? You have been at all the hearings and made several interpretationsand decisions that vitally affedt this issue. Since Mr. Horton might not have been privy to same, it would seem logical'that you should have been the one to make the final determination regarding the C.O. What about the other Z.B.A. ~dicts? Did anyone check the 50' setback from the road? The 30' setback from Brush's Creek? 7. What about the other Trustees' mandates? The removalof, fill, the propane tank, the 29'6" from the house? Other agencies approvalS? 8. At the Z.B.A. hearing you requestedthat the-u~ated survey locate the cesspoolsl Was this ever done? Mr. Victor Lessard -Page 2- 9. ~at if the Zeidler's sold 'their house? With'the C.O. infractions be rectified? August 4, 1989 in hand, how could these As we stated, we feel the Certificate of Occupancy issued to the Zeidler's must be rescinded until everything requested and/ormandatedby the various agencies have been complied with and verified. The Zoning Code - Chapter 100, article 13 - defines a Certificate of Occupancy as a document that.certifies that the structure and/or-use of land and/or.structure is IN COMPLIANCE.WITH.ALL' STATE AND LOCAL CODES, REGULATIONS. AND REQUIREMENTS. This is clearly not the case, and it should never have been issued unless it was. We were gratified that the TownBoard was so courteous. ~They'allowed us to present our side of this situation and recognized several inequities about the "Walker matter"~ As a result they requested further inspection and action. My husband and I are weary of trying to protect the pleasure land value of our home over this protracted period of time and will, be delighted to have the matter just-' ly resolved. (Mrs. Bertram W. Walke~) Enclosures cc: Messrs Schondebare & Berntssen Southold Town Board Z.B.A. & Board of Trustees FRANK A. KUJAWSKI, JR., President ALBERT J. KRUPSKI, JR., Vice-President JOHN M. BREDEMEYER, III JOHN L, BEDNOSKI, JR. HENRY P. SMITH TELEPHONE (516) 765-1892 TO: FROM: DATE: RE: BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 Curt Horton, Bldg. Inspector Frank A. Kujawski, Jr., Pres° Bd. of Trustees July 21,1989 Richard Zeidler application Nee 571 100 McDonald's Crossing, Laurel, N.Y. Please be advised that on July 20, 1989 the Board of Trustees inspected the above referenced project and determined that conditions have been complied with and all work has been completed. HENRY P. SMITH, President JOHN M..BREDEMEYER, Vice-Pres. PHILLIP J. GOUBEAUD ALBERT KRUPSKI, JR. ELLEN M, LARSEN BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road '- P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1892 Mr. Glenn Just Land Use Company Route 25 A Box 2521 Wading River, New York 11792 Re: Richard Zeidler - Application No. 571 Dear Mr. Just: The following action was taken by the Board of 'Town Trustees during their regular meeting held on November 24, 1987 regarding the above matter. Moved by Trustee Smith seconded by Truste~ Krupski it ~as RESOLVED that The Land Use Company on behalf of. Richard Zeidler be and hereby are granted permission'to construct a swimming pool with associated decking on property located at 100 McDonalds' Grossing, Edgemere Park, Laurel. It is noted that the public hearing concerning this application was held on October 29, 1987. Approval is subject to the f. ollowing conditions: 1.' The view. easement will have to be completely restored.to it's original · elevation, including the removal of fill.' The area is to be replanted with natural beach grass to preserve minimal slope to the creek. This is as close~' as practical, to the original waiver previously granted. .2- The propane tank will have to be relocated back by the roadway to prevent any disturbance of vegetation when the tank is being filled. 3. The brick deck and fence On the west side of the property will have to be removed to a distance of 29'6" from the house seaward and running .along 'the entire length of the pool. The pool filtration sys'tem-will have to be located landward of that line and the brick barbecue. (The barbecue is somewha'-t seaward of the 29 '6''~line.) . · 4. There i's a 1¼" pipe running from the pool area seaward. This matter will 'have to be clarified, prior t'0 ,the actual issuance Of a perr~it. ~5.....~The Trustees. are t0~ be notified ·after the work' is complete for a,final inspection.. 6. This approval is subject to any .'other AgencY' or Department's approval'that may ,."be required for. this project. ~ Board of Trustees - Page 2. Land Use Company on behalf of Richard Zeidler Please return to the Building Dept. for a determination on the need of any other permits or approvals or modifications that may be necessary. Please remit a $10.00 Wetland Inspection fee for this permit. Should you have any questions or concerns, please do not hestitate to contact this office Very truly yours, .... Board of Town Trustees HPS :ip cc: Commissioner Thomas C. Jorling, D.E.C., Albany Robert A. Greene, D.E.C., Stony Brook Stephen Mars, Army Corps of Engineers Thomas Hart, Coastal Management ' John Holzapfel,. Chairman, Southold Town C.A.C. Victor Lessard, Admin., Building Dept. Planning Board Board of Appeals Mr. & Mrs. Richard Zeidler file ro T~IS SURVEY )S A vIO~T~ON SE~T(ON 720~'~F T~E NE~ YO~K STATE EDUCATION ~, COPIES OF THIS SU~EY ~P ~T ~ARI~O FHE L~D ~U~EYOWS 1~ SE~L ~BOSSED SEAL SHALL NOT ~ FO BE A VALID T~UE COPY ]UARANTEES ~ICATED H~N SHALL RUN ~NLY TO THE PE~ON FOB WHOM THE SURVE) S P~EPA~ED, A~ ON HIS ~HA~ TO THE ~ITLE COMPANY, ~OVERNMENTAL AGENCY ~.ENDING INSTITUtiON LIST~ HE~N, AND 'O THE ASSIGNEES OF THE ~ND~NG I~TI- 'UTION. GUARANTEES A~E NOT TRANSFERABL~ 0 o~ (, · = ~dONUMffNT SUFF. CO T4~ MAP DIST. IO00 SECT 145 BL04 (OT 015 ~. ~4~ /979 AUG. 19, /985 ~4Y 9,1986 JUNE ~ /98F ~r L /~7 YOUNG ~ YOUN~ ~00 OSTR~NDER ~V£NU~ RIV~RH~D, N, ~ L~D ~RVEYOR~ ~ KS. L lC ~ 1~8~ N. K~ L lC. ~. ~3 ~tRVEY FOR R/CHARD ZEIDLER a RUTH ZEIDLER a r L A UREL tOWN OF SOU THOL D SUFF. CO, N. ~. SC4Lff : I"= 40 ' Mark S. Kosak 73,4-51 O0 AREA CODE 516 April 7, 1988 Henry P. Smith, President Board of Town Trustees Town of Southold Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, NY 11971 Richard Zeidler - Application No. 571 We are the attorneys which represent Mr. Zeidlerin the above-captioned matter. We would greatly appreciate the opportunity to discuss possible n~d- ifications to your November 24, 1987 decision at yourwork session scheduled on April 14, 1988. If that is not possible, please place the matter on the agenda of your next regularly scheduled meeting on April 21, 1988. Please confirm which date would be more convenient for the Board as soon as possible. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Very truly yours, CRON AND CRON, ESQS. MSK/ts Mr. Victor Lessard, Administrator Building Department Southold Town Hall Main Road Southold, New York - 11971 Dear Mr. Lessard: P. O. Box 1169 Peconic Bay Boulevard Mattituck, New York-il952 April 5, 1988 As spring approaches, we must anticipate further activityon'the pool and grounds next door. Since the Building Department is vested with the responsibility of enforcing the town agencies' rulings, we wanted to verify the current status of the Zeidler/Walker case. The Trustees decreed that: The view easement be completely restored to it's original'elevation, includ- ing removal of fill. The area is to be replanted with natural beach grass to preserve minimal sloB to the creek. 2. The propane tank will have to be relocated back bythe roadway to prevent an~ disturbance of vegetation when the tank is being filled. The brick deck and fence on the west side of the property will have to be removed to a distance of 29'6" from. the house seaward and running along the entire length of the pool. The pool filtration system will have to be locat- ed landward of that line ~nd the brick barbecue. e There is a 1¼" pipe running from the pool seaward. Thismatter will have to be clarified prior to the actual issuance of a permit . The Trustees are to be notified after the work is complete for a final in- spection. 6. Th~ approval is subject to any other Agency or Department's approval that maY be required for this project. Copy enclosed - meeting dated November 24, 1987. We don't know whether the use of that pipe has been clarified to the Trustees satisfaction, but if it has and before work resumes, we would like to point out that there are violations of the Z.B.A.'s decision that must first be addressed. 1. The construction was to be no closer to the road than 50 feet. It is about 42 feet. The coverage of the lot was to be verified to see if it is in excess of the permitted percentage.allowed. The affidavit forwarded by Alden Young, Sr. obviously did not take into consideration all of the covered area. He prob- ably worked with an old survey. See Page 2 of Appeal No. 3510, dated July 31, 1986 - Attached. Mr. Victor Lessard .-Page 2- April 5, 1988 Furthermore,. at that same hearing, you personally requested that Mr. Zeidler submit a survey locating the cesspools that service the house. To the best of our knowledge, this was never done. We will be out of town from April 9th to May 8th. We can be reached at the following address and telephone number, or you may contactour son, Peter, at (516) 928-5459 and he will get in touch with us: SeaBreeze South Condominiums, Pamela 9, 190 No. Collier Blvd, Marco Island, Florida-33937. Tel.No. (813) 642-6921 Presumably no work will be done until all these violations have been addressed and corrected by the Zeidler's. However, we wanted'this letter on record to re- mind all town agencies of the impending resumption of work on the pool and patio. Enclosed are duplicates of pictures that are on file at the~rustees office. They very clearly show the original contour of the property along the north side and into our eye-view easement, ,prior to the installation of the fill and the pool. Also shwon are some of the truckloads of fill brought in to raise the ground level. We do not wish to belabor or prolong thiscontroversy, but we'have worked too hard and too long to make the Town finally achnowledge that our neighbor has willfully violated many town laws and codes and caused us great loss of value, enjoyment and deeded rights: to say nothing of anguish and expense; and we in- ~nd to see that these abuses are fully rectified We are most anxious to have their rulings implemented and the eye-view easement restored to its original level. Since the Zeidler's may return from a winter sojourn in Florida while we are away, and commence work without contacting the town, we wanted to alert you to this fact. We sincerely hope that things will proceed without anymore rancor and look to you for just enforcement of the decisions of both the' Trustees and the Zoning Board of Appeals, as well as your own department. Thanking you for your attention in this matter, we remain - Yours very truly, CC.'~Bd. of Trustees Zoning Bd. of Appeals Supervisor - F.J.Murphy Bert=am'W. Wa ker -and' ×/?,//l. . MargerY M. Walker Enclosures: Trustees Decision - 11/24/87. Z.B.A. Decision - 7/31/86 ~ Photographs Excerpt from deed recorded in Liber 6994, Page 128, describing eye-view easement. $outhold Town Board MAIN ROAD- STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHDLD, L.I.. N.Y. 119'71 ACTION OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Appeal No. 35]0 Application Dated May ]4, ]986 TO: Mr. and Mrs. Richard Z6idler P.O. Box 165 Laurel, NY 11948 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 [Appellant (s) ] At a Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals held on July_ 3], ]986, the above appeal was considered, and the action indicated below was taken on your [ ] Request for Variance Due to Lack of Access to Property New York Town Law, Section 280-a [ ] Request for Special Exception under the Zoning Ordinance Article , Section [X] Request for Variance to the Zoning Ordinance Article XI , Section ]00-]]9.2 [ ] Request for Application of RICHARD AND RUTH ZEIDLER for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XI, Section 100-119.2(B) for permission to locate proposed pool, deck and fencing within 75' of bulkhead or tidal water. Location of Property: 100 McDonald's Crossing off the South Side of Peconic Bay Boulevard, Laurel, NY; Edgemere Park~Lots 12, 13 and 14; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-145-4-15. WHEREAS, public hearings were held on'June 19, 1986 and July 17, 1986, in the Matter of the Application of RICHARD AND RUTH ZEIDLER, under Appeal No. 3510; 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, at said hearing all those who desired to be heard were heard, and their testimony was recorded; and WHEREAS, the board has carefully considered all testimony and documentation submitted concerning this application; and WHEREAS, the board made the following findings of. fact: 1. The premises in question is located in located in the "A" Residential~and Agricultural Zoning District, ~ith frontage along' ' Brushes Creek and Peconic Bay, and is identified on the Suffolk County Tax Maps as District t000, Section 145, Block 4, Lot 15. 2. The subject premises consists of a total area of approximately 28,355 sq. ft. as shown by survey dated April 17, 1979, and is improved with a single-family, one-story frame house with attached garage and deck areas, and gazebo. 3. By Notice of Disapproval dated May 14, 1986, applicant was denied a building permit application for a swimmingpool addition under the provisions of Article XI, Section 100-119.2 of the Zoning Code, which requires all buildings and structures located on lots adjacent to tidal water bodies other than the (CONTINUED ON PAGE TWO) "~-.DATED: August 5, 1986. Form ZB4 (rev. 12/81) CHAIRMAN, SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Page 2 - Appeal No. 3510 Matter of RICHARD AND RUTH ZEIDLER Decision Rendered July 31, 1986 the Long Island Sound to be set back not less than seventy-five (75) feet from the ordinary highwater mark of such tidal water body, or not less than seventy-five feet from the landward edge of the tidal wetland, whichever is greater. 4. In personally viewing the premises in question, it has been found that the existing wood deck areas are not flush with the average grade level, and it has been noted by the building inspector that an up-to-date survey showing all above-ground structures was not submitted at the time of the filing of the building-permit application, and therefore he was not able to determine compliance or noncompliance of the lot-coverage restriction. It appears after inspections by the board members and the building department that the existing deck areas must be calculated in determining the percentage of lot coverage. Inasmuch as a lot-coverage variance was not applied for, this board is without authority to act concerning same, except to require further review by the Building Inspector and possibly a subsequent variance application. It is therefore the sugges- t. io~n~of.this board th.~.~a~.~accurate~up-to-date survey prepared by a surveyo~.~.$howing..~and calculating'the percen%age of lot coverage for all structures~'~abOve'~ground level, be submitted ,to the Building'-~nspect6~f'~'bef~~e'~''~the~'issuance ~of a building permit, and~t~hat~a~econd~'~No~tic~'~'o~ u~sappr val be issued indicating the basis of his determination, in the event that an alternative has not been accepted by the Building Inspector and the applicants, for amended construction. 5. It is the opinon of the board that the applicants do not have any other method feasible for them to pursue in this wetlands-setback application other than another variance; and in c~nsidering the character of this property and the immediate area, the most feasible location will be in this westerly yard area, as amended, having setbacks of no closer than 50 feet to the front property line and no clo~er.~tha.~ ~20~.~eet.~..~o the..~ater--~long the westerly property line, wi.t_hout any encroachment int~,~.~he weste~].y~_v_i_~_e.~se~t, and as further conditionally noted below. In considering this appeal, the board finds and deter- mines that by locating the proposed pool, decks and fence enclosure as specifically noted below: (a) the variance will be the minimum necessary; (b) the circumstances of the property are unique; (c) the practical difficulties are sufficient to warrant a granting of this variance; (d) there will be no substantial change in the character of the district; (e) the relief as granted ~s not substantial, being a variance of 40± percent of the existing setback, or 20± feet; (f) the circumstances are not shared by other properties generally existing in the neighborhood; (g) that in view of the manner in which the difficulty arose and in consideration of all the above factors, the interests of justice will best be served by allowing the variance, as conditionally noted below. Accordingly, on motion by Mr. Doyen, seconded by Mr. Goehringer, it was RESOLVED, that permission to locate an inground swim- mingpool, decks and fence enclosure, within 75' of tidal Page 3- 'Appeal No. 3510 Matter of RICHARD AND RUTH ZEIDLER Decision Rendered July 31, 1986 water body, BE AND HEREBY IS APPROVED in the Matter of the Applicat'ion of RICHARD AND RUTH ZIEDLER, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: front 1. ~?'~NO':':building conStruCtion ~]~Q~Q~than 50 feet to the ~ , line and no clo§~6~?~han 30 2.~i?NO~"encr°achment'~':'~'n'to V~ew easement along westerly side; 3. Screening along the westerly side (bushes, etc.) shall be maintained,(except for area within view easement). 4. Lighting shall be of a mushroom-type which not adversely glare into neighboring properties; 5. Screening shall be placed and maintained at the northwest corner along yard area adjacent the view easement; 6. Inasmuch as this application has not been determined by the Building Department as to compliance or noncompliance of the lot-coverage limi~ations,~'.b~.~.~u~a~~_a~abuild~.~.~p~r~, !~'a"ce~t~fied up-to-date surveY ~ust .b~ submitted to '~h~"Building Department for Such d6"~Pmihati'on, as well as any and all other Bulk Schedule regulations of the Zoning Code; 7. In the event it is found that the lot coverage is excessive for all structures above ground level, applicant will then be required to reapply or comply as otherwise authorized by the Building Inspector. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Sawicki and Doyen. (Members Douglass and Grigonis were absent.) This resolu- tion was duly adopted. lk ~ August 51 198'6 / ./ HENRY P. SMITH, President JOHN M..BREDEMEYER, Vice-Pres. PHILLIP J. GOUBEAUD ALBERT KRUPSKI, JR. ELLEN M. LARSEN BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, $3095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 1 I971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1892 Mr. Glenn Just Land Use Company Route 25 A Box 2521 Wading River, New York 11792 Re: Richard Zeidler .-. Application No. 571 Dear Mr. Just: The following action was taken by the Board of Town Trustees during their regular meeting held on November 24, 1987 regarding, the. above matter. Moved by Trustee Smith seconded by Truste~ Krupski it ivas RESOLVED that The Land Use Company on behalf of Richard Zeidler be and hereby are granted permission to construct a swimming pool with associated decking on property located at 100 McDonalds Crossing, Edg&mere Park, Laurel. It is noted that the public hearing concerning this application was held. on :~ October 29, 1987~ Approval is subject to the following conditions: ..... "-' The view. easement will have to be completely restored-to it's'original elevation, including the removal of fill. The area is to be replanted with natural beach grass to preserve minimal slope to the creek. This is as close,' as practical, to the original waiver Previously granted. The propane tank will have to be relocated back by the roadway to prevent any disturbance of vegetation when the tank is being filled. The brick deck and fence on the west side of the property will have to be removed to a distance of 29'6" from the house seaward and running along the en.tire length of the pool. The pool filtration syitem will have to be located landward of that line and the brick barbecue. (The barbecue is somewhat seaward of the 29'6" line.) :'' There i's a 1¼" pipe running £rom the pool area seaward. This matter will have to be clarified prior to the actual issuance of a permit. _ . The Trustees are to: be notified after the work' is complete for a final inspection. 'This approval is subject to any other Agency or Department's approval that may .. be re. quired for. this project. Board of Trustees - Page 2. Land Use Company on behalf of Richard Zeidler Please returri-t~--th-d-BLiiI~liS-g Dept. fo-~--&--~I~qtermination on l-he need of any other permits or approvals or modifications that may be necessary. Please remit a $10.00 Wetland Inspection fee for this permit. Should you have any questions or concerns, please do not hestitate to contact this office ..... .. Very truly yours, Henry P. Smith, ' President Board of Town Trustees HPS: ip cc: Commissioner Thomas C. Jorling, D.E.C., Albany' Robert A. Greene, .D.E.C., Stony Brook Stephen Mars, Army Corps of Engineers Thomas Hart, Coastal Management John Holzapfel, Chairman, Southold Town C.A.C. Victor Lessard, Admin., Building Dept. Planning Board Board of Appeals Mr. & I,irs. Richard Zeidler file FRANK A. KUJAWSKI, JR., President ALBERT J. KRUPSKI, JR., Vice-President JOHN M. BREDEMEYER, III JOHN L. BEDNOSKI, JR. HENRY P. SMITH BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, $3095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 .TELEPHONE (5161 765-1892 June 28, 1988 Mr. & Mrs. Bertram W. Walker P. O. Box 1169 Peconic Bay Boulevard Mattituck, New York 11952 Re: Richard Zeidler Dear Mr. & Mrs. Walker: Please be advised that we discussed the above referenced matter with the Bay Constable during our meeting on June 23, 1988. We would like to give Mr. & Mrs. Zeidler an opportunity to complete their project and at such time the Board will inspect the site. F~~an~krY truly y~urs, · Kuj~wski, Jr. President ; Board of Town Trustees FAK:ip cc: Bldg. Dept. Bay Constable file FIELD REPORT -- POLICE DEPT,, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD. N,Y Centrald~mPlamtN°-',nc -~-n ~'7,~-~j~''Or ;r II Ham'~et°fOcc" -~ L"t~'~L- I S~rl ' ~de t O C ime.. - ~ Grid No. Dayof Occurr ne ce~ Oate~fO~ ~ TimsofOcc. - Date~f Re~rt Name Complainant ~imi~ ' ...... Dd.B..[ ~ Address -~ . _ [ Phone Place o~ Occurrence Tim~Out Timeln JZo. dd j T~.r laC~dBvA,.~ PDTS 2-- Continuation R~ A~ach~? ~ Yes " :' Re~ing Officer _ ~ J Shield No. ! Superior F~m PDTS 1 ' Superviso~, Building Administrator, Town Attorney, Bd. of Trustees & Z.B,A. Town of Southold - Town Hall 53095 Main Road - P.O.Box 728 Southold, New York - 11971 P. O. Box 1169 Peconic Bay Boulevard Mattituck, New York - 11952 June 14, 1988 Gentlemen: On July 31, 1986 the Zoning Board of Appeals ruled on Appeal #350, dated 5/14/86, from Mr. & Mrs. Richard Zeidler, requesting a variance to Zoning Ordinance Article 6, Section 100=119~2. It stated seven conditions in part, as follows: 1. "NO BUI£DING CONSTRUCTION CLOSER THAN 50 FEET TO THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE AND NO CLOSER THAN 30 FEET TO THE WATER ALONG THE WESTERLY SIDE." "INASMUCH AS'THIS APPLICATION HAS NOT BEEN DETERMINED BY THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT AS TO COMPLIANCE OR NON-COMPLIANCE OF THE LOT COVERAGE LIMITATIONS, BEFORE ISSU- ANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT, A CERTIFIED UP-TO-DATE SURVEY MUST BE SUBMITTED TO THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT FOR SUCH DETERMINATION ~.AS WELL AS ANY AND ALL OTHER BULK SCHEDULE REGULATIONS OF THE ZONING CODE." e "IN THE EVENT IT IS FOUND THAT THE LOT COVERAGE IS EXCESSIVE FOR ALLSTRUCTURES ABOVE GROUND LEVEL, APPLICANT WILL THEN BE REQUIRED TO REAPPLY OR COMPLY AS OTHER- WISE AUTHORIZED BY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR." The pool and surrounding decking came to within 17~ feet of the creek and were sub- sequently acted upon by the Board of Trustees. It ruled that the Zeidler's must correct the measurement and remove material back to 29'6" from the house, plus sev- eral other corrective measures and subject to" .... ~ANY OTHER AGENCY OR DEPARTMENT'S APPROVAL THAT MIGHT BE REQUIRED FOR THIS PROJECT"~ ~ Somewhere in the shuffle, their abuse of the 50 foot set-back from the road has been overlooked, as well as the lot coverage c~lculation. Last Friday, they had a mason contractor expand the width and depth of the set of stairs that is part of the new construction and within the 50' set-back and COVERED BY THE STOP WORK ORDER. The steps are now 40 feet from the road and the filled and raised deck area 45'feet instead of 50 feet. This may seem minor - a set of steps and decking 10 feet beyond the parameters set by the Town - but it is not! It is typical of everything they have done in the past. All the allowed measurements were clearly stipulated on the permits and variance, PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, and all were violated. They took license everywhere, as you well know. When Mr. Lessard lifted the "Stop-work order" recently, it was only to permit the Zeidler's to do what work was necessary to correct their violations, not to further compound them. Since the rulings of the Z.B.A. and the Trustees are very specific and easily under- stood, we would like to have the Building Department monitor and inspect the correct- ive work being done, as it progresses, to see that the dimensions decreed are ad- hered to. Town of Southold - Page 2 - June 14, 1988 First of all, calculate the coverage before anything further is done, since this is a primary rule of the Town and dictates whether anything at all can be done. The most recent survey submitted does not show the raised wooden walkway on the easterly side of the house and to the rear, nor does it locate the cesspools as requested by Mr. Lessard at the Z.B.A. hearing. The professional calculation attached shows 32% lot coverage (31.83%), not in- cluding the above walkway nor the new set of steps. This is Wq~LL IN EXCESS OF THE PERMITTED 20%. 2. Enforce the 50 foot set-back. The survey clearly shows it to be 45' and now 40' where the new construction was done. Oversee the eye-view easement being completely cleared to original ground level. It shows clearly on the survey and has been marked with monuments by Young & Young. Brick deck removed to full stated distance from house (29'6"). They have remov- ed some, but left nine course of flat brick (4" x 9 = 36"), plus a one foot slate border. This makes at least 4 feet to t~e westerly side of the pool and is in excess of the measurement given by the Trustees. 5. Clarify other points mentioned by both agencies: explanation of 1¼" pipe running seaward, propane tank placement, filtration system relocation. To allow Mr. Zeidler to proceed with the so-called "corrections" without supervision is only setting us up for the same thing all over again. He'll violate all the par- ameters once more, (the enlarged steps and wall are an indication of what is to come), then suggest that it's expensive to correct them again and claim hardsbi.p and harrass- ment. When, in truth, it is a calculated step he's taking, presuming that you won't make him undo his deliberate infractions a second time. ~ When I spoke to the Town Attorney last Friday, he said that while the Bay Constable is the usual enforcer of the Trustee's rulings, in this case, since it deals with construction and is tied to the Z.B.A. as well, the the Building Department will be the overseeing agency. It has taken years of physical and mental anguish, as you all know, to finally have the Town rul fairly in this case and we look forward to quick and just enforcement of the agencies' mandates. We should not have to, nor do we wish to, continue to exert this tremendous effort to protect the enjoyment and value of our home. You~s~. very truly, ~rl & Mrs. W Walker Enclosures. HENRY P. SMITH, President JOHN M..BREDEMEYER, Vice-Pres. PHILLIP J. GOUBEAUD ALBERT KRUPSKI, JR. ELLEN M. LARSEN BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1892 Mr. Glenn Just Land Use Company Route 25 A Box 2521 Wading River, New York 11792 Re: Richard Zeidler -_ Application No. 571 Dear Mr. Just: The following action was taken by the Board of ?own Trustees during' - their regular meeting held on November 24, 1987 regarding the above matter. Moved by Trustee Smith seconded by Truste& Krupski it 4vas RESOLVED that The Land Use Company on behalf of Richard Zeidler be and hereby are granted permission to construct a swimming pool with associated decking on property located at 100 McDonalds Crossing, Edgemere Park, Laurel. It is noted that the public hearing concerning this application was held on October 29, 1987; Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1.' The view eas'ement will have to be completely restored-to it's'original elevation, including the removal of fill. The area is to be replanted with natural beach grass to preserve minimal slope to the creek. This is as close, as practical, to the original waiver Previously granted. 2. The propane tank will have to be relocated back by the roadway to prevent any disturbance of vegetation when the tank is being filled.' The brick deck and fence on the west side of the property will have to be removed to a distance of 29'6" from the house seaward and running along the en.tire length of the pool. The pool filtration system will have to be located landward of that line and the brick barbecue. (The barbecue is somewhkt seaward of the 29 '6" line.) . There i's a 1¼" pipe running from the pool area seaward. This matter will have to be clarified prior to the actual issuance of a permit .... 5. The Trustees are to; be notified after the work' is complete for a final inspection. 'This approval is subject to any other Agency or Department's approval that may be re. quired for. this project. Board of Trustees - Page 2. L'~nd Use Company on behalf of Richard Zeidler ~'leage returr/-fo---th-e'-BiiiI~li~g Dept. f6-f-a-%IeYt-e-r-mln~ion on Ihe need of any other permits or approvals or modifications that may be necessary. Please remit a $10.00 Wetland Inspection fee for this permit. Should you have any questions or concerns, please do not hestitate to contact this office. Very truly yours, Henry P. ~mith, President · . . . Board of Town Trustees H P S: ip "~ cc: Commissioner Thomas C. Jorling, D.E.C., Albany' Robert A. Greene, D.E.C., Stony Brook Stephen Mars, Army Corps of Engineers Thomas Hart, Coastal Management John Holzapfel, Chairman, Southold Town C.A.C. Victor Lessard, Admin., Building Dept. Planning Board Board of Appeals Mr. & Mrs. Richard Zeidler file HENRY P. SMITH. JOHN M. BREDEMEYER, III, President John BEdnoski,-Jr. ALBERT KRUPSKI, JR., Vice-President Frank Kujawski TELEPHONE (516) 765-1892 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF $OUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 April 11, 1988 Mr. Mark S. Kosak Law Offices Cron & Cron Main Road P.O. Box 953 Cutchogue, New York 11935-0032 Re: Richard Zeidl. er-Application No. 571 Dear Mr. Kosak: Pursuant to your request to meet with the Board of Trustees to further discuss the above captioned matter, please be advised that I have scheduled an appointment for Thursday, April 14, 1988. Your appointment is scheduled for 5:30 p.m.. Should you need any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact this office at the telephone number listed above. Very truly yours, Ilene Pfifferling, Clerk Board of Town Trustees ip Name: ~ Date: In: ' out: Board of Town Trustees Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Southold, New York - 11971 Attention: Frank A. Kujawski, Jr., President Gentlemen: P. O. Box 1169 Mattituck, New York - 11952 You are well aware of the difficulties we have been encountering for the past few years, due to the installation of a swimming pool directly in front~df our home on Brush's Creek by Richard Zeidler. After many long letters to all concerned agencies and many meetings with the various town departments, a fairly reasonable decision was made permitting the pool but limiting and controlling its placement and surroundings. However, not all of these mandates have been implemented, nor enforced, and we are distressed to find that you have not bothered to follow up this highly controversial situation. When we last appeared before you, wewere told that .the Zeidler's had a year to complete their project and you would not check on~ it until that time elapsed. THAT WAS MORE THAN A YEAR AGO -- (see your letter~ m dated 6/23/88). On June 4, 1986 you gave them permission to build the pool on a site that violated many town codes, but you imposed certain provisions as follows: "During construction the fill must be contained so that it does not wash into the creek. Placement of hay bales would be recommended during con- struction.'' No such containment was provided during the entire construction stage. 2. "Ail discharge from the pool is to be piped away from the creek and bay." This Spring he siphoned one half of the filled pool water into the creek, (the deep rut it made has since been filled), and trucked in more water. 3. "Immediately following construction all areas of exposed soil should be suitable vegetated." To date, this area has not been planted. On June 18, 1987 you requested the Building Department to issue a "Stop Work" order on subject property due to the fact that he was building something en- tirely different than what he had applied for and granted permission for. At a later date, (letter to Glenn Just undated by refers to 10/29/87, you again gave them permission to go forward provided: "The view easement be completely restored to it's original elevation, %N- CLUDING REMOVAL OF FILL. The area is to be replanted with natural beach grass to preserve minimal slope to the creek. This is as close, as prac- tical, to the original waiver previously granted." This has not been done! On his application, Mr. Zeidler stated that all excavated fill (115 cubic yards) would be removed and trucked to an upland site and "O" yards brought in. Instead, all of it was spread arcund the Board of Town Trustees Page 3 July 19, 1989 We hope that you and the other agencies will enforce the regulations that apply and finally Put this issue to rest justly. We look forward to an early response to this letter. Yours very truly, Be~ Ma] Walker ~~alker cc: Building Department, Z.B.A., C,A,C, D.E.C., Army Corps of Engineers, Coastal Management Town Board, Town Attorney, Town Supervisor P. O. Box 1169 Mattituck, New Y6rk-l1952 July 19, 1989 Mr. Victor Lessard Building Department Town of Southold Main Road ~ 'Southold, New York - 11971 Dear Mr' Lessard: We are enclosing a copy of a letter sent to the Board of Trustees, regarding the Implementation of the provisos mandated by the various town agencies when they gave permission to the Zeidler's to build their pool. This pool has been com- ~p!eted and in use formore than a year. Aside from those issues mentioned in our letter to the Trustees, there is the matter of the lot coverage, which was to be calculated and submitted, per the Z.B.A. on July 31,.1986. We realize you have a statement from Alden Young, Sr. ~that the coverage is within the 20% - but Mr. Young is mistaken. We understand that he.is not very active in the ~nsiness, due to his age, and he probably mis- read some figures. Anyone can see that the Zeidler's.are well in excess of 20%. The actual coverage,.computedprofessionally is 31.85%, as we are ~sure any surveyor will confirm. Also, they are closer to the road than the 50 fee~ the Z.B.A.stipulated. We recall your requesting the location of their cesspools at the same Z.B.A. hearing on 7/31/86.- ~ We are really tired of monitoring this whole mess! The town agencies have given our neighbor tremendous latitude and still he will not follow their ac- companying mandates. What was the purpose of issuing these conditions if he is allowed to ignore them? As the enforcing agency for both the Trustees and the Zoning Board of Appeals, as well as the Building Department, will you please see to it thattheir de- cisions and your codes are respected and enacted? The junk pile is gone, but the weeds are so high we'll soon have our view blocked again. We would like to see the view easement restored to its original level and the beach grass planted, as the Trustees ordered. Or, if preferable, regular grass which is what was there in the first place. Thanking you for your attention to this matter, we remain - Enclosures CC: Yours very truly, Be/~r. tr~m~W. Walker -and- Trustees, Z.B.A. & other concerned agencies Mr. Victor Lessard Building Department Town of Southold Main Road 'Southold, New York - 11971 Dear Mr. Lessard: Mattituck, New y~rk-l1952 ' We are enclosing a copy of a letter sent to the Board of Trustees, regarding the Implementation of the provisos mandated by the various town agencies when they gave permission to the Zeidler's to build their pool. This pool has been com- pleted and in use for more than a year. Aside from those issues mentioned in our letter to the Trustees, there is the matter of the lot coverage, which was to be calculated and submitted, per the Z.B.A. on July 31, 1986. We realize you have a statement from Alden Young, Sr. 'that the coverage is within the 20% - but Mr. Young is mistaken. We understand that he.is.not very active in the ~nsiness, due to his age, and.he probably mis- read some figures. .Anyone can see that the Zeidler's.are well in excess of 20%. The actual coverage, computed professionally is 31.85%, as we are 'sure any surveyor will confirm. Also, they are closer to the road than the 50 fee~ the Z.B.A.stipulated.' We recall your requesting the location of their cesspools at the same Z.B.A. hearing on 7/31/86.' · We are really tired of monitoring this whole mess! The town agencies have given our neighbor tremendous latitude and still he will not fOllow their ac- companying mandates. What was the purpose of issuing these conditions if he is allowed to ignore them? As the enforcing agency for both the Trustees and the Zoning Board of Appeals, as well as the Building Department, will you please see to it thattheir de- cisions and your codes are respected and enacted? The junk pile is gone, but the weeds are so high we'll soon have our view blocked again. We would like to see the view easement restored to its original level and the beach grassplanted, as the Trustees ordered. Or, if preferable, regular grass which is what was there in the first place. Thanking you for your attention to this matter, we remain - Enclosures CC: · Yours very truly, Berkram~. Walker -and- Margery M/Walker - Trustees, Z.B.A. & other concerned agencies P. O. Box 1169 Mattituck, New York - 11952 Board of Town Trustees Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Southold, New York - 11971 Attention: Frank A. Kujawski, Jr., President July 19, 1989 Gentlemen: You are well aware of the difficulties we havebeen encountering for the past few years, due to the installation of a swimming pool directly in front~6f our home on Brush's Creek by Richard Zeidler. After many long lettersto all concerned agencies and many meetings with the various town departments, a fairly reasonable decision was made permitting the pool but limiting and controlling its placement and surroundings. However, not all of these mandates have been implemented, nor enforced, and we are ~istressed to.find that you have not bothered to follow up this highly controversial situation. When we last appeared before you, we were told that the Zeidler's had a year to complete their project and you would not-check on it ~until that time elapsed. THAT WAS MORE THAN A YEAR AGO -- (see your letter dated 6/23/88). On June 4, 1986 you gave them permission to build the pool on a site-that violated many town codes, but you imposed certain provisions as followsz "During construction the fill must be contained so that it does not.wash into the creek. Placement of hay bales would be reco~nended during Con- struction.'' No such containment was provided during the entire c~nstruction stage. 2. "Ail discharge from the pool is to be piped away from the creek and bay." This Spring he siphoned one half of the filled pool water into the creek, (the deep rut it made has since been filled), and trucked in more water. 3. "Immediately following construction all areas of exposed soil should be suitable vegetated." To date, this area has not been planted. On June 18,1987 you requested the Building Department to issue a "Stop Work" order on subject property due to the fact that he was building something en- tirelydifferent than what he had applied for~and granted permission for. At a later date, (letter to Glenn Just undated by refers to 10/29/87, you again gave them permission to go forward provided: 1. "The view easement be completely restored to it's original elevation,'~N- CLUDING REMOVAL OF FILL. The area is to be replanted with natural beach ~grass to preserve minimal slope to the creek. This is as close, as prac- 'tical, to the original waiver previously granted." ~his has not been done! On his application, Mr. Zeidl~r stated that all excavated fill (115 cubic yards) would be removed and trucked to. an upland. site and "O" yards brought in. Instead, all of it was spread.~rcund the Board of Town Trustees Page 2 July 19~ 1989 pool area, completely changing the grade, and at least three more trucklOads brought in. The ground level has since been l°%~ered somewhat from the height he had gained with all the fill, but not to th, original-level (as dictated in your letter.) - , . In buildir,g up thE~.ground level, hecreated an even greater wash into Brush's Creek. In fact,.Mr. Zeidler himself worked a bulldozer filling-the eroded creek bank. We provided you withp~.ctures and were told~. (wit[, great, irri- tation%,'that t~--- _ ~ . ::~ was NORMAL MAINTENANCE' (~ That..wa~ = ~, 'woul ' . . ' ............. If you d check th~s out, you w~ll f~nd that the erosion is worse than ever and all his "normal maintenance,, has washed into the creek. 2 "The propane tank will have to be relocated backbylthe rOadway to prevent any disturbance of vegetation when the tank is being filled." The tank is buried where it was originally noted on survey, not relocated. 3, "The brick deck and fence on the west side of the propertYlwill have to be removed to a distance of 29'6" from the house seaward and running along the entire length of the pool. The pool filtration systemwill-have to be loca-~l ted landward of that line and the brick barbecue. '(The barbecue is-some- what seaward of the 29'6" line)." Have no idea whether all these things have been taken care of. .4. "There is a 1¼' pipe running from th. pool area seawa, rd.-:This matter will have to be clarified prior to the actual issuance of a permit." Was this clarified toy our satisfaction? 5. "The Trustees are to be notified after the work is complete for a final in- spection." · This has obviously not been done. "This approval is subject to any othE~r Agency or ~partment's approval that may be required for this project." There are several infractions of the Z.B.A,slruling of 7/31/86 and the Building Department,s codes, that have still not been addressed. To say that this issue is tiring is a gross understatement, but we have fought too long and too hard to protect our investment and the quiet enjoymentlof our home to be ignored or overlooked. The Zeidler's have abused and/or ignored the rules and regulations of the Trust- ees, the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Building Department~...They,ve been grant- ed'and accepted many concessions and ignored all the conditions that went with them. It is time that you administered your authoritylland responsibility. "See to.it- that they carry out the mandates imposed upon them -- particularly the re-grading and planting of the view easement area. Board of Town Trustees Page 3 July 19~, 1989 We hope that you and the other agencies will enforCe the regulations that apply and finally put this issue to rest justlY. · We look forward to an early response to this letter. Yours very truly, Be~ ~a ,~. W. Walker g~alke~r cc: uilding Department, Z.B.A., C,A,C, D.E.C., Army Corps of Engineers, Coastal Management Town Board, Town Attorney, Town Supervisor P. O. Box 1169 Mattituck, New Y~rk-l1952 July 19, 1989 Mr. Victor Lessard Building Department Town of Southold Main Road 'Southold, New York~- 11971 Dear Mr. Lessard: We are enclosing a copy of a letter sent to the Board of Trustees, regarding the Implementation of the provisos mandated by the various town agencies when they gave permission to the Zeidler's to build their pool. This pool has been com- 'pleted and in use for more than a year. Aside from those issues mentioned in our letter to the Trustees, there is the matterof the lot coverage, which was to be calculated and submitted, per the Z.B.A. on July 31, 1986. We realize you have a statement from Alden Young, Sr. 'that the coverage is within the 20% - but Mr. Young is mistaken. We understand that he.isnot very active in the ~nsiness, due to his age, and..he probably mis- read some figures. .Anyone can see that the Zeidler's.are well in excess of 20%. The actual coverage, computed professionally is 31.85%, as we are'sure any surveyor will confirm. Also, they are closer to the road than the 50 fee~ the Z.B.A.stipulated.' We recall your requesting the location of their cesspools at the same Z.B.A. hearing on 7/31/86.- . We are really tired of monitoring this whole mess! The town agencies have given our neighbor tremendous latitude and still he will not follow their ac- companying mandates. What was the purpose of issuing these conditions if he is allowed to ignore them? As the enforcing agency for both the Trustees and the Zoninq Board of Appeals, as well as the Building Department, will you Please see to it thattheir de- cisions and your codes are respected and enacted? The junk pile is gone, but the weeds are so high we'll soon have our view blocked again. We would like to see the view easement restored to its original level and the beach grass planted, as the Trustees ordered. Or, if preferable, regular grass which is what was there in the first place. Thanking you for your attention to this matter, we remain - Enclosures CC: Yours very truly, Ber3aram'?W. Walker -and- Marge~M/Walker · TrUstees, Z.B.A. & other concerned agencies P. O. Box 1169 Mattituck, New York - 11952 July 19, 1989 Board of Town Trustees Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Southold, New York - 11971 Attention: Frank A. Kujawski, Jr., President Gentlemen: You are well aware~of the difficulties we havebeen encountering for the past few years, due to the installation of a swimming pool directly in front~6f our home on Brush's Creek by Richard Zeidler. After many long letters to all concerned agencies and many meetings with the various town departments, afairly reasonable decision was made permitting the pool but limiting and controlling its placement and surroundings. However, not all of these mandates have been implemented, nor enforced, and we are d~streSsed to.find that you have not bothered to follow up this highly controversial situation. When we last appeared before you, we were told that the Zeidler's had a year to complete their project andyou would not. check on it 'until that time elapsed. THAT WAS MORE THAN A YEAR AGO -- (see your letter dated 6/23/88). On June 4, 1986 you gave them permission to build the pool on a sitethat violated many town Codes, but you imposed certain provisions as follows~ 1. "During construction the fill must be contained so that it does not,wash into the creek. Placement of hay bales would be recommended during Con- struction.'' No sUch containment was provided during the entire c~nstruction stage° 2. "All discharge from the pool is to be piped 'away from the creek and bay." This Spring he siphoned one half of the filled pool water into the creek, (the deep rut it made has since been filled), and trucked in more water. 3. "Immediately following construction all areas of exposed soil should be suitable vegetated." To date, this area has not been planted. On June 18, 1987 you requested the Building Department tO issue a "stop Work" order on subject property due to the fact that he was building something en- tirelydifferent than what he had applied for-and granted permission for. At a later date, (letter to Glenn Just undated by refers to 10/29/87, you again gave them permission to go forward provided: 1. "The view easement be completely restored to it's original elevation,~%N- CLUDING REMOVAL OF FILL. The area is to be replanted with natural beach -.~grass to preserve minimal slope to the creek. This is as close, as prac- 'tical, to the original waiver previously granted." ~his has not been done! On his application, Mr. Zeidler stated that all excavated fill (115 cubic yards) would be removed and trucked to. an upland site and "O" yards brought in. Instead, all of it was spread ~rcund the . 'Board of Town Trustees Page 2 July 19~ 1989 pool area, completely changing the grade, and at least three more truckloads brought in. The ground level has since been lo%~ered somewhat from the height he had gained with all the fill, but not to the origiDal, level, (as dictated in your letter.) In buildir, g up thE? ground level, he created an even greater wash into Brush's Creek. In fact, Mr. Zeidler himself worked a bulldozer filling.the eroded creek bank. We provided you with pictures and were told,~.(with great, irri- tation), that.-.this was NORMAL MAINTENANCE! (?) That-was a shock!. If you 'would Check this out, you will find that the erosion is worse than ever and all his "normal maintenance" has washed into the creek. "The propane tank will have to be relocated back. by.the rOadway to prevent any disturbance of vegetation when the tank is being filled." The tank is buried where it was originally noted on survey, not relocated. "The brick deck and fence on the west side of the property.will have to be removed to a distance of 29'6" from the house seaward, and running along the entire length of the pool. The pool filtration system will ~have 'tobe loca-~~. ted landward of that line and the brick barbecue. .(The barbecue is-some- what seaward of the 29'6" line)." Have no idea whether all these things have been taken care of. "There is a 1¼' pipe running from the.pool area seawsrd.- This matter will have to be clarified prior to the actual issuance of a permit." Was this clarified to your satisfaction? "Th, Trustees are to be notified after the work is ~omplete for a final in- spection." This has obviously not beendone. 6. "This approval is subject to any other Agency or ~partment's approval that may be required for this project." There are several infract~.ons of the Z.B.A's'ruling of 7/31/86 and the Building Department's codes, that have still not been addressed. To say that this issue is tiring is a gross understatement, but we have fought too long and too hard to protect our investment and the quiet enjoyment~of our home to be ignored or overlooked. The Zeidler's have abused and/or ignored the rules and regulations of the Trust- ees, the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Building Department~-They've been grant- ed'and accepted many concessions and ignored all the conditions that went with them. It is time that you administered your authorityand responsibility. ~See to~it~ that they carry out the mandates imposed upon them -- particularly the re-grading and.planting of the view easement area. Board of Town Trustees Page 3 July 19, 1989 We hope that you and the other agencies will enforce the regulations that apply and finally put this issue to rest justly. We look forward to an early response to this letter. Yours very truly, BeE ,~. W. Walker ge~~. Walker~ cc: uilding Department, Z.B.A., C,A,C, D.E.C., Army COrps of Engineers, Coastal Management Town Board, Town Attorney, Town Supervisor FRANK A. KUJAWSKI, JR., President ALBERT J. KRUPSKI, JR., Vice-President JOHN M. BREDEMEYER, III JOHN L. BEDNOSKI, JR. HENRY P. SMITH TELEPHONE (516) 765-1892 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 July 31, 1989 Mr. and Mrs. Richard Zeidler PO Box 165 Laurel, N.Y. 11948 Dear Mr. Zeidler: During our inspection of your property on July 20, 1989, the sand area along the pool had some beach grass but not enough to prevent future erosion of the property. The low area, which is vegetated by predominantly weeds, must also be planted with beach grass to comply with the Trustees conditions of your permit. If the area in question is unclear, Trustee Bredemeyer will be in contact with you to specify the location. FAK: jas cc: Trustees Mr. and Mrs. Bertram Walker Town Board Bldg. Dep't. Very truly yours,. Frank A. Kujawski, Jr. President Board of Trustees PUBLIC HEARING OCTOBER 29, 1987 IN THE MATTER OF RICHARD ZEIDLER NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE TOWN TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, AT THE SOUTHOLD TOWN HALL, MAIN ROAD, SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK ON THURSDAY, OCTOBER 29, 1987 ON THE FOLLOWING APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE WETLAND ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN. Present were: Trustee Henry P. Smith Trustee John Bredemeyer Trustee Albert Krupski Trustee Phillip J. Goubeaud Trustee Ellen M. Larsen Ilene Pfifferling, Clerk Trustee Smith: In the matter of the application of the Land Use Company on behalf of Richard Zeidler to construct a swimming pool with associated decking as per plan and to excavate approximately 115 cu. yds. Property is located at 100 McDonalds Crossing, Laurel. Is there anyone who wishes to comment on this application of Mr. Zeidter, for or against it? Mrs. Walker: It is becoming increasingly apparent that if you allow this situation to continue we are going to loose the enjoyment of our home and property. The whole thing that has been allowed to escalate out of all proportion and in direct opposition to your rules and regulations so stringently applied to the rest of the populous. Our neighbor's property has become a trash stop, a health hazard, a breeding place for rats and rodents, and an eyesore. It is robbing us of our rightful pleasures and real values. You have pictures of the spiteful actions he has taken against us in protest of your stop work order. He seems to have taken carte blanche to feel that you will let him do anything he chooses. Is this true? Are his political affiliations so strong that people like us don't count? First you gave him a waiver, negating the due process of a public hearing and our right and opportunity to protest. We still can't understand why. Then you stipulate the dimensions you he applied for must be adhered to, 26' from the house 30' from Brushes Creek. In complete defiance he went 39 ft. from his house and came within 17' of the creek. In so doing he invaded our deeded eye view easement. He was subsequently issued a stop work order nine months after he started. In August we challanged his application finding out many inaccuracies and false statements. Instead of investigating it for accuracy you validated it by acting upon it. I don't think there is another person in town who could have submitted a publicly discredited application to this board and created not one iota of curiosity about it's contents. Quite frankly, I don't-think that it is even legal for you to proceed with this application before authenticating this application. In September the (tape not audible) with this misrepresentation by proceeding with an environmental assessment. You said that it was of no impact but recommended he remove the encroachments from our easements. When we stated hat it was wrong to act on this invalid application you indicated that we should be · eatful for your concern. The truth of the matter is that he violated your rules and ~ke the la,v, and-in so doing subsequemtty invaded our easement. You have all lost t of the real issue here, complete contempt for your agency, your rules and the law. Page 2. Richard Zeidler Are you going to let him get away with this. He submitted a plan and they built sometI~ing entirely different. He went 13' fartl~er from the house that ~e was permitted. He went 12' closer to the creek than he was allowed. He went 8 ft. closer to the road than he was allowed. His total coverage exceeds 20% of his land. He stated that he trucked out the fill when in reality he had it pushed toward the creek then brought in three more truck loads. He stated he was building an inground pool and it is 3 ft-. above the original ground level. He stated that there was nothing in his deed that would prevent this construction. When our easement is clearly stipulated in his deed and on the survey. The applicaiton asks will this set a prescient a~nd you accepted his no. Why? If he can do this why can't anyone else in the township build within 17' of a waterway? If you allow this gross disregard for authority to go unchecked what is to stop anyone else? How about the Gambino case? How about anyone else that comes before you? I can go on, but you know all of this. You have 11 pages of statements that we corrected and you chose to ignore? Why? Why do you require a wetland application at all if you don't care what is written on it? Is it that the person who is submitting it preempt it's contents. (tape not clear), ethichs prevades the codes of our Town. These codes were written to protect the public and the environment from any use and rights of enjoyment or~ value. We have strived to use these codes to retain the peaceful enjoyment of our home in its real v~lue. It appears that projectorate is commensurate with politics. The wetland code says that there is no construction within 75' of a creek, look what he has done. The Town Code says that all swimming pools are to be placed in the back yard. A variance to place one elsewhere can be applied for only if the conformance is impossible or a hardship. It was neither impossible or a hardsl~ip for the Zeidlerrs to conform. (tape not clear) Both agencies went out on a limb for him. You the Trustees particularly. You did not allow a public hearing. Still in stead of accepting this special treatment gracefully, he abused and embarrassed both agencies He defied your generous perimeters and taking more. Mr. Zeidler should not be allowed to do this. He took a risk. He gambled that you would not check the dimensions. That pool should not have been put there in the first place. Now that he refuses to play by the rules it should be taken out. Don't bring up financial harships that were mentioned before. If he was concerned witl~ the financial aspect he would never have jeopardized investment by going beyond the law. He would have adhered to the specifications submitted and that were approved. If he isn't concerned with the cost you should not be. Make him abide by the rules. Concern yourself with justice and your duty, not politics. He is wrong. You know it, we know it, he knows it. Wetland Code Chapter 97-32 - Hearing on Violation, Par. 3 states that a person shall be given an opportunity to show cause why such violation should be modified or rescinded. He has shown no cause. This is being treated as an ordinary hearing which it is not. It is answering gross violations. There have bee~ no reasons given to clear the violations. If any of you studied the latest survey that was submitted, it's dated October 7th. It was noted after the no impact assessment was determined. Each one he submits shows something new. This one shows a 4 ft. by 10 ft. propane gas tank to be buried about 12 ft. from the creek. Is this permissable? There was never any mention of a heated pool or with enclosed machinery. There was not mention of buried gas tanks on the property. This thing keeps mushroomi How much more can be added? Is the gas tank permitted so close to the creek? What if it corrodes and leaks into the creek? It is time to stop' this nonsence. Have him take ~ut the pool. Put it where it belongs. In the back yard as per the Town Code. No ~ecial considerations. If you haven't got that survey, I have a copy of it? stee Smith: Does anyone else have anything to say regarding this application? '~lenn Just: My name is Glenn Just. I' would like to point out a few things. Page 3. Richard Zeidler As per the request by the Trustees tl~e plans were submitted. I would like to also note that tl~e Trustees have been on the site quite a few times. The patio that was always tt~ere is at the same level of the pool. The patio t~as not been raised. I would like to also note that tt~e C.A.C. has recommended approval. Thank you. Trustee Smith: Does anyone else have anything they want to say? Mr. Richard Zeidler: When we submitted our first plans to the Trustees, you were the first body that I submitted to. First I went to the Building Dept. they told me I had to go the tl~e ZBA and the Trustees. I went into your office and handed you what was drawn by Mr. Young. I then went to tl~e ZBA. At that point my neighbors asked to l~ave the pool moved further towards the soutl~ which we did. We did not come back and notify the Trustees. We were asked to move the ~ool. Trustee Bredemeyer: Will you clarify tl~is? Were you talking pursuant to a waiver? Mr. Zeidler: I got your permit. Trustee Larsen: We didn't give you a permit. Trustee Bredemeyer: We waived it as we do with most swimming pools behind bulkheads. Permission to do the job, was based on a survey submitted to us. Mr. Zeidler: Then I submitted that same survey to the Z.B.A. the neighbors felt that it was to close to tl~e house and they asked us to have it moved to tl~e south, which we did. Then they came around with an order saying that you must have a fence around 4 sides of tt~e pool. The only thing that I think that t did, that I never got a permit for was move the pool away from the house. I have a 6 ft. walkway, I am 4 ft. from the fence to tl~e pool. When I moved the pool back I changed the permits which you folks issued from the beginning. Trustee Larsen: If I recall, Jay correct me if I'm wrong, we don't always give a waiver for permits. Trustee Bredemeyer: No, but most are by a case by case... Trustee Larsen: In this particular case we were told tl~at the woman has arthritis and tl~is is for exercise. She would like to swim. Trustee Bredemeyer: As far as if you made a decision based on someone's medical condition, I think that that is very commendable of you. I look at the Code as something to protect tl~e creeks, I'm sorry I didn't care who l~ad artl~ritis, I'm sorry. Trustee Larsen: Protecting the creeks, and as you said John, when Henry took us there that was what was said. The permit was granted based on the plans that you submitted to us. When the application was also brought to us there was never a mention made that there was a scenic easement guarranteed to tl~e people across the way from you. Mr. Zeidler: When I'm finished witl~ this I will not be in their scenic easement. I have a deck, and tl~e~ deck that I have is not above the ground level. When I put my fence up it will be behind their scenic easement. Page 4. Richard Zeidler Trustee'Bredemeyer: The deck appears to be substantially higher than the native grade that we walked on when we made the first determination. Mr. Zeidler: The area is exactally the same as my front yard. My front yard I have not changed at all. My deck in the front I have not changed at all. Trustee Krupski: We are talking about the grade on the creek side, between the creek and the house. Mr. Zeidler: There is nothing I can do. It is water. I could not put the pool below the grade? Trustee Bredemeyer: It's counter to what 5 Trustees saw out there. What you are saying runs counter to what 5 Trustees saw out there. The grade appears substantially higher. You carried the level out at the deck, now it shows that it is in the scenic easement. That grade level is higher than what we have encountered when we made the original assessment when we walked the property. Mr. Zeidler: I said that I would take that away from their scenic easement. Trustee Bredemeyer: And what about the trash? The garbage that was left there for over a month and one half? Mr. Zeidler: The trash? Trustee Bredemeyer: Yes, the trash that was left there out in the open, it seems like a terrible state of affairs. Mr. Zeidler: On two occasions, your Bay Constable came and would not let us touch anything at all. Bay Constable Dzenkowski: I haven't been down there when there was any garbage there? I don't know what he is talking about. Mr. Zeidler: The building debris comes from my swimming pool and the hot water and the water tank was put there about two months ago. When I clean this up I will take a truck and clean this all up. trustee Larsen: The Town Attorney, Mr. Yakaboski, states that the scenic easement starts at ground level. The applicaiton that was submitted states that the fill will be trucked off the site 115 yards. Actually With the excavation that occur~d, nothing was ever trucked off so there was 115 cu.yds, left on the site plus according to MRs. Walker three additional truck loads of 21 cu. yds. each of sand was brought in. Which raises it to 136 cu. yds. of fill which signiflcantly raises the ground level over the scenic easement. There is a direct conflict when you say on the .application that the fill will be trucked away. Yet the pool is sitting there the ground level is raise'd three ft. the scenic easement is interfered with and the waiver that we gave you is exceedid by 13 ft. on one side and by 12' on the other side. The ZBA Ordinance says it should be behind the house. Which could be from lack of coordination between us we were not aware of I'm sure. It just seems to me that the Board granted you a waiver and there was either through your ignorance or mistake, we have clearly a problem with the dimensions of the size of the pool. Trustee Krupski: And the location.. Page 5. Richard Zeidler Mr. Zeidler: That pool is the exact size that I asked for in the beginning. Trustee Larsen: We all'measured it. Trustee Bredemeyer: Ellen, it is the same size pool, but the pool was moved out from the house. Mr. Zeidler: I was told by the Building Dept. that as long as my. deck was even with the what do ya call it, it made no difference. The walkway that I have there is the same height and the same width as the walkway ! had there originally. I had a walk way around my house. Trustee Krupski: When we gave you the waiver, and we looked at it and saw the effect that so many feet of pool, and walkway, and patio combination would have on the area, that was quite different from what exists now. Trustee Bredemeyer: 26 verses 39 ft. was the measurement. We taped it off. Trustee Smith: The first one, the pool itself extends past that. Mr. Zeidler: The pool is 16' x 32'. I went to the Building Dept. and they said as far as my deck is concerned, it is the same height as the ground level, I didn't need a permit for it. Trustee Goubeaud: The Building Dept. What were saying is that we issued you a permit for the pool to be in a specific location based on a survey, you moved the pool. Trustee Smith: Waiver. Mr. Zeidler: I was told to do it by the ZBA because the neighbors asked me to. Trustee Goubeaud: Fine, then you should have come back to us. The waiver was given for a specific location, sir. Mr. Zeidler: No one told me that. Trustee Larsen: I think that this is to a point that we denied the due process by granting you the waiver. We gave you a waiver, the waiver was not adhered to. This woman lost her eyeview, easement which they are guaranteed in their ~eed. If that happened to me and I lived across the street, I would be damn mad myself. I would want to know who that. person was that they could just do that. They did not have a permit to do that. You have the right to appear before the Board to request a permit and that is the purpose of the public hearing right now to discuss all of this. Mr. Zeidler: If the height of the view easement is the question, i ~vill dig that part down to where it originally was so that they have their view easement exactally the way it was before. It shows on the corner here. It was only the corner that I have to dig down. Trustee Krupski: That is only one of the questions. Page 6. Richard Zeidler Trustee Goubeaud: As far as I am concerned, sir, you violated our agreement of the waiver by moving the pool closer to the water. 1 Mr. Zeidler: I was told that I could do that by the ZBA. Trustee Goubeaud: The ZBA does not go and say what other departments can and can not do. Tt~ey are only concerned with ZBA affairs. The Building Dept. is concerned with Building Dept. matters. Unfortunately, they go outside of their jurisdiction. Trustee Smith: Just because we give you a waiver for certain dimensions and the Board of Appeals says that you have to move it, that still doesn't erase out the fact that we gave you a waiver for certain dimensions. Trustee Larsen: The ZBA has worked with us long enough to know that they would direct tl~e person to come back here. They would never assume to say that the Trustees would have no problem with it. They would ask for our memo and comment from us or request that you come back to us. The problem with this that is worse than anything is where the Board tried to expedite people's applications that we feel that they warrant a waiver. We don't feel very often that we should hold someone up for three months when we feel that there will be no direct impact from the project But it is situations like these when the board is stung, when adjacent property owners come up to us in arms and we feel that does everyone in the future have to suffer? Do we have to go out on a field inspection and say, can we not grant a waiver on this particular property because their may be a problem with the neighbors. We want to cooperate with the public, but we would like to assume that the public is cooperating with us on the basis of honesty, cooperativeness, and a good working relationship. This did not help anyone's situation at all. We have been known, in many instances, to have people remove structures when they have either violated a permit or violated a waiver such as this. So it doesn't mean that you can go ahead and do something which is the prevalent attitudes sometimes. Trustee Smith: Do you have a letter from the Board of Appeals, is it in writing that they... Mr. Zeidler: I listened to a lady talk about politics. When I moved into your community, I have not played any politics what so ever. I haven't gone to someone to pressure anyone. I haven't done anything after someone told me to stop. I Sit witl~ a home that I pay $5,200 a year taxes on. My neighbor has not one, but two homes, and she pays a little over $2,000 a year. The same neighbor that is giving me the problem with tl~is particular matter, has a second house that is illegal, that suppose to have a kitchen taken out that same neighbor has put an up stairs in her home and stay in it and live in it ~vithout a buil. ding permit. That neighbor comes here because she tried to steal a road. It went to the Supreme Court and the neighbors got tired and they wanted the road for ten families that live there. I'm one of the guys that spent some time to try and make sure tl~at the road was there. That is the problem. I am not trying to do anything ~ithout proper permits. I used to be a Trustee myself, 10 years in the Town of Brookhaven. I respect you. Trustee Smith: Thank you. Mr. Walker: I am Mr. Walker, and I have a few things to st~ow you. Before that time ~e went to the ZBA when Mr. Zeidler wanted the pool. Mr. Goehring'er said that he Page 7. Richard Zeidler thought that it was the proper place for the pool even though we thought that it wasn't. He didn't like the idea of the pool being to our property so close. They guarrantee that they will move it back, not water side but back bay side. As far as the 6 ft. deck I have a picture here showing the walkway before and I also have photo's showing the fill being brought in, before and after. I would like to submit them. (brougt~t them up.) He said that it was 6 ft. This was the fill that was brought in. You can see on the pool where the dirt went. Here is another picture of it. This is when he l~ad two young boys put the junk in the front. That alone will tell you that this man is not telling the truth now. Trustee Bredemeyer: Can we keep tl~ese pictures? Mr. Walker: We would like to have them back at some time. That sl~ows the story. Mrs. Walker: You asked about the ZBA? Trustee Smith: We will make copies of all the material. Mrs. Walker: I have it here. There is to be no building construction any closer than 50 ft. to the front property line and no closer than 30 ft. to the water along the westerly~ side. No encroacl~ment in the eye view easement along tt~e westerly side. Screening along the westerly side bushes, etc. shall be maintained except for the area within the eyeview easement. Lighting must be a mushroom type and will not adversely glare. (Tape not clear.) Trustee Smith: Thank you. Does anyone else have anything to say regarding this application. No comment? Trustees? Trustee Bredemeyer: Again, I would like to say that if we could get a commitment from Mr. Zeidler now that if we issued a waiver at this time that he could clean up the mess while we consider the public l~earing record. It would deescalate some of the bad feelings in the neighborhood and try to clean us some of the mess. Mr. Zeidler: The only thing I can not move is the big tank because it weighs a ton. Trustee Krupski: Is it going to stay there forever? Trustee Bredemeyer: What tank are we talking about. The inground tank, propane tank? Mr. Zeidler: The propane tank. Trustee Smith: We have your comments and we will consider them. Ilene will you Trustee Bredemeyer: If we do 'anything it will be in writing, it will be specific you can get it from tl~e Clerk. If you get it you will be willing to abide by it. Mrs. Walker: Does he need permission to clean up in front of his own house? Trustee Bredemeyer: We have to take a look at it, to see how close to tt~e creek it is. I think that it would be advisable if the Board goes and looks at it again before we make a determination. John H01zapfel: The CAC was concerned witI~ the run off on the side going down behind the bulkhead. We did approve. The way it stands now, we didn't know the whc~le issue. What went on before hand. Page 8 Richard Zeidler Trustee Smith: Are there any other comments? No comments. close this public hearing in the matter of Richard Zeidler. Hearing closed: 9:55 P.M. Then I will HENRY P. SMITH, President JOHN M..BREDEMEYER, Vice-Pres. PHILLIP J. GOUBEAUD ALBERT KRUPSKI, JR. ELLEN M. LARSEN BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1892 Re: Mr. Glenn Just Land Use Company Route 25 A Box 2521 Wading River, New York 11792 Richard Zeidler - Application No. 571 Dear Mr. Just: The following action was taken by the Board of ?own Trustees during their regular meeting held on November 24, 1987 regarding the above matter. Moved by Trustee Smith seconded by Trustee Krupski it Was RESOLVED that The Land Use Company on behalf of Richard Zeidler be and hereby are granted permission to construct a swimming pool with associated decking on. property located at 100 McDonalds Crossing, Edgemere Park, Laurel. It is noted that the public hearing concerning this application was held on October 29, 1987. Approval is subject to the following conditions: The view easement will have to be completely restored to it's original elevation, including the removal of fill. The area is to be replanted with natural beach grass to preserve minimal slope to the creek. This is as close, as practical, to the original waiver previously granted. The-propane tank will have to be relocated back by the roadway to prevent any disturbance of vegetation when the tank is being filled. The brick deck and fence on the west side of the. property will have to be removed to a distance of 29'6" from the house seaward and running along the entire length of the pool. The pool filtration system will have to be located landward of that line and the brick barbecue. (The barbecue is somewhat seaward of the. 2~ '6" line.) There is a 1¼" pipe running from the pool area seaward. This matter will have to be clarified, prior to the actual issuance of a permit. 5. The Trustees are to be notified after-the work is complete for a final inspection. 6. '.--This approval is subject to any other'Agen'cy or Department's approval that may be required for this project. Board of Trustees - _ ~ge 2. Land Use Company on behalf of Richard Zeidler PleJase return to the Building Dept. for a determination on the need of any other permits or approvals or modifications that may be necessary. Please remit a $10.00 Wetland Inspection fee for this permit. Should you have any questions or concerns, please do not hestitate to contact this office. Very truly yours, Board of Town Trustees HPS: ip cc: Commissioner Thomas C. Jorling, D.E.C. , ~Albany Robert A. Greene, D.E.C., Stony Brook Stephen Mars, Army Corps of Engineers Thomas Hart, CoaStal Management John Holzapfel, Chairman, Southold Town C.A.C. Victor Lessard, Admin., Building Dept. Planning Board Board of Appeals Mr. & Mrs. Richard Zeidler file ' Page 1- June 19, 1986 Public Hearing - Richard and Ruth ziedler PUBLIC HEARING: i'~iatter of RICHARD AND RUTH ZIEDLER. The Chairman opened the hearing at ] 0: 25 p.m. and read the notice of hearing and appeal application for the record. CHAIRMAN: I have a map dated April 'l?,1979 indicating a one-story frame house and garage, and indicating as penned-in, a proposed swimmingpoot on the west side of the house approximately 30 feet to its nearest point to the bulkhead, which is on the south side, and 40 feet to the opposite side. And it appears that there' s a six-foot deck around the pool. And I have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this ' and surrounding properties. !Vlr. Ziedter, would you tike to be heard? ,- RICHARD ZIEDLER: Iwould like to give you a copy of a Doctor' s letter, and I also have an approved from your Town Trustees. And apparently because the bulkhead was here in 1977, the D.E.C. has indicated that they have no jurisdiction. _ CHAIRlVlAN: You don't have anything for us--that's just a statement you' re making, ok. lViR. ZIEDLER: Yes. When we left here last year, my wi~fe was taken ou{ of the bedroom through a window, in an ambulance to a hospital-she was there for nine days. And I went to Florida where I builtapool, ahd when I came back, I had an application for a pool. I started with the Building Department. He turned it down and told us how to go about it, and we' ve been doing it ever since. ~)Jell, anything you can do to let us build a pool, we' 1l appreciate it. CHAIRMAN: When I was down to inspect the property, just quickly, you told me you were going to make the depth of the pool how. deep? MR. ZIEDLER: Six and one-half feet. CHAIRMAN: Six and a half. Do you have any specific objection to the normal condi- tions that we place on things of this nature, and that is no overhead lighting to be obstrusive to the neighbors? Page 2_ June 19, 1986 Public Hearing - Richard and Ruth Ziedler MR. ZIEDLER: Absolutely. · CHAIRMAN: That the pool not be:.roofed or enclosed. MR. ZEIDLER: Absolutely. CHAIRMAN: And that the fencing be the normal --what type of fence~ a four-foot ' chainlike? MR. ZIEDLER: Yes. CHAIRMAN: All right. Is there anybody else to speak in favor of this application? Anybody like to speak against? Yes, Sir. Mr. Walker. BERT WALKER: The' name is Bert Walker, and I would like'to voice objections not to the pool~ but to its placement. But first we want to go on record as not having received notification of the application for a variance. And according to the code book of the Town of Southold, adjacent owners must be notified by mail of the intent to appeal. And we are adjacent owners. And we were notified when Mr. Ziedler applied for a variance in 1981 and we were wondering why we weren't this time. It's.awkward to oppose a neighbor~ right or wrong, you come out looking [ike-a bad guy. There is nothing personal here. All our points are valid~ and there are a few issues on the proposed pool we would like to point out. And I would like my wife to read them to you. CHAIRMAN: Can I just mention a question to you? In reference to your notification, you are on the other side of the street, although it is a private road? lVlR. WALKER: Yes. CHAIRMAN: That may be the reason why you were not notified, ok. Normally the notification is within that particular block: not particularly separating it by a street. I believe he would only be required to notify everybody conti§uousto, and he's not specifically contiguous because of that street. Let roe.just check the tax map here. IViR. WALKER: It's a 15' private road. CHAIRMAN: I think that' s the reason why~ just to' answer your question there. MEMBER GRICONIS: It has to be adjacent to: CHAIRMAN: The street runs all the way down to the creels even though it's not, you know~ paved all the way down to the creek. I think that was the reason why. IVlR. WALKER: That was what I was wondering. Because we did get notification last time and not this time. CHAIRMAN: Right. That's the only reason I can give you. Page 3_ June 19, 1986 Public Hearing - Ziedler MR.W~KER: I'd like my wife- she's got a few things, Mar9. MARGERY WALKER: I' d like to go down the application if you woulu CHAIRMAN: Just turn that (mike) a little). MRS. WALKER: You hav. e an application in front of you (inaudible). SECRETARY: You' ll have to speak a little closer into the mike, please. We're not picking you up. MRS. WALKER: Now? SECRETARY: That' s better. Thank you. CHAIRMAN: No, we only'have one application. The board .members have read it, and I have all three copies of the application of Fir. Ziedler. MRS. WALKER: Well you will know what I am referring to. One thing we wanted to mention is that the application is incomplete. The survey submitted does not show 70 feet of decking or a 16' octagonal gazebo in the rear of the house. It also doesn't list the coverage of the lot which I understand is required and which appears to exceed the 20% allowed by the town code. And it' s my understanding that you require a current survey showing everything on the property when you apply for a permit or an appeal, and the one that cam e with this certainly does not show what is currently on the property. Now on Page 1~ ~2, seeks relief from Article XI, Section ii--that applies to setbacks from water bodies and wetlands. There' s no request to place the pool wi'th the side and front quite large (partly inaudible). Now isn't that necessary because after all your code requires that the pool be put in the rear yard~ so if you can't do it or won't do it, you should haverelief than have a.file, no? CHAIRlViAN: Let me answer them as you go down the line. We never really get involved in determinin9 what the rear or side yard is . In this particular case, since you have that unnamed street that runs down, they really have -- oh, I see what you' re saying, ok. Is it running down to one side.. FIRS. WALKER: Yes. It's the front. Mr. and Mrs. Ziedler front on that road. CHAIRMAN: He was not turned down for that, or they were not turned down for that ~ ok. MRS. WALKER: Shouldn't they have been? After all, that was--irregularity. CHAIRMAN: The buildin9 inspector is going to have to answer that. VICTOR LESSARD, BUILDING DEPT. ADlViINISTRATOR: It's considered an attachment to the main building. nt to the main building so therefore it's not any what harc~ listed. It does it' s more suitable ,o that x~hen there' s a distance between the ed. There' s a walkway between the house and-- , Ii4, the reason for the appeal requests~a 16' : survey shows a 16' by 35' pool and deck .drawn And there's no fence shown on that survey submitted. ne perimeter already described, you could--they could ayeview easement, which does not permit fencing or our view in that prescribed area. On Page 2, ~l, it asks fences to the ordinance. And there are no hardships ,eeds pool for therapy and D.E.C. recommended it and ght by the house." Well, we certainly sympathize with lVlrs. Ziedler' s bad back problem and a pool would probably be .helpful; however~ we would like to see the D.E.C. letter' s of recommendation. We don't think it' s within their purview to recommend where a pool is placed but to act upon a request. Do you have a letter from the D.E.C. suggesting that the pool be put there? CHAIRlVIAN: When I went down to inspect the property, Mr. Ziedler informed me that he was wai~ting for the letter at this particular time. To be perfectly honest with you, Mrs. Walker, if the bulkhead is within that specific area---or, excuse me, if the age of the bulkhead is what it is, and we know that the D.E.C. is going to waive jurisdiction on the project, to be perfectly honest with you~ we would rather see the pool in this particular area which you will refer to as the side yard, rather than in the front of the house. It enters into more serious problems with breakaway walls, with high tides and so on and so forth. Basically, that is the situation, so I have no idea. He' 11 have to answer that question. MRS. WALKER: It would seem to be more suitably' placed in the back yard where there is considerably more room where it could conform ~o the town code and woUld be adjacent to the spa already installed in the house to help Mrs . Ziedler' s back. It has a sunken whirlpool, tile floors shower, dressing rooms bath, and sliding glass doors opening to the ?0' deck already installed. A pool could be built adjacent to these facilities, can be much more convenient than placed on the side and actually partially in the front of their home. CHAIRlVIAN: I just wan~ ~o say in no way would we ever allow anything to infringe upon this view easement of yours~ so don'T worry about that. I have no idea how the board feels about this application, and I just want you to be aware of it. lvlRS. WALKER: There is more to it than our view easement. Page 5- June 19, 1986 Public Hearing - Ziedler CHAIRMAN: Ok. tVlRS. WALKER: On Page 2, Ii2, we want the pool on Brushes Creek side so as not to annoy our neighbor and it is the more logical place. By his own'. -words Fir. Ziedler states that the pool would be an annoyance to his neighbor~ and we are his~ neighbor. Our house is less than 14 feet from the drive between us-- our deck and~all but one of our rooms fronts on this roadway between us.- With the prevailing breeze coming from the south, all summer, and with the creek conducting every sound with it, it would be like having that pool in our living room rather than in front of our house, lVirs. Ziedler has a .back nroblem that needs therapy, but my husband has a heart condition that needs peace and rest. h/e built the deck in the front of our house and hope to create a secluded a quiet spot from which to enjoy the tranquility of the bay, and there s no way we' li have this peace with the pool in the front of us. The Ziedlers do a[~ot of entertaining, they frequently have large groups of people in their yard. We al1 know how boisterous people', are around a pool. This is obviously why the Town Code dictates that they be put in one' s back yard and have a.. buffer for the neighbors. As for' the logical placement~ I've already stated why the rear of the house next to the existing spa is more suitable but it's also more logical. On Page 2, it' s quoting, "it does' not adjoin anything but Brushes Creek." But since we share a common-road, it adjoins our property and has a great effect, a detri- mental one, on the enjoyment and the value of our home. Mr. Ziedler likes and has a lot of outdoor lighting, a lighting he would obviously have around a pool in front of our house would-be very disconcerting, particularly where our upstairs bedroom looks right down upon the proposed pool site. He already has considerable lighting out on the decking in the rear of the yard that could accommodate this pool very nicely. Their backyard is perfectly set up for a pool and there's no logical reason for it not being there. Have you any reasons submitted why it should not be in the rear of the yard as the Code dictates ? CHA!RlVIAN: I'll ask the gentleman the question, but in my opinion there ia~.a substantial amount of decking that would have to be torn up, ground cover, trees and so on and so forth. MRS. down down yard over. CHAIRMAN: WALKER: He didn't have to tear up decking to get a machine there to hoist a huge light pole, so certainly he could get and they could get down to it from across the neighbor's the way the bulldozer did last year. They could get up and Page 6 - June 19, 1986 Public Hearing - Ziedler Southold Town Board of Appeals MRS. WALKER: going? £ook what has to be torn down to put a pool where it's CHAIRMAN: It's only a flower bed to my knowledge. becoming-- I think this is MRS. WALKER (interrupting) ~ This is protruding beyond the front of the house. It is a pool being asked to be put in the front as well as the sid'eyard. ..... CHAIRMAN: I think this is becoming counterproductive, Mrs. Walker. I think what we will do at this p~.rticular point, since'I don't have a copy--I will allow you to continue, ~but I think I will ask the Ziedlers to come back with a survey indicating all the decking area that is existing, Which they will do between I hope, between now and the next meeting, and they will show us all the decking area, and then I will ask you to point to t~he area where you' think the pool should be placed. MRS. WALKER: I "feel it should be in~.the bac'kyard. CHAIRMAN: Oki-- But then you can show us where. Because in this particular place, pointing out into a white area doesn't give us indication exactly where you feel it should be placed. MRS. WALKER: I could not presume to place a pool. That's for other people to do as long as itLs conforming tQ. the-code and placed in the rearyard~ as long as there is_room for it. That's what the code dictates. Now another thing is we have noticed that they've already received clearance from the Board of Trustees, which is surprising. First of all, most people have to wait a long time for that. Secondly~, since the cri..%eria ~or permitting a building within 75 feet of the waterway is with bulkheading, the bulkheading in this particular area~s terrible.__ It's. com- pletely standing free and clear. All the fill is gone from behind it. I have a picture. Whereas the bulkheading supporting the backyard is new and substantial, and can certainly support the pressure who ~ould assert. Not only that it's placing it somewhere in their backyard, would probably not even require a permit because they have more than adequate footage--all directions-~ We've never deprive Mrs. Ziedler a pool, as long.as it conforms to the Town Code, did not interfere with my husband's health, and the peaceful enjoyment of our home and the.good of the neighborhood. When you take 20,000 gallons to fill this pool, or more, if it's 35 feet instead of 32, from a common water supp. ly that we have out Page 7 - .June 19, 1986 Public Hearing - Ziedler Southold Town Board of Appeals MRS. WALKER (continued): on Peconic Bay Boulevard, will that present a problem. On August 2nd of 1982, you received a letter, Mr. Goehringer, from Mr. Gerald Newman from Suffolk County mentioning the water supply limitations of our particular locale. Do you feel they're better now than they were then? CHAIRMAN: I can't assess them. I wouldn't know what they are now. MRS. WALKER: Would you feel that drawing 20,000 gallons would create the threat of sal.~-water intrusion and p_pssibly jeo_pardize our community water supply? We have all ten points out there,., very close to precious point on Peconic Bay Boulevard._ As there is nothing, personal in this-- if they would like a poo_], 'I think that's their perog.ative. However, if the convenience and the inconvenience go along, if there's room in that backyard, that's where it should be, and it shouldn't be that they can enjoy the pleasure and we have the inconveniences of it. You are duly 9ppointed arm of the government, and you have been vested with the obligation to protect the citizens..from undue license with the building codes, and u.~e of a resident's ri..ghts, and ~s property owners,_taxpayers, and fu]ltime residents, we look to you for the same protection. _. '~HAIRMAN: Before you sit down, 'can I just ask a question of Mr. Lessard. I know you have more to say. We are specifically stating that this is not the sideyard now where this pool is being placed? VICTOR LESSARD: the house. It doesn't make any difference. It's attached to CHAIRMAN: It's a part of the dwelling. MR. LESSARD: If it's not attache~"to the house, then it's in the side yard. If it's attached as I was lead to believe by Mr. Ziedler, that's it is attached to the house, it's all considered part of the house and must meet the setback requirements allowed in the Code. CHAIRMAN: All right. Continue please. Excuse me~ I had to get this in mind correctly. MRS. WALKER: No, no. I don't understand that either. If they come out onto a wooden walkway, and the pool is going to be beyond that, attached or.not, that's not attached to the house. That's attached to the walkway. Page 8 - June 19, 1986 Public Hearing - Ziedler SouthOld Town Board of Appeals MRS. WALKER: I mean, it's my understanding that you come before the Town Board and ask for a variance if you cannot conform. You're supposed to prove that you cannot conform. CHAIRMAN: Ri ght. MRS. WALKER: Now there's more than enough space. There's no reason why they cannot conform and enjoy the pool. But have it where everyone else isn't being-- CHAIRMAN: You're referring to the rea'ryard now? MRS. WALKER:. The rear yard. I understand-that it is not even legitimate to Come before you if' you can conform. You come in when there is nothing else that y~u can possibly do. CHAIRMAN: Well, 'they would prob'~bly sti'~l nee~"a 75' even on that side because %hey wouldn't be 75 feet. MRS. WALKER: We~l, I really think they could get. But it wouldn't matter, if they've already_ gotten a clearance from the Board of Trustees.. If.%hey chose to. put it in the yard where the bulkhead- ing is stronger, certainly the Trustees would be happy with. that than where it. was. But I think'that we deserve some consideration. If there are no other places to put that poOl, certainly he would object to~ it If there is another place to Put it, then that's where it should..go. _ ..... CHAIRMAN: As I said to you~ we are not specifically happy with Placing these pools as Close to the Bay a.~ we are~..in a $.i..$uation 1.ike this. .~-And I_~m not propogating th~s application. I have no idea how these gentlemen ~.eel abou$ .it. I don't know if you were hear during_the conve.rsa$ions that we had tonight with the gentleman on the Sound. There are certain conditions that we a~k w.hen pools are built anywhere on the water, and we're talking about retaining walls.~nd ~ on and so forth being placed in..proper areas so as not ~o. leech this 'type o~_.water int~ the' Bay. Be it.~n the creek, 'Brushes Creek this ca~e, 'or into the Bay in general. Ok? I personally think, 'and this is just an opinion on my part, nobody has influenced me to say this, I would rather-- I'm not sure if the placement on this part of the house is a proper--I think it could be brought a little bit farther to the south, but I think it is the best place for the pool. I feel also that taking your concerns into consideration, that proper screening, and I'm tal.king about 6' black pines, along the part that you would have view into the pool, would be the proper way of dealing with this particular application. Page 9 - June 19, 1986 _Public Hearing.- Z~edler Southold Town Board of Appeals MRSi WALKER: I don't think there's room. If you look at the survey where the pool goes up to the eyeview easement, it doesn't appear that there could be screening around it, and still not infringe upon our eyeview easement. CHAIRMAN: Just abutting it--not into it. it shaved so it would be-- Abutting it and then keeping MRS, WALKER: noise level. But the vision of it is not nearly the problem of the You know that the breeze is from the South all Summer. CHAIRMAN: That's why, 'in my idea, would be to move it a little bit farther toward the south. MRS. WALKER: I have pictures showing just how much space there is between the back yard and the beach..which I will submit to you. CHAIRMAN: Ok. MRS. WALKER: There is certainly tremendously more space there than there is on the side. CHAIRMAN: What we will do is we will recess this hearing and ask the Ziedlers, as I told you before,.__~o come back with the deck areas shown on the rear of t-heir house and the other things you were mentioning, and we will then go back and re-measure the area and we'll continue this hearing at the next reg.ular'ly scheduled meeting. We will put you on first in line as we stack in reverse,_ that is, the people that came before you will be the last, ok, and you will be before them. We'll address the issue at that particular point once we have everything there. Would you please ask the surveyor to be as detailed..as he possibly could with..the decking and the spas Mrs. Walker had mentione~, and the trees and so on and_so forth, so that we can draw a better opinion of what's' going on here. The height of the ground cover and so on and so forth, That'li give us a better idea. That's what I viewed when I was down there. Do you have anything else to say, '--yo~!r~-just going Go.submit pictures to us, right? ....... MRS. WALKER: If you would likb. CHAIRMAN: Yes, please~ (Mrs. Walker submitted pictures for the record of Mr. Ziedler's property.) .. Page 10 - June 19, 1986 Public Hearing - Ziedler Southold Town Board of Appeals MRS. WALKER: The way you're referring to that survey doesn't sound as if you have the one that I took from the town. (Chairman and Mrs. Walker compared survey copies and they were the same.) MRS. WALKER: Yes. CHAIRMAN: You see, what I'm talking about is moving it down here a little bit, then this gets yo.u away from the easement. MRS. WALKER: It would fit right in ~h~re. It's about 80 feet up to the edge. It's 70 feet over.. It'-s about~60'feet here. There's already existing bulkhead that would accommodate it, and then it would be conforming to the Code. CHAIRMAN: It's just an opinion on my part--I don't like to see something as close to the. open waten_as tha.$. MRS. WALKER: here. Well, I mean, it':s so much closer here than it is CHAIRMAN: I understand that, but we can protect this over here by a retaining wall. MRS. WALKER: Wha~ protection does that offer? CHAIRMAN: I'm not interested in this protection here. MRS. WALKER- That's where the pool-- CHAIRMAN: I'm telling you that if we were to grant this here, this gentleman would be required to put a cement block wall in here to retain this pool with piers every six feet, that you.couldn't drive a bulldozer through--and I'm being facticious now. MRS. WALKER: US. But as I said, it's ~he noise and the discomfort to CHAIRMAN: I understand that. We'-re taking that into consideration-- MRS. WALKER (Interrupting) This is going ~o be on the line, th~ front line. This is actually asking to put a pool not in the sides but in the front. Page ll - June 19, 1986 Public Hearing - Ziedler Southold Town Board of Appeals CHAIRMAN: No I understand what you're saying. That's why I thought maybe pushing it a little bit farther would maybe rectify the situation. It would be away from your easement area and then put proper screening in, so as to--in this particular case, another 16 feet away from the corner of the house. That's my opinion. I have not voicedlthat opinion from anybody else on the board. Ok? MR. LESSARD: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to say for the record that ~i~ce both parties are here, that I'm. sure I have spoken to Mr. Ziedler' about this, '~!~if this is attached and part of the dwelling, if it is not attached then it becomes acce$s.ory and' you woul~d have to~ come back for a variance. -And that's why yoK and I discussed attaching it. Ok. And when the Building Depa[~ment sees the design, then we will make that determination. So rest assured, Whatever the law requires, 'that's the way '.it'~ll'~o~i]~If it's a side walk thing and then the pool, it's not attached.. And I'm sure Mr. Z.~edler under- stands this and I want you people to Understand this. If it's attached, ~it's in the proper p~sition as far as the law..is concerned. Except that it's the Board of Appeals to do what they want from there out. As far as the Building Department is concerned, if it's attached, it's legal. If it's not attached, it's accessory and it's in the §tde ya.rd and would require a further variance. So that you both understand and I'm sure you_~re bo,th aware of it. MR. ZIEDLER: I'~m sure there's a littl~ more history to it than what everybody is talking about~ 'and ~ think the Board should khow what we're talking, about. The roadway that you see there-- I and another n~ighbor spent over $6,00..0 in lawyer's fees and. brought it to the Supreme Court to get that as a ~oa~ay that belonged to all the people that live--those nine families that origi.~al..!y oppose.d the Walkers. I know that the. Walkers built a little patio in front of their house and they have parties also, just like we do, and it's noisy, so I put up a six-..foot fence. I didn't know you couldn't put up a s'ix,foot, fence UP- I put it up on Saturday. The Building Department wa~ there on Monday, and I left it there for some time and I thought, ~'Now how'do I take and get a little peace and quiet in my yard.~ So I went out and I spent $2,300 and I bought a 35-foot blue spruce and I planted it in front of where the pool is going to be., so you will not see the pool. I will also in your permit if I get one te]] you that I will not put any other lights other than a light in the pool, that will not affect anybody, t will fence it so that it will not be in their view easement, I don't know what more I can tell you. Page 12 June 19, .1986 Public Hearing - Ziedler Southold Town Board of Appeals CHAIRMAN: Will you get us-- MR. ZIEDLER: This is a running somethings and I thought it was put to bed. Let me say this to you, I would have sent the notification to you had I been told that I had to, except there is a road in between and it was not necessary. But when you went to the Zoning Board of Appeals, I didn't get a copy of~it either, and I didn't do it intentionally. CHAIRMAN: Will you get us that survey'? We will recess this until the next regularly scheduled meeting~._'indicating the details of the ground cover that you have there. I'm talking know about the deck in the rear yard-,~ the other things that_you have. MR, ZIEDLER: I have an aerial survey. I'll bring an aerial photo, which shows everything. All right? CHAIRMAN: Could you possibly have the survey show it, if we so choose to move the pool a li.%tle to the south--we know how far we can go if we so choose .to do that. We may end up turning it around and going the opposite way which would precipitate another application of..75 feet.from the opposite direction. With the aerial photograph and with that~ ~t.'ll give us a be'tter view of what we can deal with. Thank you very much. Is there anything else you wanted to say before we recess the hearing, Mrs. Walker, Mr. Walker? MRS. WALKER.indiCated she would wait until the next hearing. CHAIRMAN: Ok. ~hank you~ Hearing no fu~ther comments, I'll recess the hearing until the next regularly scheduled meeting. MEMBER GRIGONIS: Second.. The resolution to recess the hearing until July 17, 1986, was unanimously adopted. TRANSCRIPT OF HEARING MATTER OF RICHARD AND RUTH ZIEDLER - APPEAL #3510 Z.B.A. JULY 17, 1986 .lO:30-p.m.. Public He~ring was recon'vened in the MaCter of RICHARD AND RUTH 'ZIEDLE_R_~ Appeal #3510 (recessed from our '"'June 19, 1986 Regular Me'eting). The Chairman opened the recessed hearing at 10:30 p:'m. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: We'll open this hear'ing and ask Mr. Ziedler if he could furnish us with the survey that we asked for. (Survey given to Chairman). Thank you very much. RICHARD ZIEDLER: Should I try to explain the different colors and what it's all about? CHAIRMAN: Ok, but before you do that let me give the Walkers a cory of this. MR. ZIEDLER: I'll give them a copy. (Mr. Ziedler gave the Walkers a print of the survey.) CHAIRMAN: Ok, thank you. MR. ZIEDLER: The red are brick patios, brick fireplaces and a walk ,in front of our house. The gray is a wood deck and a walk to the side of the house to the east of the octagon- shaped patio, and on that patio is the gazebo. The green indicates the trees and the shrubs. The blue, I'd hope, is the water in the pool. The gray is the wood patio to be built ,around the pool. You have asked last time that you would feel happier if I moved the pool further to the south, which we have done--we've moved it as far as we can [o the south, tf you'll notice, you'll see the old drawing of the pool that we went over. CHAIRMAN' Yes. MR. ZIEDLER: The pool holds about 12,000 gallons of water Page 2 - Transcript of Hearing Matter of Richard and Ruth Ziedler Z.B.A. July 17, 1986 MR. ZIEDLER (continued:) and the water will be tanked in by tanker-truck. In other words, a liner pool must have the water immediately, and they bring the water in and they pay for it. The pool evaporates approximately six to eight gallons a day. Are there any questions? (None) And the pool is between 80 and 90 feet from the Walkers' house. CHAIRMAN: When you say that's as far as you can go with it, how did you arrive at that determination? MR. ZiEDLER: Well, if you'll notice, it's going to'be south ~'---~of the pool--there is a tremendously big tree and I remember t said that I would not like to destroy it. There's a. picture -- and here's another picture of a tree-- CHAIRMAN: Cedar tree. MR. ZIEDLER: Cedar tree, yes. CHAIRMAN: Go ahead. MR. ZIEDLER: There's a picture of the gazebo. These are the things that the Walkers talked about last time. That's why I took pictures of them. There's a picture of my flagpole, and I'd like whoever stole my flag last year after they had a beach party, I would appreciate'it, because I guess t.he police would I notify them. And this is the garden where the pool will end up. In other words, it will totally be enclosed pretty near the shrubbery. The only thing I couldn't bring you--I don't have a flash for my camera--or I would have brought you a picture of -.my spa that is inside of my house, which I had a permit for. CHAIRMAN: Is that adjacent to the pool at all or-- MR. ZIEDLER: No, it's right inside the house itself. If you look at the brick patio, right inside there there is a room that's about l0 by 10, 12 by 12, there is a jaccuzi room in there. CHAIRMAN: Ok. I thank you very much for these, Mr. Ziedler. Mrs. Walker, would you like to address this? MRS. MARGERY WALKER: Yes. I would like to cover a couple of things that certainly ( ) than before on the side, however, we still contend that in the backyard, it would be better where it can conform. There still has been no reason given why these cannot conform. And be in the back yard. Now in the zoning book, it says Page 3 - Transcript of Hearing Matter of Richard and Ruth Ziedler Z.B.A. July 17, 1986 MRS. WALKER (continued): a variance can only be applied for, if--and I have it here to code-- CHAIRMAN: Take your time. MRS. WALKER: I'm reading from a copy of .the Zoning BoOk. Variances - where there are practical difficulties or unnecessary ~"---~hardships in the way of carrying out the strict letter of these regulations, the Board shall have the power to vary _or modify as long as it-goes on and on--that there shall be observed the public safety, welfare, and substantial justice be done. I meaa, as far as I can see, it has not yet been indicated why it cannot adhere to the Code and be in the back yard, and if I read this correctly, he can't apply for a variance unless you can prove that you can't conform. I mean, the question--moving it back is certainly better than it was but it still doesn't show the fencing, and it still is in line with the prevailing breeze, where it will be right as if we were sitting around the edge of the pool. I have a'letter from the Doctor if you need it stating what my husband's condition is, and I c~n give it to you if you so Choose. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Mr. Walker's health.) (Received copy of Doctor's letter_ concerning MRS. WALKER: That is our only concern. Certainly Mrs. Ziedler should have a pool if she wishes and if it will help her, and I understand that it certainly is hel'P for a bad back, and we do not begrudge the pool. It is again, as we said last month, the placement of the poo'l because it's our concern--let her be comfortable certainly, but my major concern is my husband's health and our enjoymeut of the deck which is right there. CHAIRMAN: I tried to address the issue--I don't know how well I did the last time concerning my particular feeling and not the particular feeling of the Board.' MRo ZIEDLER: Can I interrupt one mbment. something. CHAIRMAN- Surely. MR. ZIEDLER: I might be able to shed Because I said I would bring an area photo. Page 4 - Transcript of Hearing Matter of Richard and Ruth Ziedler Z.B.A. July 17, 1986 MR. ZIEDLER: I only have one, so you can pass it around. house is here. My CHAIRMAN: What don't you come up here so you can see where he is pointing. MR. ZIEDLER: Here's where the pool would be right in here- There's the Walker house here. I measured it--it's about 80 feet from where the pool would be. Over here unfortunately ~'--~.with this house it's built right on the property, line. If put a pool in the front here, I'd be a lot closer to-these people here than I will the Walkers. I can fence this--and incidentally, that shows the fence around~" the pool., and .it also shows that I'm behind the easement view that you have, by putting it in here. This is where it will go. And I'm sorry to interrupt you, but. CHAIRMAN: I thank you. MRS. WALKER: Why do you still have that there? If you envision a pool just off that decking, you can see where he's got eve~ so much more room in the front than in the side. Now the people next door have only been there twice so far this summer. We are there all the time, and it s-till is the fact that that's the backyard and that's where the Code says the pool should go. And it is adjacent to all the inner facilities of the house that would accommodate a pool better than the side. MR. ZIEDLER: Well, this is my garden, and I'm going to give up my garden if this Board will allow me to put a pool here. My feelings are if I'm 18 or 20 feet from this person's home, and I'm 80 feet away from your home, I don't think I've ever bothered you in anything that I have done-- MRS. WALKER: It has nothing to do with you. It is the breeze. While I'm here, let me just point out that if the pool were indeed in here, you have a full lot.which is 50 feet, plus whatever is there--granted there are only eight feet from that house. There isn't that much. But there is a full lot plus the rest of the space, is about--I d~n't know--I drew a pool , and you asked me to do that, and I skeLched one 'in arid gave Ineasurements. If you went that way, you'd have 90 feet from the proposed sides of the pool. If you do it the other way, you have 70 some odd feet. You have more from the side this- way than-that way. And you have an adequate ainount there. Page 5 - Transcript of Hearing Matter of Richard and Ruth Ziedler Z.B.A. July 17, 1986 MRS. WALKER (continued): And again they may be closer, the breeze goes this way, the noise goes this way. It does not go that way. And we live there alt year. CHAIRMAN: The pre.vailing winds are on shore? MRS. WALKER: Right. CHAIRMAN: Ok. I just wanted to address this one question that Mrs. Walker had and say what I was attemp.ting to say to you-- MR. ZIEDLER: I'm sorry. CHAIRMAN: ...in the last hearing was that we can, and I had to organize my thoughts--in fact I did them on the way home, and between 12 and 12:30 after that last hearing. What I was trying to say to you was, we can't tell them where to put the pool. They chose to put it in a specific spot. All we can do is deny the application, and if they so choose to come back with another application ~in another area, then we will have to address that application. And I did that by saying to you in my opinion I would rather see it in this side yard, ok, and what I was in effect trying to say is just what I said, all right. We can't tell them to put it in the rear of their house. MRS. WALKER: But if it says in the book that you must prove that you 'cannot put it where you should put it, don't they have to do that before they apply to do other work. And with this full view, you are way in excess of 20% use of the property, and doesn't that require another variance? CHAIRMAN: Well that's one area that I am not sure that you are ready to address tonight was the 20% lot coverage was it Mr Ziedler? ' , · MR. ZIEDLER: I don't even know what she's talking about. CHAIRMAN: And I'll explain that in one second. MRS. WALKER: And I'm sorry, but I do not see a fence around *his · I see the decking. ~ · MR. ZIEDLER: Do'you see the water? The line around the outside Page 6 - Transcript of Hearing Matter of Richard and Ruth Ziedler Z.B.A. July 17, 1986 MR. ZIEDLER (continued): of that decking is a fence. It shows that it's 6' on this side and shows it's 10 ft. on this side and 10 ft. on this side. MRS. WALKER: That's the decking. MR. ZIEDLER: Yes. MRS. WALKER: But there's no fence on there'. MR. ZIEDLER:' We!l, I do know that you've got to have a fence to put a pool, and I certainly will put a fence and when you dis- cussed it last time, I said that I would put up a 4 ft. chainlink fence and the fence would not be in your easement view. I have tried to respect your easement view, but I have tried to respect everything you folks have wanted. I have to live with .it the same way you do. But I don't think it's going to harm anybodyr- two old people splashing around in the pool. MRS. WALKER: But you still haven't stated why you cannot conform to the Code_~nd Put it in.the backyard with so much more space-- CHAIRMAN: Let me answer that question, ok? Before we went back and discussed that this was an accessory structure or if this was attached to the building. Did we not say that the walkway will be adjacent to the house even though it's not specifically attached to the building. It will be for all intensive pur- poses, the building, meaning the house, the deck and the pool. So in effect it's not an accessory structure. It's an attachment to the hous~e, so therefore it does not necessarily mean that it has to go into the rearyard area. What he in effect is doing is adding an extension onto his house. MRS. WALKER: But a hosue is four walls and a roof and living area. CHAIRMAN: The lot coverage situation is something that still has to be addressed, but tonight you have seen--if you were here early enough, the second hearing we had--I believe the name was Sieverman-- that's exactly the situation that was addressed here. I can show you the pictures of it. MRS. WALKER: Did they have room to put it in the back? Page 7 - Transcript of Hearing Matter of Ri chard and Ruth Ziedler Z.B.A. July 17, 1986 CHAIRMAN: I don't know that situation. They had two sideyards. It was a corner lot. But what I am saying to you, it was not an accessory structure. We are not dealing with an accessory structure. We're dealing with an addition basically to the house. And the reason why these people were turned down Mrs. Walker because you could step from one deck to the other just as he could if we gave him permission to build, step from t-heir house to the deck to the pool. Even though it may not be attached with bolts or may not be cemented'~ogether, it was as ~'~though it was an addition to the house. MRS. WALKER: That's not what it says in the zoning book. MR. ZIEDLER: I can add one more thing to about where it is suppos-- about where I would like to have it. Three years ago we had a bad storm. Then two years you'll remember I brought a backhoe in and I took the sand that was blowing out of the front of that bulkhead and I took it out of the creek and put it back. there. If you.'re at Chism's ( ) which is right next door, you'll find that there is 2½ ft. of sand missing from behind his bulkhead that was blown away. I couldn't possibly put a pool i~-the front there and never keep it clean with a sandy beach. Because the sand would blow it like no tomorrow. MRS. WALKER: You weren't there for that storm. We were there for that storm. More water came in the side than came in the front. MR. ZIEDLER: It took the sand away 'from the front of my yard. MRS. WALKER: It's immaterial. As far as we're concerned, we would be happier with it in the back where we didn't have the prevailing breezes.bringing it down, and where it conformed to the building code. I know nothing about it being an attached to the h,ouse. There's nothing in the zoning book that says a~ything other than a pool being in the back yard. CHAIRMAN: That's why we have a building inspector here. Do you want to address that issue. Was I correct on what I was saying? VICTOR LESSARD, BLDG-DEPT. ADMINISTRATOR: If it's an attachment it's a part of the house. If it's part of the house, then it's properly drawn. Page 8 - Transcript of Hearing Matter of Richard and Ruth Ziedler Z.B.A. July 17, 1986 MR. ZIEDLER: That was discussed the last time I was here. You had told the Walkers that what we talked about was it was going to be attached to the house. MRS. WALKER: Just one more question. now is considerably smaller-- The pool %hat you draw MR. ZIEDLER: No, .it is not. ~.MRS. WALKER: Then the size that was on the other. MR. ZIEDLER: It's still 16 by 32. MRS. WALKER: And it's still going to be this far back? MR. ZIEDLER: Like it shows right there. CHAIRMAN: The only other thing that we had not--we stretched the rules a little bit in this particularly hearing, and that is that the addressing should be to the Board and not a discourse between the two--we're trying to keep it as downplayed as possible here. The om!y thing we had not addressed was the issue of lot coverage, and that is, how much of your total lot will you or would you have covered. Ok? Now you don't have to address this issue tonight--it's quarter of 11. We have another hearing. If you just very simply sit down within the next couple of days-- just give us an approximation of what you've covered, that's all we are basically interested in. Just so we know, because the Walkers have some concern about the' 20% lot coverage. MR. ZIEDLER: In other words if --only if my lot was built on-- I have three lots. I hav 12, 13 and 14. CHAIRMAN: Let me just~make it easy for you. Let's assume you have a 20,000 sq. ft. lot. Twenty percent of that is 4,000 sq. ft. You can cover 20% of that legally in the Town of Southold (without a variance). 4,200 sq. ft. wou d be over that and it would require an additional variance. MR. LESSARD: Is this one lot or two? CHAIRMAN: Pardon me? MR. LESSARD: Have you.addressed this as one lot or two lots? MEMBER GRIGONIS: Three lots. Page 9 - Transcript of Hearing Matter of Richard and Ruth Ziedler Z B.A. July 17, 1986 CHAIRMAN: Secondly, anything that is flush with the ground is not considered lot coverage. Ok? We are talking about some- thing that is usually elevated more than 6"--more than one cement block above the ground. " MR. ZIEDLER: The only thing is my house. 'CHAIRMAN: Well, give us the square footage of it and we'll be happy. And the.gazebo and any decks that you might have. ~-.~Is there anything else you might like (to Mr.s. Walker). (Nothing). MRS. WALKER-: Th'ank you. MR. LES'SARD: Jerry, either he has one lot or two lots, ~nd he should seriously consider this when he is figuring his computa- tions. CHAIRMAN: Are you talking about the Exceptions List? MR. LESSARD: No. I'm talking about even though the subdivision shows three lots, he has encompassed two of them with the house. That is no longer two lots--it becomes one. CHAIRMAN: Right. MR. LESSARD: Now he can address it alt as one lot to give him more room in his computations or he can address it as two separate lots. If he hooks the pool onto it the way it is drawn, then they will now become one lot. Follow me? MR. ZIEDLER: -Yes. MR. LESSARD: And you should consider that when computating. MR. ZIEDLER: Ok. CHAIRMAN: Hearing no further questions, I'll make a motion closing the hearing and reserving decision until later. MEMBER GRIGONIS: Second. The hearing was concluded at this time. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis, Douglass, Page l0 - Transcript of Hearing Matter of Richard and Ruth Ziedler Z.B.A. July 17, 1986 Doyen and Sawicki. This resolution was duly adopted. Respectfully submitted~ Linda F. Kowalski, Secretary Southotd Town Board of, Appeals HENRY P. SMITH, President JOHN M. BREDEMEYER, Vice-Pres. PHILLIP J. GOUBEAUD ALBERT KRUPSKI, JR. ELLEN M. LARSEN BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall. 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 November 4, 1987 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1892 Mr. Glenn Just Land Use Company N. Country Road Box 361 Wading River, New York 11792 Re: Richard Zeidler - Application No. 571 Dear Mr. Just: The following action was taken by the Board of Town Trustees during their regular meeting held on October 29, 1987 regarding the above matter. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Trustees TABLE the decision regarding the application of the Land Use Company on behalf of Richard Zeidler until the Trustees review the file, and be it further RESOLVED that the Southold Town Trustees direct Mr. Zeidler to clean up the garbage on the road side of the property and move the gas tank to the back of the house on the road side of the premises. Very truly yours, Henry P. Smith, President Board of Town Trustees HP S: ip HAIN ROAD- STATE: ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N,Y, 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER. CHAIRMAN CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR. SERGE DOYEN, JR. ROBERT J. DOUGLASS JOSEPH H. SAWlCKI May 5, 1982 Mr. Richard Zeidler 55 Whippoorwill Lane Patchogue, NY 11772 Re: Appeal No. 2963 Dear Sir or Madam: Attached herewith is a copy of the formal findings and determination recently rendered and filed this date with the Office of the Town Clerk concerning your application. In the event your application has been approved, please be sure to return to the Building Department for approval of any new construction, or for a certificate of occupancy of the premises, as may be applicable. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call either our office or that of the building inspector at 765-1802. Yours very truly, Enclosure Copy of Decision to Building Department GERARD P. GOEHRINGER By JLinda Kowalski, Secretary HENRY P. SMITH, President JOHN M. BREDEMEYER, Vice-Pres. PHILLIP J. GOUBEAUD ALBERT KRUPSKI, JR. ELLEN M. LARSEN TELEPHONE (516) 765-1892 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF $OUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 August 28, 1987 Mr. Glenn Just Land Use Company Route 25 A Box 2521 Wading River, New York 11792 Re: Richard Zeidler - Application No. 571 Dear Mr. Just: The following action was taken by the Board of Town Trustees during their regular meeting held on August 27, 1987 zqegarding the above matter. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Trustees declare itself lead - agency in regard to the State Environmental Quality Review Act in the matter of the application of The Land Use Company on behalf of Richard Zeidler for a Wetland Permit on certain property located at 100 McDonalds Crossing, Laurel. Very truly yours, Henry P. Smith, President Board of Town Trustees HPS :ip cc: Robert A. Greene, D.E.C., Stony Brook Commissioner Henry G. Williams, D.E.C., Albany Stephen Mars, Army Corps of Engineers Thomas Hart, Coastal Management . Conservation Advisory Council Bldg. Dept. Board of Appeals File Planning Board LEAD AGENCY DECLARATION FOR RICHARD ZEIDLER BY LAND USE CO. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Trustees declare itself lead agency in regard to the State Environmental Quality Review Act in the matter of the application of the Land Use Company on behalf of Richard Zeidler for a Wetland Permit on certain property located at 100 McDonalds Crossing, Edgemere Park, Laurel. APPENOIX A EAF ENVIRO;IHENTAL ASSESSHENT - PART ! Project Inforemtion NOTICE: This document is designed to assist in determining'whether ti~e action 'proposed~may have a significant.~ effect on the environment. Please complete the entire Data Sheet. Answers tothese'questions will be considere~ aS Dart of the application for approval and may be subject to further verification and ·public review. ProVide any additional information you believe will be needed to complete PARTS 2 and 3. .~ It is expected :nat completion of the EAF will be dependent on information currently available and will not involve new studies, research or investiqation. If information requirinq such a~ditional work is unavailable, so indicate and s~ecify each instance. ' NAME OF PROJECT: NAME AND ADDRESS OF OWNER (If Different) ( Name ) ADDRESS AND NAME OF APPLICANT: i[~treet) (P.O.) _(State) (Zip) {Street) (P.O.) BU~NCSS PHONE: {State) (Zip) DESCR!PT[ON OF PROJECT: (Briefly describe type of project or action) IC~:4~',¢'y'-~ ~rc.~o~[ {PLEASE C~PL~E ~CH QUESTIO~ - Indicate N.A. tf not applicable) SITE DESCRIPTION (Physical setting of overall project, both develoned and undeveloped areas) 1. General character of the land: Generally uniform slope ~)~ Generally uneven and rolling or irregular 2. Present land use: Urban , Industrial , Co~ercial ~, Agriculture~,~r ' - Total acreage of project area: ~_~acl~eg.~t-j~C)~-~, 3. Approximate acreage: Presently After Completion Meadow or Brushland ~acres t'~ acres Forested ..C> acres !D__acres A~ricultural _.~,~_.acres (-~ acres ~Vetland {Freshwater or~ Tidal as net Articles 24, 25 or F.C.L.) _~p.__acres ~ acres 4. 'Vhat is gredominant soil tYpe(s) on ~ro~ect site? 5. a. Are there b~drock outcropoinos on nrnject'site? t. What is depth to bedrock? .__Ze~,~___~.,~).~..~y 9I~/78 · Suburban ., Rural , Forest t~ater Surface Area Unvegetated (rock, earth or fill) .Roads, buildings and other paved surfaces Other {indicate tyne) .(!~ Ceet) Presently After Co~oletion .C~ acres. acres _f~___acres acres lC>acres Approximate percentage of proposed oroject site'with slooes: 0-10~ ~_L~; IA-I~ %; 15~ or greater .. %. 7.Places?Is project_L.,_..Ye~c°ntigu°us- ~t°' or contain a buildinq, or site listed on the National Register of Historic 8. I~at is the depth to the water table? J_~feet 9. Do hunting or fishing opportunities presently exist in the project area? ~:~ Yes No )0. Does Project site contain any species of plant or animal life that is identified as threatened or ~- Yes ~-;~o, according to - Identify each species '" )l. Are there any unique or unusual land forms on the Project site? (i.e. cliffs, dunes, other geological formations - ~ Yes ~ No. (Describe _) 12. Is the Project site Presently used by the comnunity or neighborhood as an open space or recreation area - Yes .~ NO. 13. Does the present site offer or include scenic views or vistas known to _.~Yes NO--'~C~ ~'l~s~ ~,Y~-~kn~ .~j~-c~ xy.y~'~L r-x~y~--be iRoortRnt to the community~ 14. Streams within or contiguous to project area: a. 1~ of stream and n~me of river to which it is tributary ~ !5. Lakes, Ponds, Wetland areas within or contiguous to project area: Si e (in acres) 16. ~t is the ~tnant land use ~d zoning classification within a 1/4 mile radius of the project (e.g. single f~ly restd~tial, R-~) and ~e scale of develo~nt {e.g. 2 story). ~ECT ~SCRI~I~ !. Ph~ical di~si~s and scale of P~j~t (fill in di~nsions as appellate) L~gth of p~ect, ~n mtles: ~(~f app~pr~ate) e. Zf p~ec: ~s an expansion of ex~st~n9, ~nd~cate percent o~ expansion pro~sed: butldin9 square foot- f. ~r of off-s~: pa~ng spaces ex~stfng ~ ~ ; proposed ~ 9. ~x~ vehicular tr~ps generated per hour ~ (upon c~pletton of pro~ect) h. Zf ~s~den:~al: H~er and t~pe o~ ~us~ng un, Cs: 9ne Family Twq Family Multiple Family Condominium Initial Ultimate If: Orientation ~)eighborhood-City-Regional Estimated Emoloyment Co~rcia) Industrial j. Total height of tallest nroposed structure _.~ feet. -2- s~ngle phase ;~roject: multi-phased Oro~ect: 2. How much natural material (i.e. rock, earth, etc,) wilt be removed from the site - 3. How many acres of veqetation (trees, shrubs, ground covers) will be re,x)ved from, site - ~'acres. 4. Will any mature forest {over lO0 years old} or other locally-important vegetation be removed by this p oject: Yes ~ No 5. Are there any plans for re-vegetation to replace that removed during construction~ ~4[ Yes No 6. Anticipated period of construction .J months, (including demolition). 7. a. Total number of phases anticipated No. b. Antlcloated date of commencement phase ) month demolition) year (including c. Approximate completion date final phase month d. Is phase 1 financially dependent on subseauent phases? 8. Hill blasting occur during construction? Yes ~<~No 9. Number of jobs generated: during construction Z~ $ after project is complete.~F~}'. 10. Nu~er of jobs eliminated by this project~. ll. Will project require relocation of any projects or facilities/ Yes cubic yards, year. Yes No ~No. If yes, explain: 12. a. Is surface or subsurface liquid waste disposal involved? Yes ~ No. b. If yes, indicate type of waste (sewage, industrial, etc.) c. If surface disposal name of stream into which effluent will be discharged 13. Will surface area of existing lakes, ponds, streams, bays or other surface waterways be increased or decreased by proposal? ,Yes ~'~ No. 14. Is project or any portion of project located in the 100 year flood plain? ~_Yes No 15. a. Does project involve disposal of solid waste? _Yes ~ No b, If yes, will an existing solid waste disposal facility be used? Yes ~No c. If yes, give name: ; location d. :'/ill any wastes not go into a sewage disposal system or into a sanitary landfill? Yes 16. Wilt project use herbicides or pesticides? Yes 17. Will project routinely produce odors (more than one hour oer day)? Yes ~ No 18. Wi]l project produce operating noise exceeding the local ambience noise levels? ... Yes ~.. No 19, Will project result in an increase in energy use? ~ Yes No. If yes, indicate type(s) _. 20. If water supoly is from wells indicate pumping capacity /,,yj/-% gals/minute. 21. Total anticipated water usage per day _ _A~y~ gals/day. 22. Zoning: a. t.lhat is dominant zoning classification o~ site? b. Current specific zoning classification of site c. Is ~roposed use consistent ~vith present zoning? d. If no, indicate desired zoning ~___---~-. __._No -3- 26. Approvals: a. Is any Federal permit required? Yes ~No b. ODes project involve State or Federal funding or financing? c. Local and Regional approvals: _ yes _)~__No Approval Required (Yes, NO) (Type) City, City, TJ~J~(~bJZoning Board City, CountyHealth Department Other local agencies Other regional agencies State Agencies Federal Agencies Submittal Approval (Date) (Date) C. INFORMATIONAL DETAILS Attach any additional information as may be needed to clarify your project. If there are or may be any adverse impacts associated with the Proposal, please discuss such impacts and the measures which can be PREPARER'S SIGNATURE: TITLE: -4- ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSM~. Project Impacts and Their Ma~ General Information {Read Carefully} - In completing the form the reviewer should be guided by the question: Have ~ ob been reasonable? The reviewer is not expected to be an expertenvironmental analys~ - Identifying that an effect will be potentially large {column 2) does not mean that it is s_]gnificant. Any large effect must be evaluated in PART 3 to determine significance.. By effect in column 2 simply asks that it be looked at further. - The~_ provided are to asSist the reviewer by showing types of effects and wherever ss~ble h of ma~g~{~ that would tri"ner a reS-on~ ~- --, ...... .. po ' t ........ - .~ :. =' - . C ~= ,, uu, m,m ~. ~ne examples are generally'applicable throughou~ ~[a[e ano Tot ~s~ s~tuat~ons. But, ?or any specific project or site other examples and/or lower threshold. may be more appropriate ~or a Potential Large Impact rating. - Each project, on each site, in each locality, will vary. Therefore, the examples have been offered as guidance. They do not constitute an exhaustive list of i~)acts and thresholds to answer each question. - The number of examples per question does not indicate the importance of each question. INSTRUCTIONS (Read Carefully) a. b. c. do Answer each of the 18 questions in PART 2. Answer Ye~s if there will be any effect. ~answers should be considered as Y_e) answers. If answering Yes to a ouestton then check the appropriate box {column 1 or 2) to indicate the potential size of the impact. If impact threshold equals or exceeds any example 'provided, check column 2. If impact will occur but threshold is lower than example, check column 1. !f reviewer has doubt about the size of the impact ~enconsider t~e imoact as potentially large and proceed to PART 3.. ' ' If a potentially large impact or effect can be reduced by a change in the project to a less than large magnitude, place a Yes in column 3. A No response indicates that such a reduction is not possible. S)4ALL TO POTENTIAL 'CAN II, PACT BE )~ODERATE~' LARGE REDUCED BY ~IMPACT IMPACT PROJECT CHANGE I, MPACT ON LAND NO YES ®0 WILL THERE BE AN EFFECT AS A RESULT OF A PHYSICAL CHANGE TO PROJECT SITE? that Would A~ply to Column. 2 Any construction on slopes of 15% or greater, (15 foot rise per 100 foot of length), or where the general slopes in the project area exceed 10%. Construction on Land where the depth to the water table is tess than 3 feet. -- ronstruction of ~aved ~arkinq are, ~or 1,~ or more' vehicles. __ C~nstruction on land where bedrock is exmosed or genePally within 3 feet of existing ground surface. __ Construction that will continue for more than 1 year or involve more than one phase or stage. ~ Excavation for mining purposes that would remove more than tons of natural material (i.e. rock or soil) per year. ....... Construction of any new sanitary landfill. -5- Construction in a designated floodway. Other impacts: YES WILL THERE BE AN EFFECT TO ANY UNIQUE QR UNUSUAL LANQ FBRI~S FOUND ON THE SITE? {i.e. cliffs, dunes, ~eological for~- ~ tt~s, etc.) ?(PACT ON WATER Specific land forthS: YES 3. WILL PROJECT AFFECT ANY WATER BODY DESIG/LATED AS ......... PROTECTED? (Under Articles 15, 24, 25 of the Envir- onn~ntal Conservation Law, E.C.L.) ~amotes that Would Apply to Colunm 2 Dredginq n~re than lO0 cubtc yards of ~mterial from ~ channel of a protected stream. Construction in a designated freshwater or tidal v~tland. ~ALL TQ POTEntIAL CAN L'IPACT BE ~OE,~ATE LARGE REDUCED BY )~tPR~T IMPACT ,RO~)ECTI CHANCE ,( ) Other impacts: Exa~ that Would Apply to Colunm 2 A 10% increase or decrease in the surface area of any body of water or n~re than a lO acre increase or decrease. Construction of a body of water that exceeds 1(! acres of surface area. Other tm!~acts: PROJECT AFFECT SURFACE OR GROUNDWATER BIIALITY? ' ~/x~ WILL Examples t~at Hould Apply to Colunm 2 Project will require a discharge permit. Project requires use of a source of water that does not have approval to serve proposed project. Project requires water supply f~m wells with greater than ~5 gallons per minute pumptng capacity. Construction or operation causing any contamination of a public water supply system. Project will adversely affect groundwater. Ltquta effluent will be conveyed off the site to facilities which presently dO not exist or have Inadequate capacity. Project reouiring a ~eciltty that would usa water in excess of gn,O00 gallons per day, Project wilt likely cause siltation or other discharge into an existing body of water to the extent that there will be an obvious visual contrast to natural conditions, Other Imoacts: 6. :~ILL PROJECT ALTER DRAINAGE FLO~. PATTErnS DR SURFArE ~TER NO YES Exa_m~le that '.~ould Anply to Colunn 2 Project wnuld imnede flood water flows. Project is likely to cause substantial erosion. Project is incompatible with existing drainage ~atterns. Other impacts: IMPACT QN AIR [10 YES 7. ~'ILL PROJECT AFFECT AIRQUALITY? ........................... ~n Examples that t4outd Apply to Column ~ Project wilt induce 1,.~O0 or more vehicle trips, in any given hour. Project will result in the incineration of mmm than 1 ton o? refuse per hour. Project emission rate of all contaminants wtll exceed $ lbs. Der hour or a heat source n. roducing more than ID million BTU's per hour. Other tmoacts: IMPACT ~ PLANTS ANO ANIMALS 8. WILL PROJECT AFFECT ANY THREATENED OR ENDANAERED SPECIES? ~that Would Apply to Column 2 Reduction of one or more species listed on the New York or Federal list, using the site, over or near site or found on the site. Removal of any ~ortion of a critical or significant wild- life habi~l~. Ap~ticatinn Of Pesticide or he,iici de over more than tv,ice a Feat' ~ther tt~n for am~,~¢~ml~ur~l )urpo~es. Other i~pacts: YES !VILL PROJECT SUBSTANTIALLY AFFECT )(ON-THREATE:IED OR . ' NO . YES ENDANGERED SPECIES? ................................... _ .... ~ 0 Examole that Would Apply to Column 2 Project would substantially interfere with any resident or migratory fish or wildlife species. Project requires the removal of more than lq acres of mature forest (over loft years in age) or other locally important vegetation. S~IALL TO IPOTENTIAL CAN IfiPAC? BE IODERATE ~ LARGE REDUCED DY I:4P~CT ~ I"~aCT PROJECT CHANGE i 1 [ , ! ' I?A£T 0'I VISt'~L ~K.S~'JRCE UtI.L THE PmOJFCT ArrECT VIEUS, vISTAS OR T!tE v)SUAL NQ YE~ · CHARACTER OF THE ~IFIGHB~RH.nOD OR CO~W,~ITV? .............. Examn!es that tlould Apply to Column 2 An ·incompatible visual affect caused by the introduction of new materials, colors and/or forms in contrast to the surroundin~ landscape. A oroject easily visible, not easily screened, that ~s obviously different from nthers around it. Project will result in the elimination or major screening of scenic views or vistas known to be important to the area. Other impacts: ~PACT ON HISTORIC RESOURC(S5~-~t\ ~C~ ~tr, C~Lv~ PROOECT ,,*ACTA,, S TE O* ST,UC URE . STO, C. ,0 YES Examoles that Would Aool.v to Colu~m 2 Pre.iect occurino wholly or uartially within or contiauous to any facility or site listed on the National Reois~er of historic places, Any impact to an archeological site or fossil bed located within the project site, Other impacts: ~,~PACT ON OPEN SPACE & RECREATe9~ 12. WILL THE PRPk)ECT AFFECT THE OUANTITY OR QUALITY OF EXISTING NO YES OR FUTURE'OPENSPACESORRECREATIONALOPPORTU,IITIES? ...... ~~ Exam~ that Would Aoply to Colunm 2 ~ The permanent foreclosure of a future recreational oooortunity. ~ A major ~duction of an open space important to the community. Other imoacts: I~4PqCT nN TmP~qNSPORTATIO.~ ~. :'~LL THERE BEAN EFFECT TO EXISTING TRANSPORTATION -NO YES S~STE,S? ............................................... t~0 E._x_amples that Would Aoply to Column 2 ' Alteration of present patterns of movement of people and/or goods. Project will result in severe traffic oroblems. Other impacts: '~ALL TO I ~OTENTIAL CAN I)!PACT BE ) ~ODERATE LARGE REDUCED BY LJ uPACT I'~PACT PROJECT C)IA,NGf } I~PACT ON ENERGY 14. ,~ILL PROJECT AFFECT THE COMMUNITIES SOURCES OF FUEL OR NO YEI ENERGYSUPPL¥? ................... ' ........................ ~~ Examples that Would Apply to Column 2 Project causing qreater than 5% increase in any fo~ of energy used in municipality. Project requiring the creation or extension of an energy transmission or supply system to serve ~re than 50 sinqle or two family residences. i 5, Other impacts: !MPACT ON NO!S~, WILL THERE BE OBJECTIONABLE ODORS, NOISE, GI~ARE, VIB~TIQN NO YES or ELECTRICAL DISTURBANCE AS A RESULT OF THIS PROJECT? .... ~ ~that t¢ould ADoly to Column 2 Blasting within 1,5OO feet of a hospital, school or other sensitive facility. Odors will occur r~)utinely (more than one hour per day). P~ject will ~roduce operating noise exceedin~ the local ambient noise levels for noise outside of structures. Project will remove natural barriers that would act as a noise screen. Other impacts: !iMPACT ON HEALTH & HAZARDS NO YES ?,ILL PROJECT AFFECT PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY? ............. Examples that Would Apply to Column 2 Project will cause a risk of exglosion or release of hazardous substances (i.e. oil, pesticides, chemicals, radiation, etc.) in the event of accident or upset conditions, or there will he a chronic low level discharge or emission. Project that will result in the burial of "hazardous wastes" {i.e. toxic, poisonous, highly reactive, radioactive, irritating, infectious, etc., includinq wastes that are solid, semi-solid, liquid or contain gases,) Storaoe facilities for one million or more gallons of liouified natural gas or other liouids. Q~qer impacts: S~LL TO POTENTIAL CAN IHPACT DE N~)DERATE LA~.GE REDUCED BY IMPACT IHPACT PROJECT CHANGE J~' I~iPACT Or! GPOWTN AND rHARACTER OF COMI~.IJNiTY OR IIEIGH~,~RHO~ NILL PROJECT AFFFCT THE CHAPACTE~ nF THE EXISTING NO.YES COMMUNITY? Example that Would Apoly to Column 2 The population of the City, Town or Village in which the project is located is likely to grow by more than 5% o~ resident human population. The municipal budgets for capital expenditures or opera- ting services will increase by more than 5% per year as a result of this project. Will involve any 9ermanent facility of a non-agricultural use in am agricultural district or remove nrime agricultural lands from cultivation.' The project will replace or eliminate existing facilities, structures or areas of historic ~mportance to the con~nunity. Development will induce an influx of a oarticular age group with special needs. Project will set an important precedent for future proiects. Project will relocate 15 or more emnloyees in one or more businesses. Qther imoacts: 18. IS THERE PUBLIC CONTROVERSY CONCERNING THE PROJECT? ...... Examples that Would Apply to Column 2 ~. Either government or citizens of adjacent communities b~ve expressed opposition or rejected the project or have not been contacted. _~'. O~biections to the nroject from within the community. ~TQ POTENTIAL CAN IMPACT BE MODERATE LARGE REDUCED 8Y It'.PACT IIIPACT PROJECT CHANGE ( NO YES I IF ANY ACTION I~ PART 2 IS IDENTIFIED AS A ) POTENTIAL LARGE IMPACT OR IF YOU CANNOT DETERMINE THE MAGNITUDE OF IMPACT, PROCEED TO PART 3. PORTIONS OF EAF COMPLETED FOR THIS PROJECT: DETERMINATION PART I , PART II PART 3, Upon review of the information recorded on this EAF (Parts l, 2 and 3)) and considerinq both the magnitude and imoortance of each impact, it is reasonably determined that: A. The project will result in no major impacts and, therefore, is one which may not cause significant damage to the environment. Although the project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case h~cause the mitigation measures described in PART 3 have been '~'ncluded as part of the nroposed project, The proiect will result in one or more major adverse impacts ti~at cannot be reduced and may cause significant damage to tF, e environment. Signature of Prenarer (if different from resnonsible officer) PREPARE A NEGATIVE DECLARATION 0 PREPARE A NEGATIVE DECLARATION ' 0 PREPAR[ POSITIVE DECLARATION PROCEED WITH EIS --© Signature of Responsible Official in Lead Agency ~'~'int or ty~e name of responsible off~'~'ial in Lead Agency EAF ENVIRON))ENTAL ASSESS~IENT - PART III EVALUATION OF THE IMPQRTANCE OF IMPACTS ~FORMATION Part 3 is prepared if one or more impact or effect is considered tO be potentially laroe. The amount of writinp necessary to answer Part 3 may be determined by answering.the question: In bKiefly con~leting the instructions below have I placed in this record sufficient information to indicate the reasonableness of my decisions? Z~STRUCTIONS Come, late the followinq for each impact or effect identified in Column 2 of Part 2: 1 Briefly describe the impact. Describe (if applicable} how the in~act might be mitigated or reduced to a less than large impact by a pro- ject change. ~ased on the information available, decide if it rs reasonable to conclude that this impact is i~rtant to the minicipality (city, town or v~llaqe) in which the project is located. To answer the question of importance, consi~ler: - The probability of the impact or effect occurring - The duration of the impact or effect Its. i rreversibility, including permmnently lQst r~urces or values - Whether the impact or effect can be contro)le(! - The regional consequence of the imact or effect - Its potential divergence from local needs and goals -' Whether known objections to the project apol¥ to this i~M~mct or effect. R~INATION OF SI~)IFICA)ICE An action is considered to be significant if: Ape (or more) imoact is determined to both lmrne and its (Lheir) conseauence, based on the review above, is important. PAOT III'STATEMENTS (Continue on Attachments, as needed) -ll- COUNTY OF SUFFOLK STATE OF NEW YORK )SS: ~EING DU~Y S~ORN AND ~AYS THAT HE IS TH~ APPLICANT FOR THE A~OVE DESCRIBED AND THAT ALL STATEMENTS CONTAINED HEREIN'ARE TRUE TO THE BEST MANNER SET FORTH IN THiS APPLICATION AND AS MAY BE APPROVED BY THE TOW~ BOARD OF THE TOWN OF $OUTHOLD. THE APPLICANT A~REE$ TO HOLD THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD AND THE TOWN TRUSTEES HARMLESS AND FREE FROM ANY AND ALL DAMAGES AND CLAIMS ARISING UNDER OR BY In completing this application I hereby authorize the Trustees~ agent'or reoresentatlve to enter onto my property to inspect the premises in" conjunction with review o~phis appLi~tiqn. ' CH~RL~ W: BOWMAN NO?AR¥ PUBUC, Stale af New Yod~ No, ~4668~,~8, SufJelk Courtly ~XAM I NED APPROVED "~ETkAND$" PERMIT (CHAPTER 97) APPROVED "BOAT,DOCKS, ~HARVES" PERMIT (CHAPTER DISAPPROVED "WETLANDS PERMIT' (CHAPTER 97) D~$APPROVED "BOATS.DOCKS~ WHARVES" PERMIT (CHAPTER ~2) BODY, L COMPUTAT~O~ OF FEES A~rove~ 2/27/85 HENRY P. SMITH, President JOHN M. BREDEMEYER, Vice-Pres. PHILLIP J. GOUBEAUD ALBERT KRUPSKI, JR. ELLEN M. LARSEN BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 TELEPH ONE (516) 765-1892 June 18, 1987 Francis J. Yakaboski Attorney 456 Griffing Ave. Riverhead, New York 11901 RE: Ruth & Richard Zeidler - Pool & Deck Construction Dear Mr. Yakaboski:- Pursuant to our telephone conversation today, please find enclosed a copy of the waiver approved by the Board of Trustees and the application for a Building Permit and a survey showing the proposed work to be done. Should you hRve any questions or concerns, please contact this office. Very truly yours, Board of Town Trustees i? Attachments