Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-06/27/1985Southold Town Board o£,Appeals MAIN RnAD- BTATE RnAD 2.5 BrlUTHOLD, l.l., N.Y. 11c:J71. TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR. SERGE DOYEN, JR. ROBERT J, DOUGLASS JOSEPH H. SAWlCKI MINUTES REGULAR MEETING THURSDAY, JUNE 27, 1985 A Regular Meeting of the Southold Town Board of Appeals was held on ThUrsday; june 27, 1985 at 7;30 p.m. at the Southold Town Hall, Main Road,. Southold, New York. Present were: Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman; Charles Grigonis, Jr; Serge Doyen, Jr.; Joseph H. Sawicki and Robert J. Douglass, constituting.all five members of the Board of Appeals. Also present were VictOr Lessard, BuildinglDepartment Administra- tor and approximately 25 persons in the audience at the opening of the meeting. / The Chairman opened the meeting at 7:70 p.m. and proceeded with the first public hearing on the agenda, as follows: 7:33 p.m. Appeal No. 3366 Public Hearing was held in the Matter of JOSEPH AND ARLENE LESTINGI. Variance to re-locate garage in frontyard area. David Kapell, as agent for the applicants, has requested a recess of this matter until the next earliest available date since he was out of town. The Chairman read the legal notice and appeal application in their entireties. The Chairman opened the hearing indicating the documents in the file, and made a motion, seconded by Mr. Sawicki, to recess same until the next Regular Meeting, JULY 18, 1985 at 7:30.p.m. This resolution was unanimously adopted. 7:40 p.m. AppliCations No. 3352 (variance) and No. 3353 (special exception).~in the Matter of GENEVIEVE RICHARDS, to use proposed building in this "B-Eight" Business District for heaYy equipment storage, 64155'Main Road, Greenport. Mr. and Mrs. R. Richardswere present and spoke in behalf of the appl'icant~and furnished the board with a copy of the N.Y.S. Southold Town Board of Appeals -2- June 27, 1985 Regular Meeting (Appeal No. 3352 - GENEVIEVE R~CHARDS, Continued:) Department of Environmental Conservation "Notice of Need for Permit'' dated June 24, 1985, indicating that "This is a minor activity that will have no impact on wetlands and r~quires a permit beCause it is at the periphery of our jurisdiction." Also furnished for the record as requested is the original March 5,'1985 letter from Charlotte Joan VanCura, as administrator for'the Estate of Joseph A. LaColla, giving the applicant (her s. ister) the right to use the right-of-way in question along the east side of Richards' property. The transcript of the verbatim testimony during this hearing has been prepared and filed with the Town Clerk under~separate cover by Barbara Strang and Li~da Kowalski.for re~erence Following the hearings, 'action was taken as fo. 11ow~: On motion by Mr. Sawicki, seconded by Mr. Goehringer, BE tT RESOLVED, to close (conclude) the pUblic hearings in the Matters of GENEVIEVE RICHARDS under_Applications No. 3352 and 3353, pending deliberations. Vote of the BOard: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen, Douglass and Sawicki. This resolutiQn was adopted by unanimous vote of all.the members. At the end of the hearing, Debbie Richards furnished the board with a survey map of Joseph A. LaColla most~.~!r~cently dated September 12, 1967 for reference. . 7:45 p.m. - Appeal No. 3356 - Public Hearing was held in the Matter of'GREGORY'SIMONELLI. Var.ianc~ for approval of insufficient lot area a~d wid%h of two parcels in this proposed-~three-lot subdivi- sion. South Side of.Grand Avenue, Mattitu~k. The Chairman read the notice of hearing and appeal application for the reco~d. Gary Flanner Olsen, Esq. was present and spoke in behalf of the application. Submitted for the record by ~a~c~'~arsen, Appraiser, in behalf of the applic'ation, were: County Tax Map, Section 107, Exhibit 1; List~o~ vacant land assessments, 1984, Exhibit 2, and appraisal ~eport dated June 27, 1985. Objections were received from oWne~S~]O~ properties in the immediate area. The verbatim transcript of the statements made during the hearing have been pmepared by_Barbara Strang and filed under separate cover with the Town Clerk's Office for re~erence herewith. Following the hearing, the board took action, on motion by Mr. G~eh~nger, seconded by Mr. Douglass, to Close ~on~lude) the hearing, p~nding deliberations. This resolution was unanimously adopted and the hearing was concluded at 8:02 p.m. Southold Town Board of Appeals -3- June 27, 1985 Regular Meeting 8:03 p.m. App6al No. 3360 - ~bti~ Hearing was held in the Matter of ~ARGARET~W&GNER. Varianc~ ~t~Q build deck.addition with reduction from edge of Corey Creek and reductiOns in front and side yard setbacks. 2500 Takapo~ha Road, Southold. ~he Chairman read the notice of hearing and appeal application for the record~ Mrs.aWagner was present and spoke briefly in behalf of the application. The verbatim_transcript~of the statements made during the hearing have been pnepared under separate cover by Barbara Strang and filed with~the Town Clerk's.Office for reference herewith. Following the hearing, 'the book took the following action: ~'On~otion~ 'by Mr~ Go6hringer, seconded by'~-~-"Sawi~ki, it was RESOLVED, to clos~ (conclude) the hearing, pending deliberations. This resOlution was unanimously adopted. 8:lO.p,m. Appeal No. 3265 - Application of'HOWaRD HOEY. Variance f~r app[.Qval of insuf~i~ien~ area and width of parce. 1. South Si~e or.Main RQad, Orient The Chairman read the legal' notice of hearing and appeal applica- tion fer the record. Samuel. J. Glickman~ .Es~, was present and spoke in behalf.of the application.. !~ ~as noted that the Planning Board wished ~Q reserve ~Q. mments on this m~tter,pending action by the Z.B.A, except that this is to be processed as a minor subdivision rather than a set-off b~ ~heir department. No objections were received for the record~ ~The verbatim transcript of the statements made during the hearing have been prepared under separate cover by Barbara Strang and filed with the .Town Clerk's Office for reference herewith. 'Following the hearing, the board took the following action: O~motion 'by Mr. Douglass, seconded by Mr. 'Go~hringer, it was RESOLVED~ to close (conclude) the hea~ing pending deliberations. V~te of the Board: DOyen~ Douglas~ and Sawicki. vote of all.. the members. Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis, This resolutiQn was adopted by unanimous Southold Town Board of Appeals -4- June 27, 1985 Regular Meeting 8:13 p.m. Appeal No. 3363 - Public Hearing was held in the Matter of MARION R. AND JOHN M. KING.. Variance for permission to enclose existing porch and use as a real-estate office in conjunc- tion with existing single-family residence. 51155 Main Road, Southold. The Chairman opened the hearing at 8:13 p.m. and read the legal notice of hearing and appeal application for the record. Paul A. Caminiti, Esq. was present with Mr. and Mrs. John King and ~spoke in b~half of the applicants. No objections were received for the record. The verbatim transcript of the state- ments made during the hearing have been prepared under separate cover and filed with the To~ ClerkJs O~%icer~:~for reference herewith. Following the hearing, the board took the following action: On motion by Mr. Goeh~ringer, seconded by Mr. Douglass, it was RESOLVED, to close (conclude) the hearing in the Matter of Appeal No. 3~6~ JOHN AND MAR~ON R. KING. Vote of th'e Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen, Douglass and Sawicki. ..This resolution was adopted by unanimous vote of all the members. The hearing was concluded at 8:30 p.m. 8:30 p.m~ Appeal No. 3369 - Public Hearing was held in the Matter of JBAN HARFORD. Variance to construct second attached garage with insufficient sideyard setback at North Side of Takaposha Road, Southoldo The Chairman opened the hearing, read the legal notice of hearing and appeal application for the record. Mr. and Mrs. Harford were present. Mrs. Harford indicated that the addition would be 4' forward of the existing garage and that she did dot have any objec- tion to a condition by the board that same be used only for storage purposes. The verbatim testimony has been prepared under separate cover and filed with the Town Clerk's Office for reference. Following the hearing, the Chairman moved to close (conclude) the hearing, seconded by Mr. Douglass, a~d~eserving decision, pending deliberations. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen, Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was adopted by unanimous vote of all the members. Southold Town Board of Appeals -5- June 27, 1985 Regular Meeting PROPOSED REVISIONS~MASTER PLAN- The board requested a meeting with the Planning Board ~n this ~atter which was imperative to be arranged as early as possible. The Chairman indicated that several requests have been made without cooperation. The board authorized the Chairman to send a letter to the Planning Board requesting the~'.~P~an~ing Board to meet with us in the immediate future, and asking for a written response. There has been lack of co.operation by the Planning Board to meet concerning several areas of authority pr_esently under jurisdiction by the Z.B.A. Motion was made by Mr. Sawicki, seconded by Mr. Douglass, to authorize the Chairman to send a written request to the Planning Board for a written reply as to what dates they will meet, ~efer- ably~i.n the next week or so. PENDING COMPLI'ANCE OF CONDITIONS: Appeal No. 3243 - KEVIN ~nd'~Es~E~MI~6~S~K~.~' ~r~-'t-t~'~"req~es~ted was~ received 6/17/85 from the applicant requesting an inspection of the improvements made to the subject right-of-way, which was granted a conditional approval of access under A~peal No. 3243 on May 31, 1984. Inspections were made and~acceptance was recommended. The following action was taken: On motion by Mr, Goehringer, seconded by Mr. S~wicki, it was RESOLVED, to accept the road improvements made concerning Appeal No. 3243, in accordance with Conditions No. 1 and No. 4 ~f~ the board's May 31, 1984 resolution. Vote of the 'Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen, Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was adopted by unanimous vote of all the members. The Secretary was directed to mention that the right-of-way must be continuously maintained in good satisfactory condition for access by emergency and other vehicles, and that in the event any other subdivision or set-off should take place over this right-of-way, ~dditional applications will be necessary. PENDING DECISION: Appeal No. 3359~THOMAS YASSO (Williston Beverage).. Lse~ prior minutes of 6/19] The building inspector indicated that bis office will inspect for violations and traffic and parking problems. It was mentioned that maybe a barrier b6..~o~sidered.to~be erected ~hich would allow.the adjoining prop.erty owner to the south unobstructed access to their residence. ~biaction was taken pending a recommendation from the building inspector. Southold Town Board of Appeals -6- June 27, 1985 Regular Meeting PENDING APPEAL: Apoeal No. 3338 - HOWARD L. YOUNG. The public hearing on this matter was heard and concluded on 6/13. Upon inspect- ing the premises, it was found there was more than one co-called "cottage on one of the proposed parcels, more particularly the building as shown on the survey ~depicted "shop," or sprout shop. The board indicated thei~r~cdn¢~rns as to the nature of the build- ings on the premises and whether Ore,not they were legal con~e~sions. A reinspection .woUld be made, tentatively for July 13th, and the Secretary was asked to contact the applicant's agent, John DeReeder for an appointment between 10:.30 and 11:00 a~m~ for an interior inspection of the buildings. (South .Side Main Road, Orient.) PENDING APPEAES: Appeal No. 3369, Jean Harford, and Appeal No. 3360, Margaret Wagner, at private right-of-way, Takaposha Road, Southold. The Chairman asked Vic Lessard to give his opinion as to the type of improvements he feels would be sufficient for fire access. No action was taken at this time pending the building inspeCtor's report and viewpoint. ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATIONS: On motion by Mr~ Sawicki, seconded by Mr. Douglass, it was RESOLVED, to declare the following Environmental Declarations indicating that there would be no sign~f~cant adverse effects to the environment for each.application as noted below, in accordance with Part 617 of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the N.Y.S. Environmental Quality Review Act of the Envi~onmental Conservation Law and Local Law #44-4 of the Town of South'old: (continued on page 7) Southold Town Board of Appeals -7- Meeting ;]u'ne 2.7.., 1985 (Environmental Declarations, continued:) S.E.Q.R.A. NEGATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION Notice of Determination of Non-Significance APPEAL NO.: 3375 PROJECT NAME: Bergen 0il Inc. This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the N.Y.So Environmental Quality Review Act of the Environmental Conservation Law and Local Law #44-4 of the Town of Southold. This board determines the within project not to have a sig~ifi- cant adverse effect on the environment for the reasons indicated below. Please take further notice that this declaration should not be considered a determination made for any other department or agency which may also have an application pending for the same or similar project. TYPE OF ACTION: [ ] Type II ~X~ Unlisted [ ] DESCRIPTION OF ACTION: Insufficent height for above ground sign LOCATION OF PROJECT: Town of Southold, County of, Suffolk, more particularly known as: Main Rd. Mattituck REASON(S) SUPPORTING THIS DETERMINATION: (1) An Environmental Assessment in the short form has been submitted which indicates that no significant adverse effects to the environment are likely to occur should this project be imple- mented as planned; (2) The property in question is not located within 300 feet of tidal wetlands or other critical environmental area. -8- Southold Town Board of Appeals June 27, 1985 Meeting S.E.Q.R.A. NEGATIVE ENVIRONMENTAI~ DECLARATION Notice of Determination of Non-Significance APPEAL NO.: 3368 PROJECT NAME: John & Lorraine Fabry This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the N.Y.S. Environmental Quality Review Act of the Environmental Conservation Law and Local Law #44-4 of the Town of Southold. This board determines the within project not to have a signifi- cant adverse effect on the environment for the reasons indicated below. Please take further notice that this declaration should not be considered a determination made for any other department or agency which may also have an application pending for the same or slmlt~r project. TYPE OF ACTION: [ ] Type II IX] Unlisted [ ] DESCRIPTION OF ACTION: permissi'0n to construct a deck within 75' of wetland and with an insufficient rearyard setback. LOCAtiON OF PROJECT: Town of Southold~ County of~Suffotk, mcre particularly known as: Deeph0]e Dr. Mattituck REASON(S) SUPPORTING THIS DETERMINATION: (1) An Environmental Assessment in the short form has been submitted which indicates that no significant adverse effects to the environment are likely to occur should this project be imple- mented as planned; (2) Approval has been received from the N.Y. State Dept. 6f Environmental Conservation concerning this matte~. Construction as proposed is landward of an~ existing bulkhead or similar type of barrier. Southold Town Board of Appeals -9--Juhe~2T, 1985 Meeting S.E.Q.R.A. NEGATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION Notice of Determination of Non-Significance APPEAL NO.: 3374 PROJECT NAMe: S0uthl~nd Corp. This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the N.Y.S. Environmental Quality Review Act of the Environmental Conservation Law and Local Law #~4-4 of the Town of Southold. This board determines the within project not to have a signifi- cant adverse effect on the environment for the reasons indicated below. Please take further notice that this declaration should not be considered a determination made for any other department or agency which may also have an application pending for the same or similar project. TYPE OF ACTION: [ ] Type II [X] Unlisted [ ] DESCRIPTION OF ACTION:Variance 'for fence exceeding 4' inheight in fr0ntyard area. LOCATION OF PROJECT: Town of Southold, County of, Suffolk, more particularly known as: Main Rd. S0uth0]d REASON(S) SUPPORTING THIS DETERMINATION: (1) An Environmental Assessment in the short form has been submitted which indicates that no significant adverse effects to the environment are likely to occur should this project be imple- mented as planned; (2) The property in question is not located within 300 feet of tidal wetlands or other critical environmental areas. Southold Town Board of Appeals-10-.June 2-7, 1985'~= Meeting S.E.Q.R.A. NEGATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION Notice of Determination of Non-Significance APPEAL NO.: 3370 PROJECT NAME:Robert Kenney This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the N.Y.S. Environmental Quality Review Act of the Environmental Conservation Law and Local Law #44-4 of the Town of Southold. This board determines the within project not to have a sig~ifi- cant adverse effect on the environment for the reasons indicated below. Please take further notice that this declaration should not be considered a determination made for any other department or agency which may also have an application pending for the same or similar project. TYPE OF ACTION: [X~ Type II [ ] Unlisted [ ] DESCRIPTION OF ACTION: Variance to a rear yard setback LOCATION OF PROJECT: Town of Southold, County of, Suffolk, more particularly known as: 2320 Gillette Drive, East Marion REASON(S) SUPPORTING TIIIS DETERMINATION: (1) An Environmental Assessment in the short form has been submitted which indicates t.hat~ no significant adverse effects to the environment are likely to occur should this project be imple- mented as planned; (2) The property in question is not~locat~dw~it~in~3OO~feet of tidal wetlands or other c~itical environmental area. Southold Town Board of Appeals -lljune 2~,? 1985 Meeting S.E.Q.R.A. NEGATIVE ENVIRONFLENTAL DECLARATION Notice of Determination of Non-Significance APPEAL NO.: 3376 PROJECT NAME: John Martin This notiCe is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the N.Y.S. Environmental Quality Review Act of the Environmental Conservation Law and Local Law ~44-4 of the Town of Southold. This board determines the within project not to have a signifi- cant adverse effect on the environment for the reasons indicated below. Please take further notice that this declaration should not be considered a determination made for any cther department or agency which may also have an application pending for the same or similar project. TYPE OF ACTION: [ ] Type II [X~ Unlisted [ ] DESCRIPTION OF ACTIOn;: perm~s~i0n to erect an antenna exceeding height permit by statute Old Shipyard Lane Southold LO~ATION OF PROJECT: Town of Sou~hold, County of Suffolk, more particularly known as01d Shipyard Lane S0u~h0]d REASON(S) SUPPORTING THIS DETEkMINATION: (1) An Environmental Assessment in the short form has been submitted which indicates that no significant adverse effects to the environment are likely to occur should this project be imple- mented as planned; (2) The property in question is not located within 300 feet of tidal wetlands or other critical environmental wetlands Southold Town Board of Appeals-12-June 27!~ 1985 Meeting S.E.Q.R.A. NEGATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL DECLA~LATION Notice of Determination of Non-Significance APPEAL NO.: 3372 PROJECT NAME: Community Chf~s~6 Fellowship Church This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the N.Y.S. Environmental Quality Review Act of the Environmental Conservation Law and Local Law #44-4 of the Town of Southold. This board determznes the within project not to have a signifi- cant adverse effect on the environment for the reasons indicated below. Please take further notJ.ce that this declaration should not be considered a determination made for any other department or agency which may also have an application pending for the same or similar project. TYPE OF ACTION: [ ] Type II ~X] Unlisted [ ] DESCRIPTION OF ACTIOn[: Special Exception for a church LOCATION OF PROJECT: Town of Southold, County of Suffolk, more particularly known as: Wickham Ave and Ct Rd. 48 Ma~tituck,NY REASON(S) SUPPORTING TIIIS DETEP~4INATION: (1) An Environmental Assessment in the short form has been submitted ~]ich indicates that no significant adverse effects to the environment are likely to occur should this project be imple- mented as planned; (2) The property in question is not ]coated within 300 feet of tidal wetlands or other critical environmental area. Southold Town Board of Appeals-13-June 27,~1985~ Meeting S.E.Q.R.A. NEGATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION Notice of Determination of Non-Significance APPEAL NO.: 3364 PROJECT NAME:Spirakis, Socrates & Daphne This notice is issued pursuant to Part~6t7 of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the N.Y.S. Environmental Quality Review Act of the Environmental Conservation Law and Local Law #44-4 of the Town of Southold. This board determines the within project not to have a signifi- cant adverse effect on the environment for the reasons indicated below. Please take further notice that this declaration should not be considered a determination made for any other department or agency which may also have an application pending for the same or similar project. TYPE OF ACTION: [ ~ Type II [ ] Unlisted [ ] DESCRIPTION OF ACTION: Insuffic%~nt $ideyard setback LOCATION OF PROJECT: Town of Southold, County of. Suffolk, more particularly known as: leepee Trail, $0uth0]d REASON(S) SUPPORTING TIIIS DETERMINATION: (1) An Environmental Assessment in the short form has been submitted which indicates that no significant adverse effects to the environment are likely to occur should this project be imple- mented as planned; (2) This is a setback variance for proposed construction which is landward of existing construction,_~ Southold Town Board of Appe.al,-s i42 ~n~'~7, 1985 Regular Meeting (Environmental Declarations, co'ntinued:) Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goeh~ringer, Grigonis, Doyen, Douglass and Sawickf.~' This resolution was adopted by unanimous vote of all the members. HEARINGS FOR'JULY ]'8, 1'985: On motion by Mr. Sawicki, seconded by Mr. Dougl. as~, i_~ ~as _ RESOLVED, that the fo]lowing ap.plications be and hereby are SCHEDULED FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS to be hgld at the Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, NY by the Southold Town Board of Appeals, on T~ursday, July 1'8~ 1'985, commencing at 7~30 p.m. and as noted below: 7:30 p.m. Recessed hearing of Joseph and Arlene Lestingi; 7:35 p.m. Hearing of Socrates and Daphne Spirakis; 7:40 p.m. Hearing of John and Lorraine Fabry; 7:45 p-.m. Hearing of-Robert N. Kenney; 7:55 p.m. Hearing of R.L. Bergen Oil Co.~ 8:00 p~m. Hearing of Southland Corp. (7~11); 8:05-p.m. Hearing of John ~. Marti-n; 8:10 p~m. Hearing of Community Christian Fellowship, Inc. and it was further RESOLVED, that the Secretary is hereby authorized~.iand~directed to adyertise notice of same pursuant to law in the local and official ~ew~ 6f the town, to wit: Suffolk Times, Inc. and Long Island Traveler-Watchman, Inc. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen, Douglass and Sawicki~ This resolution was adopted by unanimous vote of all the members. There being no other business properly coming before the board at this time, m~idh.'~a~ made~b~r~.'~oe~n§e~,-s~conded by Mr. Dou.glass, to adjourn. Thi..s..resolution was unanimously adopted. The meeting adjourn.ed at 9:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted~ .~outhol~d Town Bo~rd of Appeals TRANSCRIPT OF VERBATIM HEARINGS SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS Regular Meeting Thur~d~ ~, June 27, 1985 ~3356 - At 7:33 p.m. a Public Hearing was held in the matter of JOSEPH and_.A~LENE LESTINGI for a variance to relocate a garage in the frontyard area, 1150 Sound Avenue, Greenport, New York. Chairman read legal notice and appeal application in their entirety for the record. CHAIRMAN G©EHRINGER: Would anybody like to speak in favor of this application? Would anybody like to speak against_.the application? We have a letter from Mr. Kappel here. He is in Boston and is unable to appear tonight. I have several questions concerning this appli- cation, or this new application, so I will make a motion recessing the hearing until the next regularly scheduled meeting. ~3352 - At 7:40 p.m. a Public Hearing was held in the matter of GENEVIEVE RICHARDS ..... for a variance to use the proposed building mn B-Light Business District for heavy equipment storage, 64155 Main Road, Greenport, New York. Chairman read legal notice and appeal application in their entirety for the record. #3353 - Simultaneously with the above hearing, a Public Hearing was also held in the matter of GENEVIEVE RICHARDS for a special exception to use proposed building for heavy equipment storage as permiteed in a "C" Light zone, 64155 Main Road, Greenport, New York. Chairman read legal notice and application in their entirety for the record. Suffolk County Tax Map ~1000-56-4-20. ROGER RICHARDS: My name is Roger Richards. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: of the building is? Could you tell us exactly what the purpose R. RICHARDS: Just general stcrage. I do have heavy equipment and I intend to use it, mostly on jobs, so it wouldn't be in the building. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The only thing that the Board was rather concerned about was the fact that you only left yourself 10' on the east side of the property. I know some of this equipment is a lot wider than 10'.Do you have a right-of-way over that right of way? ZBA June 27, 1985 Page 2. GENEVIEVE RICHARDS HEARING - continued R. RICHARDS: That road there is actually only one right of way. There is another one between Higgins and Tuminello's property what used to be Van Curers. That actually has acesss to every other part of the property. That right of way road there is really not necessary to have access to the other property. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Could you give us a copy of that right to use that right of way? R. RICHARDS: It is not in the deed. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Maybe you could give us a letter from somebody there that says they have no objection to your using it? R. RICHARDS: That's possible. There are 6 brothers and sisters involved. What if we moved the building over 5 more feet? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You can't move the building on the line be- cause, well, first o£ all let me ask you a question. How high is the building? R. RICHARDS: I think it is 14 on the south and I am not sure on the other side. I can't remember. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: We want to be able to allow you to, and I realize you own the piece of property adjacent to this one in the' rear, that is the house piece, is that correct? R. RICHARDS: Yes. I am also in the process of buying the piece that right of way runs across. In other words, in another six months, I will own it. I could give you proof of that. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Ail right. What I am leading up to basically is the fact that we, in applications of this nature, I realize that the area is commercial, but we do ask that if we are so inclined to grant this application that the equipment be properly screened; that it not be left haphazardly all over the property, and that is the reason I am asking you where you are going to put the equipment. R. RICHARDS: Ail the equipment would be in the back on the piece adjacent to the east side, which will be part of the new property. You can't even see anything from the road and once the building goes up anything that I have out front there will be in that place. It will be completely landscaped. I also know that across the street they store heavy equipment, so it won't change the character of the neighborhood. But I can get you at least a couple of letters from some of the people that are involved 'that there will be no problem with access on the right of way. ZBA June 27, 1985 Page 3. GENEVIEVE RICHARDS HEARING - continued CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The reason we are concerned about the 10' with the equipment situation also is the possibility that that right of way eliminated, it may curtail or restrict fire vehicles from getting to the rear of the property also. R. RICHARDS: .I intend to keep it open. It will always be open. It will always be a right of way or access road to that. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: to whom? The house piece adjacent to this one, belongs R~ RICHARDS: Genevieve Richards, my mother. One other thing I wanted to make clear is that my equipment is only 8' wide and nothing that I have is wider. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you very much. Is there anybody else who would like to be heard on behalf of this application? Against the application? Questions from Board Members? Hearing no further questions, I make a motion closing the hearing, re~serving decision until later, pending a letter from Mr. Richards. Thank you very much for coming in. #3356- At 7:45 p.m. a Public Hearing was held in the matter of GREGORY SIMONELLI for a variance~for approval'of insufficient lot area ~ two parcels in proposed 3 lot subdivision, south side Grand Avenue, Mattituck, New York. Chairman read legal notice and appeal application for the record. G. OLSEN: My name is Gary Olsen, I am an attorney with offices on Main Roa~ Cutchogue, New York. I represent the applicant, Gregory Simonelli. As you can see by the map that was prepared by Mr. Young, the applicant seeks to divide the subject premises, which contains 3.851 acres into 3 parcels. Lot #1 has a house on it, that~would have 40,000 s.f. and as you can see, the house, when you look at the property is on the southerly Side of Grand Avenue. Parcel ~2 is to the east of that piece contains 45,130 s.f. then an interior parcel which would have access over a right of way over lot ~2, has an area of 82,637 s.f. All of the parcels meet the area requirements of the Suffolk County Department of Health and as you can see from a review of the tax map, this is an oversized parcel compared to the other pieces in--the community. The other parcels in the neighborhood are one acre sized or quarter acre parcels. What I have done is make a copy of the tax map and have outlined the subject premises in red ink and I have marked it as "Exhibit 1", and I would like to submit it for the record, if I may. It is respectfully submitted that the public health, safety or welfare would not be damaged in any way by granting this application The Suffolk County Health Department has approved the lot sizes of each of these pieces, so that is not an issue. ZBA June 27, 1985 Page 4. GREGROY SIMONELLI HEARING - continued G. OLSEN: -- continued The applicant would suffer serious economic damage if the appli- cation was no~t .granted~ What I .have done also is gone through the vacant land assessments of all the parcels that immediately surround this piece, which I obtained from Real Property Tax Services, 1984 microfiche, and the subject premises, you will see, has a vacant land assessment $.3,600. All of the other parcels in the area range from $60.0 to $700. I have marked this as "Exhibit 2" and would like to submit it for the record. As I have stated, the entire neig'hborhood basically has...it is pre-existing the 2 acre zoning requirements .... the interior parcel has the 80,000, over 80,000 sq. ft., so that it is not even an issue. What we are looking for is a frontage variance for the two parcels on Grand AVenue and the reason is is that it is a unique situation in this case, because the applicant's house is over to one side of the property, leaving an ideal building lot to the left hand side, as you face the road, which has significant value in today's market. The size, shape and configuration of the parcels to be created are generally even with the size and shape of the other parcels in the neighborhood also. At this time, I would like to introduce Mr. Lance Larsen, who is an appraiser I have hired, who will go into the evalua- tion of the piece. Thank you. L. LARSEN: I would like to submit a copy of my appraisal to you. I am a real estate appraiser with offices in Southold. I have been retained by Mr. OlSen to appraise Mr. Simonetli's property as it exists and if the subdivision were approved for 3 parcels. During the course of Mr. Olsen's discussion and your reading of the variance request, it was mentioned that the predominant size of the lots in the area are one acre or less. Browers Woods, for instance, are predominantly quarter acre lots and the majority of the metes and bounds descriptions are one acre, under an acre and a few parcels are 1.4 acres. SUbject lots, Lot ~1 would be the existing lot with the house. Lot ~2 would be a secondary vacant site on Grand Avenue. Lot #3 would be the rear lot accessed by a right of way. I did a sales analysis of both vacant and improved sites and came up with a value indication, as is for the property, of $108,000. If the property were subdivided into 3 parcels, Lot 1 would have a market value of $147,000; Lot 2, $35,000; and Lot 3, $54,500 for a total of $236,500 indicating economic deviation of $89,500. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you very much. ,Mr Olsen, do you have anything to add? Is there anybody who would like to. be heard on behalf of this application? Against the application? Could you use the .mike and please state your name, ma'am? ZBA June 27, Page 5. 1985 GREGROY SIMONELLI HEARING -~continued EDNA FOLAND: I am right along the edge of the property, and by the way, I am an acre and a half, not an acre or under an acre. I am disturbed about 'this. When we were first notified of this request for a variance, one of the neighbors called Mr. Simonelli and he said all he wanted was a right of way to build "a" house back there. When we received the map it did not indicate that they were asking for 3 homes there. I think the 2 acre Southold regulation is a good one. We are concerned about our water supply. We are concerned about the sewage. We are also concerned about crowding. I have this property now since 1960 and I have just re- tired and I am looking to enjoying the openness, the cleanliness of the air and three more houses back there, it will be very dis- turbing. I wish we could uphold the two acre regulation. ~ can say nothing more because I don't have the facts that they do. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I think they mean two more houses~ There is already a house on one of them and they are looking, for two additional lots. Is that correct, M~. Olsen? MR. OLSEN: Yes. EDNA FOLAND: They had told us one house. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Sometimes it helps. Let me just show you the map so you can see. EDNA FOLAND: They showed us just this. Mr. Simonelli said all they wanted was a variance to come here and build one house.. Where are they going to put the other house, here? And Here? See, I am here and this is considerably more than one acre. I own practically an acre and a half. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: They are talking, I assume, about constructing a house here and hare. I just wanted you to understand. Is there anybody else who would like to speak against the application? Mr. Olsen, anything in rebuttal? MR. OLSEN: No. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Questions from the Board? The Planning Board has suggested that the application be amended to a two lot subdivision. MR. OLSEN: Just looking at the tax map, Mrs. Foland's property is approximately 38,300 sq. ft. which would be less than the size we are looking for ZBA June 27, t985 Page 6. GREGORY SIMONELLI HEARING - continued CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you very much. Anybody else. MR. MEALY: I am Mr. Simonelli neighbor to the south. Why are they trying to make three lots instead of two? CHAIRMAN"GOEHRINGER: I can't answer that question. Maybe Mr. Olsen can. I can answer the question about the right of way. I can't answer the question about the lots or the amount of lots. MR. OLSEN: Obviously, the only way we can get to the lot is from the back. That's why we came in for three instead of four, which might be permitted, because all of them would be over an acre and in keeping with the general size and shap of the neigh- borhood. Before the two acre came in, there would be no reason why this would not be four - one acre pieces -- there is enough room for it but he has decided not to do that. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Any other questions? Thank you. Does that answer your question? EDNA FOLAND: My question is listening to this and I know it has come up before and it is becoming rather disturbing. We have two acre zoning and I know that there have been a lot of applications for .setoffs, for Variances. Even in this case, I wonder, you are supposed to judge it on hardship. Now is this a real hardship or one that is self-imposed. Originally this property was owned by Mr. Simonelli's mother and when she died, they inherited the property. They also own apartment building, so I don't consider it a case of hardship. If it were really a case of hardship, I would be a lot more considerate. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You did not'want me to react to your state- ment, did you? You are just making a statement for the record? Is there anybody else who would like to be heard on behalf of this application? Hearing no further statements, I make a motion closing the hearing~ .reserving decision until later. 93360 - at 8:03 p~m. a"Public Hearing was held in the matter of MARGARET WAGNER:~ for a variance to build a deck addition with reduction from edge of Corey Creek and reductions in front and side yard setbacks, 2500 Takaposha Road, Southold, New York. Chairman read legal notice and appeal application for the record, in their entirety. MR. WAGNER: I have nothing to add to it. ZBA June 27, 1985 Page 7. MARGARET WAGNER HEARING - continued CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The deck is 7' wide on the west side. MR. WAGNER: On-the w.est side it is 7'. On the north side it will be 12' toward the water and it will be 23' from the east to the west sides. On the road side, or ~the south side, it will be 13', which will bring it right in line with .the side of the house CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The question that we usually ask in appli- cations of this nature are do you at any time propose to enclose this deck and make it part of the living area? MR. WAGNER: No, I do not. It will always be open. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: This is a rather funny question. Since you have no neighbors on the one side, do you propose to put any exterior lighting that would be obstrusive to the neighbors? MR. WAGNER: and south. There is lighting on 'it now on both sides both north CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I thank you very much. Is there anybody else who would like ~to speak in favor of this application? Against the application? Questions from Board Members'? Hearing no further questions, I make a motion closing the hearing reserving decision until later. Did your gentlemen get down there to fix the road up at all? MR. WAGNER: Mr. Dickerson was supposed to come this week and we have not heard anything CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Hearing no further questions, I make another motion closing this hearing, reserving decision until later. ~336 - At 8:10 p.m. a Public Hearing was held in the matter of HOWARD .... HOEY for a variance for approval' of insufficient area and width 6f parcel, south side of Main Road, Orient, New York. Chairman read legal notice and appeal application in their entirety for the record. MR. CHAIRMAN: I have a copy of a survey dated September 3~ 1982~ indicating the Hardman parcel of 40,374 sq. fro and the parcel in question to be set off, and it shows it as 43,560 sq. ft. I have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map showing this and the surround- ing properties in the area. Mr. Glickman would you like to be heard? ' ZBA June 27, 1985 Page 8. HOWA~RD ]~OEY. HEARING continued SAMUEL J. GLICKMAN, ESQ.: Yes, sir. The house that is presently situated--].et me say, first to the board that the Planning Board asked tlhat this be a minor subdivision. I've already written to them asked them to consider my application which I put in for a minor subdivision. Here we have a house that's been there for over 60 years, more than that, after acquiring that from the neighbors, and to ask for us to use a two-acre zoning, which is now the board's and the town's rule, and the house is that small, and if it were two acre zoning, the house wouldn't be there. It wouldn't change the character of the area and there's nothing in or around this area with two acres. We're asking Here that he be allowed to have this minor subdivision and grant tlhis application here. MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Is there anybody else that wishes to speak in behalf of this application? Anyone against? (None). Questions from board members? Mr. Glickman, can I just ask you one question? What is the nature of the subdivision? What are you going to be-- MR. GLICKMAN: It's a minor subdivision two or more. We already set one off. And this is the second one. We are not going to be doing any more subdividing on this property. None whatsoever. But they just forced me to use a minor subdivision rather than a set-off as we did on Hartman. MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. All right, hearing no further ques- tions, I'll make a motion closing the hearing and reserving decision until later. MEMBER DOUGLASS: Second. The hearing was declared concluded (closed) at 8:13 p.m. ZBA June 27, 1985 Page 9a ~3363 - At 8:]3 p.m. a Public Hearing was held in the matter of MARION R. and JOHN M. KING for a variance for permission to en- c-~0se existing ~o~c~ and use as a real estate office in slngte family dwelling, 51155 Main Road, Southold, New York. Chairman read legal notice and appeal application in their entirety for the record. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Caminiti, in appeals of this nature, I usually ask the attorney if they have any objection to my officiating in this since I do hold a license~ New York State Broker's License. Do you have any objection to my offi_.¢iating in this hearing? MR. CAMINITI: No objection. MR. CAMI~ITI: Mr. Chairman, members of the board. There's not much I can add that isn't already in the petition except that since we filed the petition, Marion King as filed as part of the record two consent forms consenting to this application, and I also realize that the board made a field inspection of the premises. I would like to make a part of the record a series of photographs which depict the area in great detail, just for the record. (Eleven large photographs were submitted for the file.) MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. MR. CAMINITI: Another point, as far as I know, when the Master Plan was first set forth, it contemplated a residential office, high/density~ which would consist of those on west Main Street, and we are, this is just the way our application would read. West Main Street is a truly unique area. C-zones. Two real estate offices. Church. American Legion on west Main. And we don't feel this would hurt the area in any way. It is a special use. Architecturally, the building is well maintained. As far as I know there isn't anything being done in the town now that is going to allow these, for a home occupation. And it is a large ( ) as far as I know that is going to be included for a home occupancy. Look at the general trend. The William Smith Office space ( ) [Not audible] -- when there is a funeral home estate office will not create a traffic problem Similar variances have been granted to Sharp Realty, Dr. Slotkin, Terry's law office. We ask that you favorably consider the application. (Portion of statements inaudible, microphone was not used by speaker.) MR~ CHAIRMAN: Great pictures. Is there anybody else that Would like to speak in behalf of this application? (None) Anyone wishing to speak against ~he application? (None) Questions from board members? I will say for the record that we do have distinct problems in our code concerning applications of this nature -- the areas you had sited, Dr. Slotkins, clearly states the particulars of that particular instance. ~I do not recollect the application of Sharp Realty, but I believe the area was a different zone. ZBA June 27~ 1985 Page 9b HEARING OF MARION AND JOHN KING, continued: I believe there was a C zone not an A zone, which is a different situation. I did not vote on that application from what I remember. MR. CAMINITI: It was .in an A zone. It was.a house in a residen- tial zone based between the B-1 zone and ( ) [inaudible, not using microphone]~ MR. CHAIRMAN: I stand corrected. We will take a look at this particular application to the best of oN~ ability~ The decision is going to take us a little while, ok. You probably would want to have it that way anyway~and we'll see what we can do. Thank you very much and thank you for coming in. I'll make a motion closing the hearing. MEMBER DOUGLASS: Seconded. it was On.motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Douglass, RESOLVED, to close (conclude) the hearing in the matter of Appeal No.~ 3363, JOHN M. AND MARION R. KING. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen, Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was adopted by unanimous vote of all the members. The hearing concluded at 8:30 p.m. ZBA June 27, 1~85 Page 10. #3359 - At 8:30 p.m. a Public Hearing was held in the matter of JEAN HARFORD for a variance to construct a second attached garage with insufficient sideyard setback at north side of Takaposha Road, Southold, New York. Chairman read legal notice and appeal application for the record, in their entirety. MR. CHAIRMAN: I have a copy of a map showing the proposed garage of approximately 12' by 24', existing garage approxi- mately 12' by 20' And I have a copy of theCounty Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. Would somebody like to be heard.in behalf of this application? MRS. HARFORD: property. Mr. Chairman, I am Jean Harford, owner of the MR. CHAIRMAN: We did not have a ruler when we were down there and we just wanted to ask you a question, something we are concerned with, that the garage, proposed, would not protrude farther than the existing house, is that correct, towards the frontyard? MRS. HARFORD: It will protrude four feet from the existing garage, but it will be on the same line as the house there. MR. CHAIRMAN: It appears to be 3½ to 4 feet when we were down there. Do you have any objection, if we should grant this application, to a restriction that the proposed garage be used only for storage purposes? MRS. HARFORD: Not at all. That's what we would use it for. MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you very, very much. Anybody else like to speak in behalf of this application? Anyone against this application? (None) Hearing no further questions, I'll make a motion closing the hearing and reserving decision until later. On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Douglass, it v;as RESOLVED, to close (conclude) the hearing and reserving deci- sion pending deliberations. This resolution was unanimously adopted.~- The hearing was concluded at 8:35 p.m. o~'~T~rm~-~ m~Tr~ ~-, ~ ~ Respectfully submitted, I _~ ]/~_ ~ .B~rbar~tra~g (pp.~l through 8) Town Clerk, Town o~ Soured