Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-07/26/1979Southold Town Board of Appeals .¢::OUTHOLD, L. I., N. Y. 119'71 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS ROBERT W. GILLISPIE, JR., CHAIRMAN CHARLES GRIGONIS. JR. SERGE DOYEN, JR. TERRY TUTHILL ROBERT J. DOUGLASS MINUTES Southold Town Board of Appeals July 26, 1979 A regular meeting of the Southotd Town Board of Appeals was held on July 26, 1979, at 7:30 P.M. (D.S.T.) at the Town Hall, Main Road, South~d, New York. There were present: Messrs: Robert J. Douglass, Acting Chairman: Charles Grigonis, Jr.; Serge D~yen, Jr.; and Terry Tuthill. Also present was: Shirley Bachrach, Leagus' of Women Voters PUBLI'C HEARING: Appeal No. 2565 - Upon application of Goldsmith & Tuthill, 1560 Youngs Avenue, South~ld, New York, for a special excep- tion to the Zoning Ordinance, Article IX, Section 100-90A for permission to relocate a 20,000 gallon fuel oil tank on property on Youngs Avenue, Southold, New York. Location of property: Youngs Avenue~ Southold, New York, bounded on the north by Agway, Inc.; east by Youngs Avenue; south by Long Island Railroad; west by Agway, Inc. The Acting ~hkirman opened the hearing by reading the application for a special exception to the Zoning Ordinance, legal notice of hearing, affidavits attesting to its publication in the official newspapers, and disapproval from the Building Inspector. The Chairman also read a letter from the Town Clerk that notification by certified mail had been made to: MTA Long Island Railroad and Agway, Inc. Fee paid: $15.90. MR. DOUGLASS: We ha~e a survey attached to this application:of the property on Young's Avenue where they propose to relocate the tank, and we have a piece of the Suffolk County Tax Map attached. Is there anyone present who wishes to speak for this application? ADELE RICH: I'm one of the owners of Goldsmith & Tuthill, Inc. We purchased the Goldsmith & Tuthill Company from Floyd and Ruth Tuthill Houston about three years ago. The fuel oil storage tank was located on ship yar~..land formerly owned by the TuthiI1 family W~ ~k~:~.:.'Scarcity an~!~ of the product stored in the tank it has caused us much concern. If someone should attempt to break the locks or use a sledge hammer to knock off fittings a great loss and hazardous condition could occur. Yachts surround this tank in the shipyard ~' S~LrT~OLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -2- July 26, 1979 and it is only about 300 feet from the Bay. Any leakage or spill could be quite hazardous° We would like to relocate this tank and consolidate our operation. We would like to place the tank next to two existing tanks located in a fenced in area on Youngs Avenue, which is lighted at night, and is also zoned for this type of business. By placing all of the tanks in this one area, it would enable us to better che~k and monitor a valuable product. The tank is above ground in New Suffolk and would be above ground on Youngs Avenue also. t would like to sub- mit two pictures taken of the two existing tanks on Youngs A~enue, and we would simply add a third one to that. I don't believe it would cause any difference in any traffic p~oblem. MR. TUTHILL: They are all the same size, aren't they Adele? MRS. RICH: Yes. MR. DOUGLASS: Is there anyone else to speak for this application? (there was no response). Is there anyone in the audience who would like to spDak a~ainst the application? (there was no response). Is there anything the Board would like to ask? (there was no response). I might say in checking this Youngs Avenue property over when we went there Tuesday, it is a very, very, risky situation the way it is now. It's totally unguardable. At least when you bring it over where you want to put it, you can keep track of it° I would suggest ~ou go over your fence a little bit. There are a few places vandals could get through in the back. After investigation and inspection the Board finds that the applicant is in fuel oil business, and presently have a 20,000 gallon fuel oil tank presently located on the North Fork Shipyard, Inc. property in New Suffolk. They desire to move this tank to their storage yard on Youngs Avenue to consolidate their business, preven~ vandalism and the possibilit~ of leakage. The Board agrees with the reasoning of the applicant. The Board finds that strict application of the ordinance would pro- duce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship; the hardship created is unique and would not be shared by all properties alike in the immediate vicinity of the property and in the same use district; and the variance will not change the character of the neighborhood and will observe the spirit of the Ordinance. On motion by Mr. Grigonis, seconded by Mr. Tuthilt, it was RESOLVED, that Goldsmith E Tuthill, 1560 Youngs Avenue, Southold, New York, be GRANTED permission to relocate a 20,000 gallon fuel oil tank on property on Youngs Avenue, Southold, New York. Location of property: Youngs Avenue, Southold, New York, bounded on the north by Agway, Inc.; east by Youngs Avenue; south by Long Island Railroad; west by Agway, Inc., unpon the followzng condition: (1) Site Plan Approval of the Southold Town Planning Board. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Douglass, Grigonis, Doyen and Tuthill. ~ S~UTI{OLD TO~YN BOARD OF APPEALS -3- July 26, 1979 On motion by Mr. Tuthill, seconded by Mro Grigonis, it was RESOLVED, that the minutes of the Southold Town Board of Appeals meeting of July 5, 1979, be accepted. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Douglass, Grigonis, Doyen and Tuthill. PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2655 - Upon application of Carol Lounsberry, 191 Manell Avenue, Islip, New York (Dickinson Realty, as agent), for a variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-31 and Bulk Parking Schedule for permission to divide property with insufficient widtk and area. Location of property: East side of North Sea Drive, Southold, New York, bounded on the north by Boyle and Stoll; east by Sound ~iew Avenue; south by Dews and Palmer; west by North Sea Drive. The A~ting ~hairman opened the hearing by reading the application for a variance to the Zoning Ordinance, legal notice of h~aring, affidavits attesting to its publication in the official newspapers, and disapproval from the Building Inspector. The ~ Chairman also read a letter from the Town Clerk that notificatio~y certified mail had been made to: Lynn Palmer, Joseph Dews, Cora Stoll and Thomas Boyle. Fee paid $15.00. MR. DOUGLASS: We have a survey of July 2, 1979 showing the property, and we also have a section of the County Tax Map showing the property and where she desires subdivide it. Is there anyone in the audience who would like to speak on this application? MARGERY BURNS: Miss Lounsberry, as you know, wants to subidivide this property. In my estimation it is in keeping with the neighborhood because practically ali of the lots on North Sea Drive are 100 feet by 300 feet or less. They are less toward the east. There are many lots on Kenney's Road that are 75 feet by 150 feet. There are lots on Sound View Avenue that have 50 feet or less of road frontage. This will be an keeping with the neighborhood. MR. DOUGLASS: Is there anyone else who would like to speak for this application? (there was no response) Is there anyone in the audience that would like to speak agains~ this application? MR. HENRY G. LYTLE: I don't wan~ to speak against it, but I would like to know what the dimensions of the lots are. MR. DOUGLASS: The lot on North Sea Drive will be 100 feet of front- age and 320.76 feet on one side and 306.23 feet deep on the other side. The lot located on Sound View Avenue will have 85.0 feet for its width and 327.61 feet deep on one side and 355.34 in depth on the other side. MRS. BURNS: Both of these lots are better than a half acre. The~one on Sound View is 0.6066 of an acre. The one on North Sea Drive is 0.718 of an acre. ERNEST H. SCHROEDER: I live on West Drive, Southold, New York. I · SO~T~LD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -4- July 26, 1979 would like to know whan this prQpert~ ~as purchased. CAROL LOUNSBERR¥: Ii inherited this from my parents at the age of 21. That was a few years ago. MR. DOUGLASS: Do you know if when your parents purchased it, they purchased .... MISS LOUNSBERRY: This was purchased in three separate pieces. would like to have it divided the way it was originally purchased. MR. DOUGLASS: So what happened was when they property fell into the estate, it became one piece. JOHN JAZWA: I own property on North Sea Drive. Could I see a diagram of the plot the way they want this divided? MISS LOUNSBERRY: You can see this one. MR. JAZWA: In other words you want to make two lots out of this? MISS LOUNSBERRY: Right. MR. 'JAZWA: So you will have 85 feet on Sound View Avenue and 100 feet on North Sea Drive. I have no objection to this. My property is about 525 feet east of Kenney's Drive. MR. DOUGLASSi Is there anyone else who would like to say anything on this application? Does anyone on the Board have any comments? MR. GRIGONIS: I don't think it will do anything to change the character of the neighborhood. After investigation and-inspection ~he Board finds that the appli- cant is the owner of two lots which run from Sound View Avenue to North Sea Drive in Southold, New York. She wishes to divide the property the way her parents originally bought it. The property is totally surrounded by lots equal in s~ze and area and the Board agrees with the reasoning of the applicant. The Board finds that strict application of the Ordinance would pro- duce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship; the hardship created is unique and would not be shared by all properties alike in the immediate vicinity of the property and in the same use district; and the variance will not change the character of the neighborhood and will observe the spirit of the Ordinance. On motion by Mr. Douglass, seconded by Mr. Tuthill, it was RESOLVED, that Carol Lounsberry, 191 Manell Avenue, Islip, New York, be GRANTED permission ~o divide property with insufficient width and area. Location of property: East side of North Sea Drive, Southotd, New York, bounded on the north by Boyle and Stoll; east by Sound View Avenue; south by Dews and Palmer; west by North Sea Drive, upon the following conditions: SO~HOLD TOWN BOARD OF ~PPEALS -5- July 26, 1979 (1)There shall be no further subdivision of this property. (2) Approval of the Suffolk County Planning Commission. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Douglass, Grigonis, Doyen and Tuthill. PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2564 Upon application of Mary Sayegh, 515 Shore Drive, Greenport, New York, for a variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100~31 and Bulk Parking Schedule for permission to divide property with insufficient width ah~d are~. Location of property: Shore Drive, Greenport, New York, bounded on the north by Shore Dr~ve; east by Chasko; south by Pipes Cove; west by Morris The Acting Chairman opened the hearing by reading the application for a variance to the Zoning Ordinance, legal notice of hearing, affidavits attesting to its publication in the official newspapers, and disapproval from the Building Inspector. The Acting Chairman also read a letter from the Town Clerk that notification by certified mail had been made to: Mr. and Mrs. Morris, Christine Chasko Palmerio Fee paid $15.00. MR. DOUGLASS: This area is called Greenport Shores, and we have a survey map of her plot and the desired division. We also have a copy of the County Tax Map showing the same area and the surroundinq homes. Is there anyone presen~ who would like to speak for this application? MRS. sAYEGH~ I'm the applicant, and I would like to say that I noticed that all the other applicants have somebody speaking for them. I hope it won't prejudice my case since I came without an attorney or a real estate broker. MR. DOUGLASS: You do not need any of them° MRS. SAYEGH: I have three children and six grandchildren, and they all like to spend the summer at my house. You can imagine what a burden that is. I'm looking forward to the day when I can build a house on that vacant lot~ to keep the family together, but yet not be all over one another. I intrigue you to grant me that permission. MR. DOUGLASS: While you are there, could you answer a couple of questions? When we were out inspecting this property, we saw that this ls the only open piece left along the waterfront, is that right? MRS. SAYEGH: That's right. MR. DOUGLASS: Ail of the other lots have homes on them, and they are about the same size of your proposed subdivision. MRS. SAYEGH: Some of them are a little smaller. MR. DOUGLASS: Most of them are about the same size. SOU~HOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -6- July 26, 1979 MRS. SAYEGH: I waited all day for you, but I did not see you. MR. DOUGLASS: We were there;, we have a picture of it. Is there anyone else present who would like to speak on behalf of this application? EDGAR BEBAN~: ~I~m just sort of a friend in court, but I have witnessed the over crowding at Mrs. Sayegh's house. I think it would be beneficial to the community if she is granted this variance so she can go ahead with her plans. MR~ TUTHILL: Were those separate lots at one time? MRS. SAYEGH: When I bought this it was with the understanding that it was zoned f~r a building lot. I bought it from Mr. ~onroy back in 1971 or 1972. We just realized that the new zoning requirments are for one acre zoning. We were just sleeping all that time. We had the feeling everything was taken care of. So that is why I am making this application now. MR. TUTHILL: You are not asking for anything that ~as not in perfect order at one time? ROBERT PAUL: I llve on Leeton Drive, Southold, New York and have no objection to What this lady is trying to do. ?~at she is trying to do, is that tantam0uht t0 the~i~bdiVisio~in that the building and the property could be sold off separately? MR. DOUGLASS: She is in a subdivision right now. The piece that she wants to break off now was two lots when she originally bought this. Not one as she is going to make Q~t of it now. tt was two narrow lots made into one lot. This subdivision was one of those 50 foot frontage subdivisions that they created at that time and sold off to unsuspecting people down west. MRS. SAYEGH: It is all clay. It is terrible ground. MR. DOUGLASS: I know you have to go about 60 feet for sewerage. I know because I Worked on the roads and sewerage back when the subdivision was originally built. You have got a big problem. You have city water. MRS. SAYEGH: Yes, thank ~od. ~R. DOUGLASS: tills application? have any!~esti~n~? Is there anyone present who wishes to speak against (there was no resPonse~ Do any of the board members MR. TUTHILL: I don't think it will make any changes in the character of the neighborhood. I think it is a highly reasonable request and I move that it be granted. After investigation and inspection the Board finds that the appli- cant is the owner of vacant lot on Pipes Cove, Greenport, New York, which is presently merged to her house lot. The applicant wishes to divide this lot from the house property in order to build a dwelling for herself. The ~ SOU~HOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -7- July 26, 1979 newly created lot will conform in size to the other lots in the neighbor- hood and in some instances will be larger. The Board agrees with the reasoning of theaapplicant. · he Board finds that strict application of the Ordinance would pro- duce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship; the hardship created is unique and would not be shared by all properties &like in the immediate vicinity of the property and in the same use district; and the variance will not change the character of the neighborhood and will observe the spirit of the Ordinance. On motion by Mr. Tut~ill seconded by Mr. Grigonis, it was RESOLVED~ that Mary Sayegh, 515 Shore Drive, Greenport, New York, be GRANTED permission to divide property with insufficient width and area. Location of property: Shore Drive, Greenport, New York, bounded on the north by Shore Drive; east by Chasko; south by Pipes Cove; west by Morris, upon the following conditions: (1) Board of Health approval for the sewerage systems. (2) Approval of the Suffolk County Planning Commission. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Douglass, Grigonis, Doyen and Tuthill. PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2567 - Upon application of Doretta T~ainor, 117 Villa Place, Roslyn Heights, New York, for a variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 190-32 for permission to cons%~t an accessory building in the front yard area° Location of property: West Shore Drive, Southold, New York, bounded on the north by Southold Bay; east by Krueger; south by West Shore Drive; west by Kolyer. The Acting Chairman opened the hearing by reading ~he application for a variance to the Zoning Ordinance, legal notice of hearing, affi- davits attesting to its publication in the official newspapers, and disapproval from the Building Inspector. The Chairman also read a letter from the Town Clerk that notification by certified mail had been made to: Mr. Krueger and Robert J. Kolyer. Fee paid $15.00. MR. DOUGLASS: As you have just heard, this house is a water front property, which is why this situation is created. On the water your - legal back yard is your front yard. Is there anyone present who would like to speak for this applicatian? DORETTA ~RAINOR: I~m the applicant. I'm just here to say that I hope the board will approve this. We do plan to make it appealing to our ~eighbors, who have told us they do not object to this. MR. DOUGLASS: What do you plan to build this shed out of? SOUT~OLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -8- July 26, 1979 MR~i. TRAINOR: This will be a metal shed. MR. DOUGLASS: One of the stock sheds '~mu can buy? MRS. TRAINOR: Yes. MR. TUTHILL: Do you have a sketch of this? MR. DOUGLASS: Yes, there is sketch of the house on the property and where the shed will be. The shed will be 50 feet back from the street and a minimum of five feat off the south property line. It will not disrupt any trees or anything. It's abo~t where your kidspplay. MRS. TI~INOR: Yes° MR. DOUGLASS: Is there anyone else who would like to spDak for this application? (there was no response). (~s there anyone who desires to speak against this application? (there was no response)° Does the Board have any further questions? MR. TUTHILL: The same sltuatimn exists along there, and there are many home owners who have had to put their garages and accessory buildings in the front yard. After investigation and inspection the Board finds that the appli- cant!s property fronts on the water. The applicant wishes to place a metal shed in her legal front yard area which will be 50 feet back from West Shore Drive and at least 5 feet off the side yard ar~a~ Li~et The Board agrees with the reasoning of the applicant. The Board finds that strict application of the Ordinance would pro- duce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship; the hardship created is unique and would not be shared by all properties alike in the immediate vicinity of the property and in the same use district; and the variance will not change the character of the neighborhood and will observe the spirit of the Ordinance. On motion by Mr. Tuthill, seconded by Mr. Grigonis, it was RESOLVED, that Doretta Trainor, 117 Villa Place, Roslyn Heights, New York, be GRAi~TED permission to construct an accessory building in the front yard area, as rgquested. Location of property: West Sho~e Drive, South~ld, New York, bounded on the north by Southold Bay; east by Krueger; south by West Shore Drive; west by Kolyer, subject to the following condi- tion: (1) Approval of the Suffolk County Planning Commission. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Douglass, Grigonis, Doyen, and Tuthill PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2568 - Upon application of Bruce A. Norris, · sou~HOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -9- July 26, 1979 c/o Charles A. Price, 3rd.~ P. O. Box 237, Mattituck, New York, (Richard F. Lark, Esq.) for a variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article ~II, Section 100-71 and Bulk Parking Schedule for permission to divide pro- perty with insufficient width and area. Location of property: North- west corner of Love Lane and Sound Avenue, Mattituck, New York, bounded on the north by Barker and North Fork Bank & Trust Company; east by Love Lane; south by Sound Avenue; west by Mattituck Episcopal Church. The Acting Chairman opened the hearing by reading the application for a variance to the Zoning Ordinance, legal notice of hearing, affi- davits attesting to its publication in the official newspapers, and disapproval from the Building Inspector. The Acting Chairman also read a letter from the Town Clerk that notification by certified mail had been made to: The North Fork Bank & Trust Company, Robert S. Barker, Church of the Redeemerr Protestant-Episcopal Church° Fee paid $15.00. MR. DOUGLASS: As we proceed with this one, we inspected it and have had a couple of informal discussions with the people on it. We made requests of the ps~ple who own this property to give us more parking area in the back of these buildings to take more of the con- gestion off of the street. They created a turn around area for vehicles and emergency vehicles that might have to enter. They were very cor- dial, and they have redrawn their map which we have. We also have the original and one. Both maps are drawn by Young & Young. They gave us the footage we asked for in off-street parking in back of the buildings and they, due to circumstances that we not known at that time, they have drawn in a splif off one of the other old buildings in the back next to the church with over 10,000 square feet attached to it. In general they have been very cooperative with any suggestions that we have given them. I have also a portion of the County Tax Map in front of me of this location, and I'll ask if there is anyone present who would like to speak for this application. RICHARD F. LARK, ESQ: I'm told that Mr° Price's airplane got di- verted so he will not be here this evening. As you announced at the r.equest of the Board we did increase the turn around parking area per your requirement. As it layed out with the existing building over by the Episcopal Church so you wouldn't get any further subdivision, we layed out al~ the requirements that you wanted. So I think substantially it conforms/~at you wanted. I think that will nob be the over-all layout. If they Were sold as individual parcels, each one on Love Lane would get an access on the rear the way you wanted, and there is ample space for a turn around. That leaves the two-story, frame house parcel on Sound Avenue with 19,374 square feet which is substantial, and they will have plenty of on-premises parking there. The existing frame garage on lot No. 7 has been ~tilized as a garage, lawn mower shop and such over on the westerly portion of the property, and that will have plenty of parking for any t~p~e of contingent business use. As stated, every one of the buildings is occupied with the exception of the two-story frams house. That is not presently occupied, and rented. All the rest are on going. There will b~ni°ncrease of anything that is there, and I think it will clean up the back portion there which is a little trashy, as you saw when you inspected the premises° By having bituminous parking, which · ' SOUT~OLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -10- July 26, 1979 a$~you kno~ Mr~ P~celhas~agreed to dot thi& wkll clean up the whole a~ea. MR. DOUGLASS: You are going to remove that tumbled down garage to get the right-of-way through there, aren't you? MR. LARK: There are two buildings that will have to be removed. One is the tumbled down garage that you referred to and the other is a frame garage on the back of lot 3,-whlch is nothing more than a fire hazard. They will be removed when they go in tO dbethe grading and all. That wilt clean the whole thing up. I respectfully move that the variance be granted as requested. I have nothing more to add to the application. MR. DOUGLASS: Is there anyone else who would like to say anything for this application? (there was no response). Is there anyone present who would llke to speak against this application? (there was no response). Does anyone on the Board have any comments they would like to make? MR. TUTHILL: I have lived in Mattituck all my life, and I'm happy to see this approved. After investigation and inspection the Board finds that the applicant is the owner of a parcel of land on the northwest corner of Sound View Avenue and Love Lane mn Mattituck, consisting of seven parcels. There are presently on going businesses located on lots 1~ ~, 3, 4, 5 and ~. Lot 6 contains a two-story frame dwelling, which is presently unoccupied. Adequate off-street parking~will be supplied for lots 6 and 7. The Board agrees with the reasoning of the applicant. The Board finds that strict application of the Ordinance would pro~ duce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship; the hardship created is ukique and would not be shared by all properties alike in the immediate vicinity of the property and in the same use district; and the variance will not change the character of the neighborhood and will observe the spirit of the Ordinance. On motion by Mr. Douglass, seconded by Mr. Tuthill, it was~ RESOLVED, that Bruce A. Norris, c/o Charles A. Price, 3rd., P. O. Box 237, Mattituck, New York, be GRANTED permission to divide property with insufficient width and area. Location of property: Northwest corner of Love Lane and Sound Avenue, Mattituck, New York, bounded on the north by Barker and North Fork Bank & Trust Company; east by Love Lane; south by Sound Avenue; west by Mattituck Episcopal Church, upon the following con- ditions: (1) There shall be no further subdiviszon of the lots created and shown on the survey from Young & Young dated May 8, 1979. (2) Lot 6 and Lot 7 shall furnish off street parking. (3~ Approval of the Suffolk County Planning Commission. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Douglass, Grigonis, Doyen and Tuthill. ~' SOU~HOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -11- July 26, 1979 PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2569 - Upon application of M. A. Kelsey Properties, Inc., P. O. Box 983, Southold, New York (Richard F. Lark, Esq.) for a variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article VII, Section 100-71 and Bulk Parking Schedule for permission to divide property with insufficient width and area & off-street parking. Loca- tion of property: Love Lane and Main Road, Mattituck, New York, bounded on the north by Barker; east by Mattituck Park District and Stype; south by Main Road; west by Love Lane. The Acting Chairman opened the hearing by reading the application for a variance to the Zoning Ordinance, legal notice of hearing, affi- davits attesting to its publication in the official newspapers, and disapproval from the Building Inspector. The Acting Chairman also read a letter from the Town Clerk that notification by certified mail had been made to: L. W. Barker, Mattituck Park District, Valentine Stype. Fee paid: $15.00. MR. DOUGLASS: In inspecting this on Tuesday, it is quite obvious which part of the building carries over into Mr~ Barker's property, and that it does encroach on by 6 or 7 feet. That the back of the L & L market at the present time just fits within the property line boundary to the north. At this time, I~have the survey of the property and I also have the County Tax Map of the area. At this time, I'll ask if there is anyone present who wishes to speak on behalf of this application? RICHARD F. LARK; ESQ: I have Mr. Raymond Terry, one of the officers of the M. A. Kelsey Properties, Inc. here with me io answer any questions. This one ~g~h~.~he Board should be aware of that on the southerly end of the property which is shown on Exhibit A, a parcel of 10,942 square feet, & th~ Board of Appeals did give a variance to actually save the building. This was the octagon building in Mattituck, and it was divided off so it could be renovated. With the owner occupant concept, people will spend money to renovate businesses. The proof of the pudding is that building was a derelict before the present people, Clause~ went in and renovated it, and I think the modernization and fixing up of the building is testimony' itself. You have seen it so you know what I am talking about. We propose %he same thing on the northerly end of the property which is the subject of tonight's application. Mr. Milowski does want to spend considerable money to modernize his store. It is a year round store and he's proven quite successful there. It is in need of modernization. The encroachment you referred to which encroaches as you indicated some six feet and 12 feet at some point was done back in the 1920 or 1930's. MR. TUTHILL: It was done in the days when people were renting out lockers to freeze food. .~RAYMOND Wo TERRY, JR: World War II years. MR. TUTHILL: That's right. There are a lot of lockers back there. MR. LARK: The day of reckoning has come, and ~hat now has to be moved with the modernization and different changing of land owners. He ~' sOQTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -12- July 26, 1979 has until August 31, 1980, which is a year from now to get that off there. Much of his operation is the meat business, freezinq and such. What he proposes to do is just get rid of the encroachment ~ntirely. You probably noticed that is a wooden building that had been added on to the cement block building. As t understand it from Mr. Terry, who has talked to him, he intends to take the whole thing down. Then he plans to buy one of those unitized things and attach it virtually to the back of his existing property and then have a walk through, because his meat department in the retail store is in the back of the store. Other than that everything will stay the same. He is going to continue to have the rear entrance which is for patrons to use to walk from there to the Park District parking lot back there. I am told he gets, and I was con- ce~ned about it deliveries currently, as all the stores do on the front street. He also gets some, if you noticed when you looked at the property, there is a black topped driveway that runs the rear of the property behind the post office. I understand some of the larger trucks that take more time on off-loading pull in that way and go in the back door. MR. DOUGLASS: They were there when we were there. MR. LARK: Then you know how that goes. That is how it is done° Virtually the~e will be no change in the existing operation except that tke bu±lding will be cleaned up some, and also that encroachment will come down. The rear portion will be dressed up a little° I don't really have anything more to say about this except to explain the theory of it was the same thing confronting the land owner on the southerly end of the property. Mr. Tuthilt will testify that the whole block was owned by the Kelsey Family and deteriorated. Mr. Terry picked up the property with the corporation and modernized it by making a modern post office there and then all of a sudden he was stuck. He beautified the central portion of the property and then he had the derelict on the corner which everybody wanted removed because it was a fire hazard and the only way he was able to do any~h±ng was to sell it to somebody. The Board went along with it. The proof of the pu~ing is that ±t has been fixed up nicely. The same thing confronts him at this end of the property. This fellow who has been proven an entrepreneur wants to continue, but he wants to own the store. In order to do that I have to come before you to get a variance so he can own it. MR. DOUGLASS: Let me ask Mr. Terry a question. In going over this with Town Counsel and if we do end up granting it, we feel that there would have to be some usage guarantee of this parking lot up to his back door for deliveries and for him to get into his back door. Would this be agreeable? M~. LARK: I can answer that. Practically, yes, legally, no. When the United States Post Office stayed there and kept Love Lane alive, they insisted upon having an exclusive maneuvering area in the rear of the post office S~ they would not be precluded at any time by delivery trucks of anyone else. You saw where their loading dock was back there. They allow us to use this for L & L or anyone else, but they do not want anyone to have a legal right-of-way directly behind that post office. Now, from the post office to the south there is no problem. Their right-of-way is in common with everyone else's. The owners park their cars behind there. Directly behind there they have an exclusive maneuvering area, and I wanted to be honest with you and tell you that. They insisted on that. That way if they have to move a semi or any post office truck, they have the right to have it sit there. sou~HOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -13- July 26, 1979 MR. DOUGLASS: This is all right, but the man has got to have a way of getting into the back, too. MR. LARK: He's never had. Nothing changes here. That whole section was put up in the late '20's and 30's, and it has been that way ever since. It is an existing state of facts. He uses it for deliveries and no one complains about it. We cannot give him anything in his deed, if you would, because of the exclusive maneuvering area the post office negotiated for in their lease. The Government was absolutely adamant about it. MR. DOUGLASS: They want to control everything. MR. LARK: I understand that, but on the other hand there was no other choice at the time. It was felt by the Chamber of Commerce and everyone that they wanted the post office to remain there to keep Love Lane alive. Otherwise Love Lane would have been a deteriorated area. That's a fact of life. MR. DOUGLASS: They are just in there on a lease, right? They don't own it. MR. LARK: They don't own any of the post offices. They lease them all out here. MR. TUTHILL: They need all that room behind L & L to maneuver? MR. LARK: Not behind L & L. MR. TERRY: They don't need it in back of any of the other stores. MR. DOUGLASS: There is not that much room in back of L & L. MR. LARK: The property kind of pies down into a point. That is what Mr. Douglass' point is. MR. DOUGLASS: The way it is Terry is that if he put anything in back here, he would immediately go over his rear yard status. MR. TUTHILL: Where if all the trucks would deliver in the rear, instead of backing in between the access road between Barkers and L & L, because I would like to see all the deliveries in the rear. MR. LARK: Okay, that you will see, because that maneuvering area next to L & L to the north between there and the Barker's card sh6p. That also goes in 1980. Mrs. Barker owns that and the reason she gave up the right-of-way there is that was really the only practical access without really trespassing that you could get for the encroaching freezer building° To maintain it and all. I do know the trucks back in and out ~ there and creates a real traffic hazard on Love Lane. That should be elimiated. ~R. TUTHILL: How are you going to do i%? MR. LARK: Because once that encroachment comes ~own, he will no longer has the right-of-way to go over there. .SOUT'HOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS 414- July 26, 1979 MR. DOUGLASS: Then he is stuck and he can't get to the rear of his building. MR. LARK: That's right. He can't ~et through to the rear of his building now, without going through the building. Look at the survey. It is physically impossible. MR. DOUGLASS: I know it is Where you say the Post Office has control but the Town Attorney thinks,.., .... MR. LARK: But from Love Lane if he wants to get through, he cannot get through any other way, but through his building. Lo~k at the building. MR. DOUGLASS: That's now. He is using this back here to the rear of the building. He has an access to the rear now. MR. LARK: The public uses it over here. MR. DOUGLASS: But trucks are using it right to here. MR. AARK: That's right. MR. DOUGLASS: And the Town Attorney feels ..... MR. LARK: As far as we are concerned.v... MR. DOUGLASS: The Town Attorney feels he should be guaranteed that he can get into there. MR. LARK: Cannot guarantee it, but as a practical matter nothing will change. MR. DOUGLASS: Are these other people here guaranteed the use of all of this? MR. LARK: Yes. The maneuvering area to the post office is from here to here. MR. DOUGLASS: Then can you not give him under present situation access to this post office line? MR. LARK: Yes. MR. DOUGLASS: Then he can go across it or encroach on it as they are until the post office rental expires. MR. LARK: I see what you are saying. The s~ller can give him a legal right-of-way from here to here. No question about it. MR. TUTHILL: Through the parkin~ lot. MR. LARK: There is no pm~blem there. That we can do. But this area here I had to be honest kith you. I can't give him that in writing, if you -15- July 26, 1979 SOU~HOLD TO?~ BOARD OF APPEALS would, they don't care. MR. DOUGLASS: You can give him a legal access to the post 6ffice line with the possibility of the next post office lease being able to make other arrangements? So the man knows he can come to this line and make a delivery across a 50 foot area or whatever the post office occupies. It doesn't say. MR. LARK: Ray, how wide is the post office right-of-way? I have somewhere. MR. DOUGLASS: It is about 50 foot. MR, LARK: It is 43.4 feet wide. MR. TUTHILL: Pedestrians will still have a right-of-way thrQ~gh there. MR. LARK: Yes, the park district and Mrs. Barker have w~rked that out. MR. TUTHILL: No more trucks, just people? MR. LARK: No that 4 foot foot path there, the park district got an easement from Mrs. Barker from Love Lane to the park diStrict property. That was cleaned up a number of years ago. The theory is that the people park back there and walk through and shop on Love Lane. People use that lot and particularly in the summer time. That parking lot is well utilized. MR. TERRY: I would just like to say that it will not change the operation one iota other than the legal ownership will be transferred. As Mr. Lark has indicated to you, legally we cannot say something we have a restriction on. From a practical point there has been consideration between the hardware store, Raynor & Surer that they might get together and go right on through from the Main Road° This will help deliveries for we are all aware of the problems. At this point legally we cannot make a guarantee on something like that. MR. DOUGLASS: Yes, but you can come to that point. Then if something else develops it can be tied in. So the man knows he at least can come a certain distance to his rear door. MR. TERRY: That is correct. MR. DOUGLASS: This is what we have got to have. MR. LARK: Mr. Terry was mentioning about the Raynor-Suter building was added on there, between there and the shoe store there is about 15 or 20 feet. MR. TUTHILL: On Pike Street. MR. LARK: What Mr. Raynor hopes to do with Mrs. Barker's cooperation is to create a legal alleyway like they out in some of the ~estern towns. .~ ~SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -16- July 26, 1979 This way all deliveries could~U~!~ight through. If that is in Mr. Milowski's interest, he would probably go along with it. The point being from both ends it would go through and you would have a delivery roadway through there for trucks which would alleviate the traffic con- gestion on Love Lane just tremendously. Mrl Raynor is still working on that with Mrs. Barker. MR. DOUGLASS: Is there any store attached to her piece there? MR. LARK: No, the old barn was taken down. MR. DOUGEASS: There was a bicycle shop there, too. MR. LARK: That's the one. That was taken down. MR. DOUGLASS: I built a building copied directly from that. There are no other buildings on her land. MR. LARK: No, it is vacant. MR. TERRY~ She added on to the rear of her store. MR. LARK: But that will not interfere with what he is talking about. MR. DOUGLASS: If she gets together with Raynor on that they could have a good parking area in back there. MR. TERRY: She would have a situation where she could park her car in the back there. I think this is what will eventually come. We can't make a promise to you tonight though. MR. DOUGLASS: We just want to make sure that he can come in here this far and then that you will put something in there..v.. MR. LARK: We will give him a right-of-way across the back portion with the others. MR. DOUGLASS: If the post office lease is renegotiated, you will make adjustments~and give him the right to get to his back door. MR. LARK: Practically he is going to have it. MR. DOUGLASS: Practical word of mouth when we shift or leave does not really count, people could have trouble. MR. LARK: What you are asking for would be included in his deed. The right-of-way would be t~ethe post office property. MR. DOUGLASS: Then a statement if the lease situation changes with the Post Office the right-of-way would continue to his rear door. MR. LARK: There ms no problem with that. I think that would be a 15 foot black topped right of way. ' ~0~THOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -17- July 26, 1979 MR. ~OUGLASS: No, 25 feet. The right-of-way according to this is 25 feet. MR. LARK: Yes, but as you know there is a shoulder there. MR. DOULGASS: I don't care about that, but the right-of-way that is on the survey says 25 feet and then widens out in back of the stores. Is there anyone else who would like to speak in favor of this application? (there was no response). Is there anyone present who would like to speak against this application? (there was no response). After investigation and inspection the Board finds that the applicant requests permission to set off a business lot with insufficient area, width and off-street parking on property located on Love Lane, Mattituck, New York. The p~ospective purchaser is interested in puEchhsing the retail food store property, modern±ng the interior and removing an encroach- ment on the neighbor's property to the north. The findings of the Board are that the parcel to be dividSd out is surrounded by substandard par- cels and the granting of this variance will not change the chhracter of the neighborhood. The Board agrees with the reasoning of the applicant. The Board finds that strict application of the Ordinance would produce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship; the hardship created is unique and would not be shared by all properties alike in the immediate vicinity of the property and in the same use district; and the variance will not change the-character of the neighborhood and will observe the spirit of the Ordinance. On motion by Mr. Tuthill, seconded by Mr. Douglass, it was RESOLVED, that M. A. Kelsey Properties, Inc., P. O. Box 983, Southold, New York, be GRANTED permission to divide property with in- sufficient width and area and off-street parking. Location of property: Love Lane and Main Road, Mattituck, New York, bounded on the north by Barker; east by Mattituck Park District and Stype; south by Main Road; west by Lo~e Lane, upon the following conditions: (1) The purchasers shall be granted a right-Of-way to the post office with the possibility that when the post office lease is renegotiated there will be consideration for the right-of-way to be extended to the rear entrance of the L & L market. (2~ Approval of the Suffolk County Ptanning Commission. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Douglass, Grigonis, Doyen and Tuthill. PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2563 ~ Upon application of Louis V. Car- tell±, 13~04 146th Street, Whitestone, New York, for a variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-31 and Bulk Parking Schedule for permission to divide property with insufficient width and area. Loca, .SQU~OLD~ - TOWN BOARE OF APPEALS -18- July 26, 1979 tion of property: Kenney's Road, Southold, New York, bounded on the north by Central Drive; east by Kenney's Road; south by Lake Drive; west by Dechiaro. The Acting Chairman opened the hearing by reading the application for a variance to the Zoning Ordinance, legal notice of hearing, affi- davits attesting to its publication in the official newspapers, and disapproval from the Building Inspector. The Acting Chairman also read a letter from the Town Clerk that notification by certified mail had been made to: Nichatas De~hiaro. Fee paid $15.00 MR. DOUGLASS: I have here to read several letters that have come in to the Board, which I will now read into the minutes: (1) Mrs. Conroy, Secretary of the Planning Board, Southold Town Hall, Southold, New York, dated July 24, 1979. Dear Mrs. Conroy: I wo~d like to express my opposition to the request by Louis V. Cartelli for variance to subdivide the property adjoining Kenny's ~oad, in Southotd. The area ±s already quite crowded because of the public beach, the presence of the Seafarer Restaurant and multiple dwelling units. I feel that subdivision would be counter to the spirit of the zoning regulations and I urge you to consider my opposition when considering this request for variance. Thank you very much. Sincerely, Lynn Faught. Just for the record she sits on a 100 by 160 foot lot which is 14,000 square feet. (2) Zoning Board of Appeals: On behalf of myself, William A. Cuff, and my mother, Loretta M. Cuff, each owner of a lot on North Sea Drive, Southold, I wish to comment on two appeals scheduled for July 26, 1979, specifically those of Lounsberry and Cartelli. We strongly object to these efforts to create substandard lots in our neighborhood, largely because they would change its character and adversely affect the value of our own properties. We ask, therefore, that these appeals be rejected. Very truly yours, William A. Cuff. For our information they sit on a lot 100 feet by 250 feet, which is 25,000 square feet. (3) Zoning Board of Appeals, Town of Southold, New York: To Whom It May Concern: (This letter is dated July 23, 1979). As owners of a home on Lake Drive at Kenney's Beach, Southold, we wish to make known our objection to the granting of a variance requested by Louis V. Cartelli for the division of property with insufficient width and area ~ocated on Kelley's Road, Southold, bounded on the north by Central Drive, east by Kenney's Road, south by Lake Drive, west by Dechiaro. We believe thet the granting of such a variance would be in violation of the intent of the existing ordinance and would only become the begmnning of a continuing ~erie~ of such requests. The recent purchase~fij~ ~ave Peen aware of the zoning regulations at t~he ti~ 6~ ~'i'~ pu~c'hase, and should noterequest a variance solely and only for his convenience. The area is presently a very busy location with a great deal of traffic, both road and pedeserian, due to the proximity to a town beach (Kenney's Beach), the Seafarer Restaurant and the multiple dwelling directly opposite the property in question on Kenney's Road. The granting of this variance would serve to further compound the situation and reduc~ the property' values of the surrounding community. We thank you for your consideration and trust your decision in the best interest of the community, will be to deny SOU~HOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPE~S -19- July 26, 1979 this variance request. Very truly yours, Arline Richter and Kenneth E. Richter. Their piece of property contains 15,000 square feet since it 100 feet by 150 feet. This is all the correspondence I have on this matter. Before I ask for any views, I would like to say after going over this, visiting the area and then reviewing it before the hearing, it turns out that after the survey were made f6r the people, John V. Kas~imatis and Leon M. Merjian we find that the lot on Lake Drive and Kenney's Roadwould not have to rece~ve~a' variance.' It contains over 40,000 square feet and it contains 406/~e~ake Drive, which is more than enough road frontage. (This is on Leon M. Merjian's lot) The other survey indicates that the lot that bounds on Central Drive ~ paper street) and Kenney's Road also contains 40,013 ~q~are feet, is 331.52 deep and has 12~.31 feet on Kenney's Road. The only variance that this lot requires is a 150 feet of frontage that he would need on Kenney's Road, and ~e only has 122.31. It mentions in here the paper street. We are not able to consider a paper street as an official road. The front yard area would be Kenney's Road. After that, I'll ask if there is anyone present who wishes to speak in favor of this application? JOHN NICHOLAS, ESQ: I represent Mr. Cartetli, and if I may say a few words. I believe that the lots are so substantial to the acre that they are in essence an acre from every point of view. We have had an opportunity to check out all the other houses around including mine which is on West Road. Most of them are about 25,000 square feet, but the © largest we found was $35,000 square feet. We believe these two lots are going to be the largest lots with the largest area throughout the entire area. They are going to have more land there for these two houses than any of these existing houses° So if they say they do not conform, that happens to be true. They do not conform. They are setting a new pre- cedent. They are actually increasing the amount of land that is necessary. Most of these existing lots are 100 by 150 or the very most 150 by 150. These two lots taken on an over-all basis are a bait's breath short of an acre by about 1500 square feet MR. DOUGLASS: They are a legal construction acre. MR. NICHOLAS: Under those c~rcumstances, I don't believe they should not have been turned down to begin with. I don't understand why the~ are. The other thing I would like to say I don't think that these two lots should be penalized for the restaurant may generate a certain amount of traffic or the beach. They are there to be enjoyed by the people who li~e around here. These people should not take the brunt for what traffic happens to be there. What could two families that have a right to buy a~.~o~ and build a house generate in terms of traffic which would bring catastrophe to the area. I urge that it be approved. Thank you very much. MR. DOUGLASS: Before you finish sir, do you have a copy of the DEC approval that you say you have? MR. NICHOLAS: Yes, it should have been submitted with the p~pers. I have ample copies here of the letter. MR. DOUGLASS: You can keep those copies for other thing~ you will need. You w~ll need them for the Board of Health ane everybody else. SOU~HOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -20- July 26, 1979 MR. NICHOLAS: We obtained this approval before we purchased the land. MR. DOUGLASS: For everybody's information, I will read this: New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Stony Brook, New YOrk. Florence S. Kramer, 206 Main Street, Greenport, New York 11944 (which was the pre~io~ owner). Your petition for a Tidal Wetlands Morae~ torium Permit has been reviewed by this office. As a result, we have determined that construction of two houses near Long Island Sound and Great Pond, Town of ~th~ld, Suffolk County; New Y~rk, will have no adverse effect upon adjacent tidal wetlands~ Therefore, pursuan~ to Section 25-9202 of the Environmental Conservation Law and 7NYCRR, Part 669.3(c), you are hereby notified that no permit will be necessary. A copy of this determination must be available at the job site at all times during construction activity. Sincerely yours, Daniel J. Larkin~ Local Tidal Wetlands Permit Administrator. The Corps of Engineers, New YOrk District Louis M. Concra have been notified. This was obtained and approved on August 29, 1974. Is there anyone else who would like to speak for this application? (there was no response). Is there anyone present who wants to speak against this application? ERNEST H. SCHROEDER: May I ask a question first? Mt{. DOUGLASS: Sure, go ahead. M~. SCHROEDER: Does the Board ha~e any information about what the Board of Health will do about approving or disapproving a septic tank system. Has any boring on the property been made?to find out the brackish water level? MR. DOUGLASS: Let my answer you this way. This is not in our department. This becomes fact upon the request of the Building Department for a building permit. They must produce the DEC approval and that must be produced to the Board of Health must issue a permit for sewerage and wa~er system before the Building Department of Southold Town may issue a building permit. That is the way that is handled. MR. SCHROEDER: Is it possible that if the Board of Appeals grants this application the owner still may not be able to get health department approval? MR. DOUGLASS: This is possible. MR. SC~RQEDER: May I make my statement now? MR. DOUGLASS: Yes. M~. SCHROEDER: I live on West Drive. I am concerned about this application for several reasons. The first one: If I recall the Board enacted the lot requirements around 1971 or 1972, is that correct? ~R. DOUGLASS: Somewhere around there. That ~s when it was increased. MR. SCHROEDER: When I was in the office this morning~ I was told the property was purchased in the last year and a half or so. S0~HOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -21- July 26, 1979 MR. DOUGLASS: By the new owners? MR. SCHROEDER: Yes. So it is true as stated in one of the letters that the buyers should have been aware of the~requirements of the Board of Appeals in the Town of Southold, as to building. So I .would object to the Board granting this type of ~ariance since the builder should have been aware of this, that we are trying in the Town of South°ld to upgrade the building code, the buildings that are put forth. I guess my main objection is that the applicant no'where has stated that he intends to reside on either one of these lots. Every Other case we have heard tonight has been from s~meone who has resided, is supporting a hardship and so Ono Here we have an applicant who has bought the proRsrty fully aware of what the zoning is, is asking for a subdivision~¥~nt~ds to build two structures and then sell them to someone else. MR. DOUGLASS: This happened because the purchasers of the property went into the Building Department for the right to build and found that they had to get the land approved first. The other answer I tried to point out before is they have the area required in land. They are not undersized ~ts even with the increase in the area requirements. So there is no question about the size of the lot. They are 40,000 square feet and better. The only thing that is a varianee at all is the footgage on Kenney's Road of the one lo~. That is all we have. MR. NICHOLAS: May I say something that might put Mr. Schroeder at ease about his feeling about the possibility of Mr. Cartelli making a windfall. Mr. ~artelli is a very good f~iend of mine, and also of the two purchasers. All four of us are very goodsfriends. Mr. Cartelli is selling the lots to the two purchasers for the exact same price he pur- chased it about four years ago in 1974. This can be borne out by looking at the contract which is going to be filed in the Town records. The exact purchase price four years ago is the selling price now. MR. DOUGLASS: do with the appeal. on his land. The financial value of the property has nothing to Any man is entitled to make a profit if he wants to MR. NICHOLAS: I just want you to be aware of that. He is losing his closing costs. This would normally have been done in the names of the two purchasers, but we do not have the recorded deeds yet, so it waspput in Mr. Cartelli's name. The two people who ha~e purchased these two lots, are very ~nterested in living here and being good members of our community, and are going to benefit the town I believe by paying taxes and bringing · n good people to this area. MR. DOUGLASS: I believe the man si~ting along side of you is one of the purchasers? Would you like to say anything to help reassure these people of what your intentions are? JOHN V. KASSIMATIS: My intentions are to build a home on a legal size lo~, 40,000 square feet, and be a member of the community. I can't see any other objections. There have been test borings taken on the property. We have been in touch with the well people and Board of Health, and everything was based on getting a building permit and going from there. -~ $OU~HOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -22- July 26, 1979 MR. DOUGLASS: ts there anyone else present who would like to speak against this application? HELEN PAUL: Not so much against the application. I live on Leeton Drive. I would like to question the validity of the Enviromen~al Conservation letter written in 1974 against what their new regulations are. I would like to know if the Board will require a new investigation by the Enviromental Conservation department? MR. DOUGLASS: I'm sure the Board of Health will before they will issue them a permit. MRS. PAUL: I'm talking about the Department of Environmental Conservation? MR. DOUGLASS: Yes. The County will not issue something on a ~iece of land that is questionable. MRS. PAUL: Is that considered tidal lands in there? MR. DOUGLASS: It is considered high land. MRS. PAUL: You are not answering my question. You have a letter there that you referred to that is dated in 1974, and I'm asking about that letter. The regulations have changed. MR. DOUGLASS: My answer is that the Board of Health will require a more recent report. MRS. PAUL: Oh, is that who does it. I didn't understand that. MR. DOUGLASS: We will put it in our decision, but the Board of Health will require something from the DEC. They will not pass on a piece of land that has any question. The only reason there wQutd be further investigation in this matter is that somewhere along the line since this was written that the DEC now has a controlling factor on some inshore, fresh water wetland area, so this .will have to be re-investigated and a new letter issued to be presented to the Board of Health, and to our Building Department. MRS. PAUL: I do raise issue with that this was presented with the idea the property was purchased with the idea that it could be split into two lots based on that paper. I cannot conceive of anyone purchasing property to bu~ld on, based on a paper like that and coming before a Board like this. MR. DOUGLASS: I have seen it happen many times. I have seen people bu~l~roperty where they could not get a building permit and had paid for the property. MRS. PAUL: You misunderstood what I was saying. That you buy it with the idea you can build on it because the environmentalists say so. That is leaving you people with nothing. They are not considering zoning S0~HOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -23- July 26, 1979 or anything else. It is just an interesting aspect of things. MR. DOUGLASS: ts the~eaanyone else who has anything to say? MRS. JAZWA: ! would just like to ask one question. Do I under? stand that only one house will be put on each piece of property. In the future they cannot ask for a subdivision of each of these lots? MR. DOUGLASS: That will all be in our decision. JAMES GENOVESE: Lake Drive, Southold, New York. As I understand it we are only talking about a variance for one, is that correct? MR. DOUGLASS: Yes. MR. GENOVESE: The one that is 122 feet on Kenney's Road. I have a question to this Board, and that question is going to be like this. Since we have people that are planning and they lay down these laws and rules and regulations, who's to say if you grant this for 122'feet that next week you won't grant 115 next week? MR. DOUGLASS: This we have the right to do. This is what the Board of Appeals is for. MR. GENOVESE: I understand that. Then why have someone lay down the rules. MR. DOUGLASS: You have to have a standard to start from. Then you turn around and through your village and town you find there are many old areas which mn no way can be spread out to gain the proper footage. There is no way the people can get it. Consequently they have to come to us for a variance in accordance with the regulations. Also a lot of these properties were purchased back when zoning only called for a small area and then zoning was updated. MR. GENOVESE: That I understand, but this is not the case. They purchased this and they knew that the road frontage was short. My ques- tion is very simple. It seems as though we go around the mulber~y~b~s~. We are spending all of our money to pay taxes so people who are making the rules and regulations,ppeople will grant dispensations. MR. DOUGLASS: Everyone has a different situation. MR. GENOVESE: I understand that. and I understand they are all different. them all, too. I have heard the cases here tonight, I understand that you granted MR. DOUGLASS: If they do not adversely affect the community, the people have a right to relief. MR. GENOVESE: We have a bird sanctuary back there. That is wetlands as wetlands as can be. MR. DOUGLASS: I have pictures of it, and I walked around there, and · S0~UT~HOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -24- July 2~, 1979 I wouldn't say it was wetlands. I can't find any wetlands grass on it. GENOVESE: Come on over to 620 Lake Drive, and I'll tromp you it. MR. DOUGLASS: That is for the DEC to decide, not us. MR. SCHROEDER: May I ask what the width of the paper street is? MR. DOUGLASS: Fifty feet. But it is not a town street. It is not controlled by the Town. MR. SCHROEDER: Who owns the property: MR. DOUGLASS: The people who own the rest of the land along there. MR. SCHROEDER: I thought it belonged to the County or th8 Town. MR. DOUGLASS: No, sir. MR, KASSIMATIS: According to the County that is a Town ~oad. MR. DOUGLASS: As far as we could find out today with the Town Attorney, it's ~ot. MR. SCHROEDER: May I take this a step further? Assuming it is individually owned, do we then come up with a case where someone wants to build a house on a 50 foot wide plot. MR. DOUGLASS: They would not get it. MR. SCHROEDER: Well I hope we don't start shrinking and shrinking. MR. DOUGLASS: They couldn't get their land area. MR. SCHROEDER: This is an area that is jammed already with the restaurant ~h8 the multiple dwelling across the street. I think we have to retain the 150 foot frontage, which'is the case in poi~t now. Maybe~ this is not a bad place to start. MR. DOUGLASS: They have their area, and we can not jeepardize them because they are short a couple of feet on the front. Then we would have to close .~veryone out in town. MR. SCHROEDER: I repeat once again this property was purchased, the Ordinance has been in existence since 1971 or 1972, and it is the old story of "Buyer Beware". Someone buys a two family house and it is not a legal two family house. They are stuck with it. MR. GRIGONIS: They have 40,000 qquare fee-which is a legal building lot. The only thing they lack is the width. The density isn't being harmed at all. MR. SCHROEDER: It is still a problem, it is not within the Ordinance. SQU~HOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -25- July 26, 1979 MR. DOUGLASS: I think you would find that if they came in with an area down as low as 25,000 square feet, possibly, it would have been granted due to the fact when this neighborhood was created there were smaller lots. He is taking seven paperslots and bringing them into one. He is helping your area. He is not depriving your area at all. He has increased the area of his lot to 40,000 square feet. The lots all around you people are all 100 foot and less of frontage. All of them on the paper lot. MRS. PAUL: We had b~en interested in that particular parcel ourselves so we know that the Kramer estate parcel was not broken into lots. MR. DOUGLASS: We have a map of it here. MRS. PAUL: Fine, we looked at that way back in 1965 and that was one solid piece. It was sold off only as one piece. We went in and talked to Mr. Terry at the time about buying it and b~aking it inca four lots. He said it was impossible° MR. DOUGLASS: Yes, but it is a paper map. MRS. PAUL: But it was never divided into small lots the way you are talking about it. MR. DOUGLASS: It was an unfiled map of Wemt Southold on the SQund. They were a~l drawn. JOHN JAZWA: I would like to raise an objection. If the Town of Southold drew up a zoning plan, zoning laws and all, I think they should be abided by. First of all the property is undersized with insufficient frontage, and access to a driveway would be in a bad location at that particular spot. You have the restaurant, you have Dogwood Lane, Lake Drive, Leeton Drive plus all the traffic and North Sea Drive. All of these roads sort of Combine in one particular spot there. I think a house at that location with an access driveway leading in is a hazard. That is number one. I think you should abide by the zoning laws and put your foot down, because if you grant this, as Mr. Shroeder mentioned, someone is going to be in here and this is going to go on and on and on% What is your name, by the way? MR. DOUGLASS: Mr. Douglass. MR. JAZ~A: I have attended hearings here before, not in this par- ticular building but on South Street, and one thing I object to is that all of the iet%ers you read tonight in objection to this particular par- cel, you made a statement as~to the size of their pl°t that they built on. MR. DOUGLASS: For our records, right° MR. JAZWA: ~ think that is highly improper. Do you think it is proper? You did it for every one, not just one. MRS. PAUL: Those homes were built years ago. ~ S©U~HOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -26- July 26, 1979 MR. JAZWA: I have one of the first maps of this area and the breakdown of the lots. I have one of the original maps that we are talking about. I have 3/4 of an acre and when I b~ught my property I have ~00 frontage and 330 feet deep on one side and 318 on the other side. I have approximately 102 feet on the sound. Does this make me a special person that I have to withhold my statements and objeetions? MR. DOUGLASS: No sir. MR~ JAZWA: If I wrote a letter about this, would you state that my house sits on 3/4 of an acre and I am Objecting to someone who is short 2,000 feet. MR. DOUGLASS: I am not ~aking that as something against anything~ that anyone wants to state. I was describing the surrounding area. MR, JAZWA: I think your~atements are out of line, and I think this should be placed in the record. Every~one of those lots was laid out, and as I told you I have the original map. It was broken down ... I will look it up. I have the map at home. These lots were broken down way before the Town of Southold even thought of zoning. MR. DOUGLASS: That's right. It was called West Southo~d on the sound. MR. JAZWA: I don't remember if that was the exact title. D~yway I think you should confine your statements exactly to the letters you receive and only to that. Don't add any comments as to how big the property is that these people have their house on. MR. DOUGLASS: Well, the surrounding property sizes are what controls the moves that we make. MR.JJAZWA: You have a zoning ordinance, why don't you abide by it? If anyone wants to break down a piece of props~y from now on and they bought it after the zoning went into affect, you should abide by that. MR. DOUGLASS: No~ not necessarily. MR. JAZWA: Not,necessarily. Why do we have a zoning ordinance then? Southold spent thousands of dollars if I remember correctly it was over $25,000 to print up that thing. I went to the trouble of purchasing a copy of it because I happen to be the President of the Kenney's Beach Civic Assocation. I had a very active part trying to keep this zoning where it is, k~ep the property in good shape and Cut down on down zoning. MR. DOUGLASS: We are not do~n zoning here. They have 40,000 square feet. MR. JAZWA: 40,000 square feet is not an acre. MR. DOUGLASS: If you read your zoning book, 40,000 is a construction acre and what is required. s~U~HOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -27- July 26, 1979 MR. DOUGLASS: That is what is required under Town zoning. MR. SCHROEDER: I'm doing a lot of talking, I am at the corner of Leeton Drive and West Drive and I purchased the property. For the record it is 151. inches by 151.inches. I bought it at a given time because I was told if I did not buy it then, i% would not be a buildable lot because the Town of Southold was upping their ordinance to 200 feet by 200 feet. Is that correct~ Now, we have the Ordinance and we are going full circle. Maybe I should not have been concerned at that time. I would like to make one other statement just to get off my chest. I have been saying a lot of things here tonight, and I get the feeling that the Board has been trying to convince me that it is okay for him to do what he wants to do. I will make another statement and then I will sit down. I sit on the Board of Zoning Appeals in the Village of Floral Park in Nassau County. I have a very uncomfortable feeling tonight, because when I sit on tha5 Zoning Board, I listen, as you do for and against. I do not make any comments or try to convince anybody. We as a Board sit, discuss it among ourselves, and take a vote just as you do. I still get the very uncomfortable feeling that you are trying to convince me of something, and I don't think that is proper. MR. DOUGLASS: No, I was simply making a stat~msnt of wh~t is legal and what isn,t. MR. JAZWA: I have one more thing I would like to add° I think this thing is rigged. MR. DOUGLASS: Rigged? MR. JAZWA: I hate to say it, I believe it is rigged. MR. DOUGLASS: I think... MR. GRIGONIS: Call him out of order, Bob. MR. JAZWA: Your statements were out of order. MR. DOUGLASS: I think you are out of order, and I think you had better have proof of that. MR. JAZWA: You made a statement out of order. You listed everyone of those people's lot sizes. MR. NICHOLAS: Those three letters stated that the reasons for which they were objecting~was they did not want to have something which is different than what was the existing lot in the neighborhood. I believe your comment about how big the lots were are not only important, but if they were not brought out by you, they would have been brought out by me, because I believe these people should know how big those lots are. W~ have a lot here that is over 40,000 square feet and there is not another lot in that whole area that comes close to it. These people in the letters are objecting that we are going to alter the scheme of things. Now if you SgO~HOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -28- July 26, 1979 didn't mention the lots sizes, I would have insisted on mentioning it. The only a~tering we are doing is that we are. increasing the land that is required for an individual house. All of these people who are here today none of them have as much land for their house as these two houses will have. The crux of the situation is that once you sit on a particular place you do not want anyone else to come along. That is the essence of the situation. There is more than enough land here° There is barren land all over. None of us were born out of Pocahantaso We &l~ have a right to b~y a lot we want to and build a house with the hard work and the money we earn. MR. DOUGLASS: I think we are all getting a little bit off the beam. ~IARLES HICKEY: I am President of the Kenney's Beach Civic Association, and Mr. Nicholas when he was doing all the bragging about the size of ~e lot, I would like him to mention the size of his own lot, and compare it to what he is talking about. MR. DOUGLASS: It is probably about half the size of the lots we are talking abo~t. What is the size of your lot, Mr. Nicholas? MR. NICHOLAS: The exact same lot as Mr. Schroeder's is. 151. something by 151. something. Even my lot is not as big as my lot. In my opinion they should close up both of our lots. MR. KASSIMATIS: Being one of the principals here, there are two regulations involved: 40,000 square feet and 150 of frontage and we don't have to be here, right? That's all I wanted to hea~. MR. DOUGLASS: If there are no further questions, they have the area ~equired. I would ask for a motion to be granted with some conditions. After investigation and inspect±on the Board finds that the applicant is the owner of a parcel of land consisting of 80,026 square feet. He wishes to divide this into two lots, each of which will contain 40,013 square feet. The lot to be c~reated on Lake Drive contains 40,000 square feet and has 406 of road frontgage on Lake Drive. This lot does not re- quire a varzance. The lot which is bounded by Central Drive, a paper street, contains the 40,000 square foot requirement, but lacks 37 feet to meet the frontage requirement of 150 feet. The lots to be created are in some instances two to three times greater than the existing lots in the area. The Board agrees w'ith the reasoning of the applicant. The Board finds that strict application of the Ordinance~would produce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship; the hardship created is unique and would no~ be shared by all properties alike in the immediate vicinity of the property and in the same use district; and the variance will not change the character of the neighborhood and will observe the spirit of the Ordinance. On motion by Mr. Grigonis, seconded by Mr. Tuthill, it was RESOLVED, that Louis V. Cartelli, 13-04 146th Street, Whitestone, New SQU~HOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -29- July 26, 1979 York, be GRANTED permission to divide property with insufficient area and width. Location of property: Kenney's Road, Southold, New York, bounded on the north by Central Drive; east by Kenney's Road; south by 5a~e Drive; west by Dechiaro, upon the following conditions: (1) Board of Health Approval. (2) De~tment of Environmental Conservation inspection. (3) There will be no further subdivision of the lots created by this action. (4) Approval of Suffolk County Planning Commission. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Douglass, Grigonis, Doyen and Tuthill. An informal discussion was held with Emanueal Kontokoska and his attorney, Richard ~. Lark, concerning his application to erect a 28 unit apartment complex with 21 motel units and a coffee shop. The Board made the following requests: (1) The access road be 50 feet wide with 36 feet of it paved; (2) A map showing contours of land land at one foot intervals of the entire property; (3) a better arrangement for parking of cars in front of the apartment units. Cars should be side by side for ingress and egress. On motion by Mr. Grigonis, seconded by Mr. Tuthill, it was RESOLVED, that the next meeting of the Southold Town Board©of Appeals will be held on Thursday, August 16, 1979, at 7:30 P.M. (D.S.T.) and set the following times on that date as the time of hearing upon the following applications: 7:45 P.M. (D.S.T.) Upon application of Frank and Delores Davies, 16 Rose Court, Northport, New York (Gary F. Olsen, Esq.), for a variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100~31 and Bulk Parking Schedule for permission to divide property with insufficient area and width. Location of property: Lots No. 54, 55, and 56, Map No. 175, Tolle- wood, Mattituck, New York. 7:55 P?~. ~D.S.T.) Upon application of ~reenport United Methodist Church, Main Street, Greenport, New York, for a special exception to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-30 C6f for permission to erect an off-premises directional sign. Location of property: Corner of Sound Road and County Road 27, Greenport, New York, bounded on the north by Brandi; east by SOund Road; south by County Road 27; west by Raynor. 8:05 P.M. (D.S.T.) Upon application of Greenport United Methodist Church, Main Street, Greenport, NeW York, for a special exception to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, SeCtiOn 100-30 C6f for permission to erect - '~S~HOLD TO~ BOARD OF APPEALS -30- July 26, 1979 an off-premises directional sign. Location of property: Corner of County Ro~d 27~and Chapel Lane, Greenport, New York, bounded on the north by County Road 27; east by Shames and others; south by Price and Main Road (State Road 25); west by Chapel Lane. 8:15 P.M. (D.S.T.) Upon application of Greenport United Methodist Church, Main Str.eet, Greenport, New York, for a special exception to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-30 C6f for permission to erect an off-premises directional sign. Location of property: Main Road (State Road 25); Greenport, New York, bounded on the north by Main Road (State Road 25); east by Jurzenia; south by Reese and Sill; west by Drossoso 8:25 P.M. (D.S.T.) Upon application of Thomas F. and Margaret Mo Maher, 114 Locust Street, Garden City, New York (Robert W. Gitlispie, III~ as agent), for a variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100~31 and Bulk Parking Schedule for permission to divide property with insufficient area and width. Location of property: Leeton Drive, Southold, New York, bounded on the north by Long ISland Sound; east by Markel; south by Leeton Drive; west by Molloy. 8:35 P.M. (D.S.T.)' Upon application of William P. Riley, Smith Drive North, Southold, New York (William B. Smith, as agent), for a varianee to ~he Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-31 and Bulk Parking Schedule for permission to divide property with insufficient area and with. Location of property: Lots No. 23 through 27 inclusive, Map No. 1663, Map of Goose Neck Estates, Southold, New York. 8:45 P.M. (D.S.T.) Upon application of Long Island Oyster Farms, Inc., 2835 Skipyard Lane, East Marion, New York,-for a variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article IX, Section 100-93 for permission to erect ~n eight ~8) foot chain link fence in the rear yard area. Location of pro- perry: Shipyard Lane, East Marion, New York, bounded on the north by Cherepowich; Reeve, Bohlke, Clark, Geoghegan, Kelly and Gregory; east by Manoglu, Watt, Tsatsos, Muir, Wahrenhurg and Southold Town; so~th by Orient Harbor; west by Shipyard Lane. 8:55 P.M. (D.S.T.) Upon application of Thomas and Edith Perillo, 87 Old Country Road, Melville, New York, (Carman, Callahan, Carman & Sabino, Esq.) for a variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-31 and Bulk Parking Schedule for permission to divide property with insufficient area and width. Location of property: Great Peconic Bay Boulevard, Laurel, New York, bounded on the north by Great Peconic Bay Boulevard; east by Weglicki; south by Weglicki; west by Sidor. 9:10 P.M. (D.S.T.) Upon application of Raymond and Anna Ciacia, Main Road, Greenport, New York (James Bitses, Esq.) for a varlance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article VIII, Section 100-80 and Bulk Parking Schedule for permission to divide property with insufficient area and width. Loca- tion of property: Lots No.~157, 158, 159, and 160, Map No. 1124, Peconic Bay Estates, Greenport, New York. 9:20 P.M. (D.S.T.) Upon application of Robert and Anita Feagles, 21 Colony Road, West Hartford, Connecticut, for a variance to the Zoning Or- dinance, Article III, Section 100-31 and Bulk Parking Schedule for permis- ~ ~U~HOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -31- July 26, 1979 s~n to divide property with insufficient area and width. Location of property: Equestrian Avenue, Fishers Island, New ~ork, bounded on the north by Ocean View Avenue; east by Philipp; south by Beach Avenue; west by Equestrian Avenue. 9:35 P.M. (D.S.T.) Upon application of Herbert R. Mandel, Inlet Lane Extension, Greenport, New York (John Geideman, as agent), for a variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-31 and Bulk Parking Schedule for permission to construct an addition to a building with insufficient side yard, Location of property: Inlet Lane, Greenport, New York, bounded on the north by Clempner; east by Gull Pond; south by Conan~; ~est by Inlet Lane. 9:45 P.M. (D.S.T.) Upon application of Clifford and Mary Eginton, Deep Hole Drive, Mattituck, New York, for a variance to the Zoning Ordin- ance, Article III, Section 100-32 for permission to construct a carport in the front yard area. Location of Deep Hole Drive, Mattituck,~ ~ew York, bounded on the north by Niedoroda; east by Deep Hole Drive; south by Dohm~ west by Deep Hole Drive. 9:55 P.M. (D.S.T.) Upon application of Lim-Con Enterprises, Inco, 1455 Vets Highway, Hauppauge, New York, for a special exception to the Zoning Ordinance, Article VI, Section 100-62C2 for permission to erect a sign that exceeds the height requirements. Location of property: North- east corner of Factory Avenue and Main Road, Mattituck, New York, bounded on the north by Bethany Cemetery Association; east by Bethany Cemetery Association; south by Main Road (State Road 25); west by Factory Avenue and Ardprop, Inc. 10:05 P.M. (D.S.T.) Upon application of Armando Cappa and Ann Hocking, Main Road, Southold, New York, for a variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article VIII, Section 100-81 and Bulk Parking Schedule for permission to construct an addition to an existing building with insufficient rear yard setback. Location of property: Old Main Road ~ Southold, New ~ork,-b~unded on the north by Old Main Road; east by Reiter; south by Budd's Pond; west by Port of Egypt Enterprises. 10:15 P.M. (D.S.T.) Upon application of Emanuel M. Kontokoska, 26 Court Street, Brooklyn, New York, (Richard F. Lark, Esq.) for a special exception to the Zoning Ordinance, Article V, Section 100~50 B(3) & (4) and C(2), for permission to erect a 28 unit apartment complex with 21 motel units and a coffee shop. Location of property: Shipyard Lane, East Marion, New Y6rk, bounded on the north by Parkside Heights Co~ east by Shipyard Lane~ south by Gardiners Bay; west by Parks±de Heights Co. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Tuthill. Douglass,~r~onis,~Doye~ and The meeting was adjourned at 11:00 P.M. APPROYFD Respectfully submitted, ~Babette ¢. ¢onre7 Secretary ......................................................