Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-11/29/1990 HEARING 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 I0 I1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 STATE OF NEW YORK : COUNTY OF SUFFOLK BOARD OF APPEALS. TO~[~ OF SOUTHOLD. REGULAR MEETING Town Hall 53095 Main Road Southold; New York November 29, 1990 8:05 P..M. BEFORE: GErhARD P. GOEHRINGER, Hearing Officer 11971 RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~t Main St., Rlverhead, N.Y., 119o1 (516) 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 I1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 APPEARANCES: Charles Grigonis, Jr. Serge Doyen, Jr. James Dinizio,. Jr. Linda Kowalski o0o RAM Court Reporting Service 633 Eaat Main St. Rlver~ea~, N.Y., L~01 (516) 727-3Ib8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 HEARING OFFICER: Copin Hearing, 3977. I ask Mr. Meyerhoefer 3 We will reopen the if there is something he would like to add for the record? MR. MEYERHOEFER: Well, the neighbor had a hardship and there is nothing I would like to add to the record, just that their property is resolved and looking at the re- zoning where we are going to place our garage would be in line with the back yard of their property. It wouldn't be on a front yard basis with there property. I can't really see any hardship. Thank you. HEARING OFFICER: Thank you. Is there anybody else that would like to speak in favor of this application or like to speak against the application? MS. ONGIONI: ~es. I just have a few additional comments to make. My presentation covered most of the points last month and you have the memorandum in your file. I would just like to reiterate that the RAM Court Reporting Service 633 East Main ga., Rlvorhead, N.Y., w901 (S16! 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 4 Zoning Board to grant an area variance, practical difficulties should be proven by the applicant and I would submit to you that the applicant has not proven practical difficulties. The Courts have set forth what the criteria are for practical difficulties and it sets forth ih the memorandum that the applicant has not established that there are practical difficulties here. First of all, there are alternate locations on ~he property for this garage, The garage could be cut down in size to conform to the code. In addition, this is a self-created hardship because about 12 or 13 years ago the applicant subdivided a much larger lot. If that subdivision had not taken place, there would be more than ample space on this lot for the location of the garage and in balancing all of the tests set forth by the court in deciding whether or not an area variance is appropriate, I think that the Board's finding can only be that the practical difficulties that are required are not set forth in this application. HEARING OFFICER: I want to ask you a questio~ RAM Court Reporting Service 633 East Main St., Riverhead, N.Y., 119o1 (516) ~7-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 15 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 5 but go ahead, complete your presentation. MS. ONGIONI: That is all I have to say at this time because the law and the facts are adequately set forth in the memo. HEARING OFFICER: You are objecting to the garage in.~otal being placed in the side yard and it being placed within ten feet of the property line? MS. ONGIONI: My client objects to it being placed so that it is only this distance from the lot line. It is my client's intention that the garage could be located elsewhere so that a variance would not be required. HEARING OFFICER: My only problem is that if we were to move it farther back, we might be closer to the pond and therefore requiring a variance from freshwater. MS. ONGIONI: You might be able to move it closer to the house so that it would be within the side yard requirement and still not be too close to the pond. HEARING OFFICER: That is basically what the nature of my question was. Are you RAM Court Reporting Service 633 East MmJn St., l~lverhead, N.Y-, 11~01 (~16) 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the footage just -- MS. ONGIONI: property line. HEARING OFFICER: 6 concerned about both being the side yard and from the property line or is it to that, Kurt? MR. MEYERHOEFER: It is the footage from the Thank you very much. there anything you would like to add The only reason for filing a variance was because th~law was changed a month prior to the garage going up. The garage had been purchased. I had come down here to the building department about any were not. aware of the law. That's the only reason for the variance. Otherwise we could have put it five feet from the property line and not had it at all. The other thing, there is a tree that is rare on the east coast. If it wasn't a rare tree, I would chop it down. It's rare and it's 25 some years old. It happens to be a California Redwood. to inquire law changes and I was told there I also had a contractor who wasn't RAM Court Reporting Service 633 F.4st Mmin St., Rlverhead, N.Y., 11~Ol (S16) 71~.316e 1 2 3 4 5 6 '7 8 9 I0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 HEARING OFFICER: is indicated in red? MR. MEYERHOEFER: HEARING OFFICER: 7 That is the one that Yes. I will tell you what, I have viewed this property a month ago from the road. I did not come on site, but I will be down either this weekend or next weekend at a reasonable time. It will be in the morning on Saturday. MR. MEYERHOEFER: You are more than welcome. HEARING OFFICER: I will knock on the door and indicate my presence. MR. MEYERHOEFER: I have it staked out. HEARING OFFICER: I did see the stakes at the time from the road. As I said, I did not enter the property other than standing by an extension on the road. MS. ONGIONI: say a few words. MRS. CASSITY: I'd like to say is Mrs. Cassity would like to I am Marie Cassity and what that the Planning Board denied the building of the garage and the Redwood tree that is being referred to was a prom6tion RAM Court Reporting Service 633 ~ Mtln St., Rlverhesd, N.Y., Llg01 (516) 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 $ thing given by Fleet Lumber, 25 years ago and planted. It isn't anything of sentimental value, I should think, and it would just ruin the whole architecture of the surroundings and another question is how would they approach the garage and what would be the exit. HEARING OFFICER: We had originally asked that question of Mr. Meyerhoefer. Let me ask that again. We were talking towards the road; is MR. MEYERHOEFER: HEARING OFFICER: about placing the doors that correct? Right. You were talking at that time not taking the stanchion down by utilizing the existing driveway and transversing the front lawn? MR. MEYERHOEFER: Right. Coming right across up the front. HEARING OFFICER: I'm sorry. To answer your question -- MRS. CASSITY: I mean, right now there is no approach. There is a guard rail. HEARING OFFICER: They would not be taking RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~t M~ln fit., Rlverhemd, N.Y., LI~01 (516) 757-3168 1 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 9 that down. MRS. CASSITY: Oh, they wouldn't? HEARING OFFICER: No. MRS. CASSITY: Then how would they get in there? HEARING OFFICER: Utilizing the existing driveway going across the front lawn around the corner of the house. MRS. CASSITY: You mean on the driveway they have now? ~ HEARING OFFICER: Entering on that driveway, making the left, going around the house entering the garage. Having the doors face the road. MRS. CASSITY: I see, but there is no right of way on my property. HEARING OFFICER: No, not at all. MRS. CASSITY: I just want that understood. HEARING OFFICER: Sure. MRS. CASSITY: Thank you. HEARING OFFICER: I make a motion to close the hearing and reserve the decision. Ail those in favor say aye. BOARD MEMBERS: Aye. RAM Court Reporting Service 633 East M~ln St., Rlverhomd~ N.~l~., L~I (516) 727-3168 1 4 5 6 7 8 9 HEARING OFFICER: for the decision. 10 We will do a reinspection Thank you again for coming. (Whereupon, the above-mentioned hearing concluded at 8:15 P.M. and a brief recess was taken.) 10 11 12 13 14 IS 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 (Whereupon, after recess at 8:30 P.M., another Hearing commenced.) ~ water mark. is a 14 foot, 31 feet, approximately 33 head and I have a copy of HEARING OFFICER: There is an appeal on behalf of Janet Maloney, Appeal Number 3983. I have a copy of a sketch of a survey reduced by Roderick Vantile, dated February 11, 1972, indicating a one and a half story frame home approximately ten feet from the north easterly property line and 33 feet, 7 inches from the bulk head, which is the ordinary The nature of this application 8 inch deck by approximately feet from the bulk the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and adjoining property RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~st M~Jn St., Rlverhes4, N.Y., LI~Ol (516) 727-316~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 11 in the area. Is there someone that would like to be heard? MR. MULCAHEY: Would you state your name for the record? MR. MULCAHEY: Donald Mulcahey. I am the attorney for the applicant, Janet Maloney. I am available for any questions you may have with respect to this application. However, I would first like.~o know that the deck, which we seek a variance this evening, was constructed in 1981, so the deck is approximately nine years old. My client just recently sold the property and we are obligated, at this time, to provide the new owner with a Certificate of Occupancy, otherwise we would suffer a financial hardship. For your information, I have already received a letter of nonjurisdiction from the DEC as well as a waiver from the Town of Trustees. I would like to request at this point in time your approval of this variance. HEARING OFFICER: I want to ask you; is there~any~indication tha~ thi's .deck will be RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~st Main St., Riv~rh®ad~ N.Y., ~1~01 (516) 72';-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 enclosed in anyway? MR. MULCAHEY: Not to my knowledge. HEARING OFFICER: That would be the restriction from the Board if the variance was so granted. Thank you very much. question I have. MR. MULCAHEY: 12 That is the only Thank you. HEARING OFFICER: Is there anybody else that would like to speak in ~avor of this application? Is there anybody who would like to speak against the application? Are there any questions from Board members? If there are no further questions, I will make the motion to close the hearing reserving the decision until later. All those in favor say aye. BOARD MEMBERS: Aye. HEARING OFFICER: Thank you very much for coming in. Next we have an appeal on behalf of Phyllis Rayne Byer, Number 3981. I have a copy of the survey dated June 12, 1976 on behalf RAM Court Repor~ing Service 633 East M~ln St., Rlverhe&d, N.Y., LI~01 {516) 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 13 of ~antile P.C. indicating a lot area of approximately 10,510 square feet and I have a copy of a Suffolk County Tax Map indicating that an adjoining property in the area. Is Mrs. Byer present? She has asked for a postponement of this Hearing. Is there anybody ~hat would like to say anything concerning this application that might not be here for the January meeting? Seeing there are no hands, I will make a motion to recess this Hearing for the next regularly scheduled date. All those in favor say aye. BOARD MEMBERS: Aye. HEARING OFFICER: We will take a recess. (Whereupon, the above-mentioned hearing concluded at 8:40 P.M. and a brief recess was taken.) (Whereupon, after recess another Hearing commenced. (Continued on the next page.) at 8:45 P.M., RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~t Main St., Rlverhead, N.Y., II~Ol (!16) 727-3168 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 14 HEARING OFFICER: The next appeal we have is on behalf of John and Rose Milazzo, Number 3973. I have a copy of the survey and a site plan. The survey was produced by Roderick Vantile, P.C. It is dated October 27, 1988 and indicates a one-story framed dwelling on a variable -- actually, it is a four sided piece of property, approximately. We will refer to it as an irregular piec~ of property and we have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. Would you state your name for the record? MR. MAZZOLA: Mr. Lewis Mazzola, for the applicants, Rose and John Milazzo. As I indicated, the applicant proposes to remodel and add an addition to the existing dwelling which you see on the site plan which consists of a 512 square feet building, which is obsolete. It's smaller than what would be required as a minimum for a building today. The lot is an irregular lot with a 33 feet frontage and tapering down to the creek and RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~t Main at., Rive,head, N.Y., %%~1 ($16) 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 15 at its widest point, is about 62 feet. The applicant currently uses that residence as a summer residence only. It is not heated and it is inadequate for the size of the applicant's family. The applicants have four children. They are unable to use the premises as they now exist. They are not able to all come out to the sunnier residence all at one time. In addition, it is the applicants plan to use this residence as a retirement home eventually and it will be winterized and will eventually be more efficient heatwise than it is at this time. It is the smallest structure in the community. The increase in the size wouldn't be inconsistent with the size of the surrounding structures. It will increase the value of the neighborhood in general and in its present state, conventional financing is unavailable for a building of this sort. As you indicated, this plot has unique physical conditions. It is irregular and it gives rise to practical difficulties in complying with the area provisions for zoning. My client has obtained a negative RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~st Main St., Riverhead, N.Y., LZ~Ol (516) 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 16 declaration from the Board of Trustees and also has obtained the DEC approval for the construction and at this point, I would like to offer to the Board an affidavit prepared by John Breslin, a licensed appraiser who has looked at the property and has an affidavit which I am going to hand to the Board at this time. In addition to the negative declaration from the Board of Trustees, the DEC approval of the building permit and a letter from Paul J. Heffernan, who lives in this photograph of the a local real estate broker area. Finally, I have a existing structure taken from across the creek which I would like to offer to the Board and at this time I am going to pass that information up to the Board and introduce Mr. Sal Caradona who is the architect who prepared the site plans and the building plans, I asked Mr. Caradona to come up right now and tell the Board what he has. MR. CARADONA: Sal Caradona. What I have is a model of the adjoining sites and of RAM Court Reporting Service 633 East M~ln St., Rlverhead, N.Y., 11901 (S16) 727-316~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the'building itself. appropriate at this forward. I think of the problem. This is a little show and tell. represents the regular lot as it now 17 I think it would be time if we brought this it would clear up most This stands and what we are producing is a structure that would be this configuration. The way the house is presently situated is this configuration. I believe this iR the Baldwin's residence. this This is Casamasina and is the Milazzo's residence. The reason why I went through this elaborate display here is to show that the lot itself, being irregular as it is, is almost impossible to p~t a home.on~.it that conforms to the zoning resolutions and so what I tried to do was put on this lot a building that would just serve the Milazzo's needs and not be any larger than it had to be. In addition to that, I felt that the structure itself has a sense of play. It isn't overly bearing. It has a sense of sure and in keeping with the residences that surround it, it is not RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~t Main St., Rlverhead, N.Y., 1x~01 (516) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 18 imposing or not an encumbrance on anybody's views or anything of that nature. In that regard, I was wondering if you had any questions that I might help you with with reference to this? HEARING OFFICER: Mr. Caradona, we come back to the same problem that we have with waterfront lots and that is, again, I'll mention and I am not speaking for my colleagues. Some of them have been here for 35 years, but we are all firemen. Our concern is access to at least three sides of the house based on fire access and we must have access and it is not within the jurisdiction of my Fire District and not with Mattituck. To my left is Mr. Grigonis and he is from the Southold Fire District and Mr. Dinizio is with the Greenport Fire District. We have to have a minimum of eight feet. I notice that on the one side you have 5.7. I believe their code calls for ten. I would not be in favor of this application unless I can see at least eight feet on that side which would mean you would have to cut the house down. RAM Court Reporting Service 633 Eaot Msln St., Rlverhead, N.Y., la~Ol (516) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 19 MR. CARADONA: We will cut the house down or move it over. Again, the house is designed around the needs of the Milazzo's and their children. As a matter of fact, there are three bedrooms in all and you know at the present time as it stands, it's smaller than they would have like it. HEARING OFFICER: What'is the actual increase in square footage? MR. MAZZOLA: It is 512 to 2~034. It's approximately a 1500 square foot increase. HEARING OFFICER: It is two floors? MR. CARADONA: Yes. HEARING OFFICER: Your anticipation would be to move it over closer to the southeast? MR. CARADONA: Exactly. Just slide it over and that actually would be one or 2.3 feet. HEARING OFFICER: of the house is what? MR. CARADONA: MR. MAZZOLA: The approximate width It is like 26? Yes. I would like to address myself to one other point. I have a letter here from Mr. McLaughlin who represents an RAM Court Reporting Service 633 East Main St., l~iverhemd, N.Y., LI~Ol {516) 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 adjoining owner to the i~nediate north, Baldwin's and I would only like myself to the last paragraph of 20 the to address the letter which he indicates that he expressed his concern for the Baldwin's, but no remedial action was taken. I will ask my client to come up here and relay the conversation that he had with Mr. Baldwin wherein he told Mr. Baldwin that he had an architect that was designing the plans for him and that he should contact the architect and the architect would be happy to work with him in any way to alleviate his concern. Apparently, Mr. Baldwin didn't choose to do that and only came to the hearing at this time. So at this time, I would like to ask Mr. Baldwin to come up and he will explain to you what occurred at that time with the Board. MR. MILAZZO: My name is John Milazzo. Back in the winter of ~89/90 my wife and I came out one day. We don't live too far away. We live in Hauppauge. We have been property owners in the Town of Southold since approximately RAM Court Reporting Service 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 21 1970. We have property in the Village of Greenport on Bay Avenue, so we have come to like this community and come out whenever we can. One of the problems is, as the attorney mentioned before, we have some difficulties because we can't bring our kids. Our kids have grown. They're of different sexes. There is simply no space in this house for any privacy, so we end up coming out a lot of times, just the two of us for th~ day. Any way, last winter we came out and our neighbor, Mr. Baldwin, invited us into his house to observe something and while we were inside, he went outside and I wasn't aware of what he was doing, glasses. Apparently, some indication that perhaps my lack of he was going to show the new site lines for the house would impede his view in some way. In all fairness, I didn't see what the argument was, but it may have been my eyes what he was pointing to. At that time I went back immediately and I told him I have been involved with Civic matters. I have been president of the RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~t Msln St., Rlverhemd, N.Y, 119o1 (S16) ';1'~-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 22 Civic Association for maybe 15, 20 years. I've had extensive dealings with people like Mike LoGrande, the supervisor of the Town of Islip, the County Executive and Superintendent Jones. So I have been in front of Boards for many, many years and I know the general gist of the argument, et cetera. So I pointed out to Mr. Baldwin, I appreciated his concern even though I didn't know what it was and I really would appreciate if he talked to my architect because I hired an architect for that very reason. I didn't want to get into a debate I was going to live there in this community and I had an architect who had a nice personality as well as a flair to design and I certainly recognized things could be done in terms of movement. At the same token, I didn't want to get into the situation where I would push the house from one side and push it to somebody on the other side. There are two neighbors involved here and I had to treat each of them equally. Another concern that I had was at the time when we were designing this house, the RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~t M~in St., Rlvorhead, N.Y., 11~Ol (3161 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 23 major concern had been conveyed to me by some neighbor, a Mr. Mulholland who lives directly across the creek on this side, who shares with me, by the way, the creek bottom. The creek bottom is shared between myself and Mr. Mulholland at this point. At one time, by the way, this was dredged here to allow those homes here to become Waterfront. There were not normally waterfront and they now are. In fact, Mr. Mulholland indicate~ to me that there has still been some litigation about some dredging going on in there in terms of who owns the soil, but aside that the, Mr. Mulholland indicated he is an attorney, by the way, that in the last two or three years, built an extensive renovation to this house. He indicated to me that the DEC would be a real problem. The town was ameniable and recognized the need for improving the tax base et cetera, but he conceived a problem and said we should be With all of this of not wanting to get of the neighbors very careful. in mind, I was cognizant into a contest with any and I invited Mr. Baldwin RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~at Msin St., Rlverhomd, N.Y., 11901 ($16) 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 24 to speak to the other neighbors and in turn to speak to our architect who was more than willing to speak to him. I immediately went home that day and called him and said, speak to him, contact him, et cetera, least be receptive to a phone call. They know who you are. They may call you. He assured me he would certainly talk to them. please or at He had no problem. I had spoken to him since then, again, no problem. However~ Mr. Baldwin has not chosen to speak to him. That is number one. In that same letter, by the way, this letter that Mr. Mazzola refers to, apparently was dated the 27th, I think, of November, a day or so ago. There were a couple of comments made there that I'd like to address and if I can, I would like to misunderstood something It is not a requirement. question you. Maybe I about this requirement. HEARING OFFICER: MR. MILAZZO: A desire. HEARING OFFICER: Yes. MR. MILAZZO: In that letter, two phrases. One of them is, the attorney "Currently uses RAM Court Reporting Service b33 East bisln st., Rlverh.ad, N.Y., 11901 (S16) 727-3168 ( ( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 25 the view is not substantially restricted," and later on he uses the phrase, "The proposed house would drastically impair my client's view." I would like to show you something. We took a picture. My wife is has professional qualifications field and amongst other things, an artist and in the art is an artist in photography. So she took a photograph and I believe you have this photograph and if I can, I would just like to point o~t something on it because you have to look. This is not quite what it should be, but there is a tree stump here. This is the tree stump and there are two trees here that have died here in the last year or two. These were pine trees of fair height. The point being that this view certainly to say, this point here, was obstructed by these trees. If you look at that card the way I have imposed it on this picture, you have dropped this down something like this. This line is further to the right, that is towards the Baldwin's house than those trees were. So I really question, number one, this first point, that the view is substantially -- that the view RAM Court Reporting Service 639 E~st Main St., Riverhead, N.Y., L~9Ol (S'g6) 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 '7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 15 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 in the past was unrestricted and now is restricted and, indeed, this new house would So I really wish you would take a do that. look at that. Another thing, if you could please go through this business about the fire department for me? I would like to hear the argument. HEARING OFFICER: The argument is that we require access on waterfront ~or at least the rear yard area. You are, in fact, closing up the rear yard or the side yard area to the south with a .deck. In the past, we have asked people to construct break away'decks, decks that could be pulled away by fire apparatus. In this particular case, however, you must be aware that the normal fire truck is at least 8% feet wide and 10 feet wide with the apparatus that is hanging off both sides. It would not be within my~pa~ticular opinion to grant this variance at 5.7 feet for that particular reason. We have allow access to the rear' yards so as on neighbors' property even for emergency come to not to go RAM Court Reporting 8ervlee 633 East Main St., Rlvarhaad, N.Y., 11901 ($16} 727-3168 ! 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 27 purposes, for normal work in the rear yard area which would require maybe ~ccess in years to come. I have no idea about the sewer system. A bulk head may have to be repaired. Whatever the case may be, that is basically the reason we have had in the past interesting, very interesting areas. I have slides. I teach a class at SUNY on zoning and fundamentals. We have required people, because of hardship that had to close up side yards, to actually construct doors on both sides of their garage so that fire can be fought through the garage and that presently exists on Carol Road in Southold, which is over on the south side. MR. MILAZZO: If we were to make provisions for that, if we came up with something? HEARING OFFICER: In my opinion. MR. MILAZZO: What department do you teach in? HEARING OFFICER: in CED. MR. MILAZZO: I'm in mechanical engineering there so we are neighbors. Thank you. RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~st Main St., Rlvorhead~ N.Y., ll~l (516} 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 $ 9 10 I1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 28 MR. 14AZZOLA: My client ~ ~ available for any additional question~ However, I just asked 3~.. C~radona and he assures me that we can ~ia~ ~e ~ouse so we can have an eight foo~ si~ ~a~d on that side. HEARING OFFICER: Tha~ We are not used to these pr~sen~io~s. Thank you very much. It's very, ~e~p Is there anybody else ~%~% %~o~ld like to speak in favor of this Yes, sir. for the record. MR. HEANY: %$ould you sta%e~ ~m~~ name My name is Se~m~r~ ~eany and i've been a friend of J~hu~ a~ ARose for about 15, 18 years. I know ~h~ p>=~erty. In fact, I'm surprised that he ~i~'~t ask you to maybe back fill to the ~le of his land which would fill in half o~ %b~t lagoon in front of it and he might ka~.~ ~'~ter access to his property. As far as the view, I =~em~r the pine trees that John is talking ~m~- I had forgotten about them until k~ ~m~t mentioned RAM Court R~porting 653 E~t M~ln ~t., Rlv~rh~&d, N.Y., 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 29 them and i didn't know that John had to give an encumbrance upon his property to someone, to either neighbor, so they could have a view. I thought he owned this property. Maybe I'm mistaken. John loves the water. He likes to clam. He went clamming this year for the first time. So you know what that's about. The property, as stated was too small for the family and he told me right from ~he beginning when he proposed this that he would be willing to switch it, but he thought that the Zoning Board wanted him to stay in the configuration of the property as opposed to the house and that is the reason why I think the architect was asked to design it the way the house set on the property. So I don't think he is trying to hinder the neighbors. He is trying to work within the frame work of the neighborhood. Thank you. HEARING OFFICER: Thank you, Mr. Heany. Is there anybody else that would like to speak in favor? Anybody like to speak against? RAM Court Reporting Service 633 Eut Main St., Riverhemd, N.Y., LI~01 (S16) 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 3O MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Kevin McLaughlin, 828 Palm Street, Greenport, New York, on behalf of the adjoining neighbor, Mr. Baldwin. Basically, there is, I guess, four different area variances that are being requested here. As the Board I'm sure is well aware, the criteria for an area variance is practical difficulties and further, I'm sure the Board is aware that the Courts have set forth certain criteria that the Board is supposed to consider in determining what practical difficulties they mean in any individual case. There is basically a five part test. The first part being how substantial the variance is the requirements in the in our particular case, in relation to Zoning Ordinance and there are two side yard setbacks, one of which is 10 feet and one of which is 15 feet taking as far as the setback from the Baldwin's side being the lesser of the two, being 10 feet. The proposal for this Board is 5.7 feet which is basically a 53% reduction in what the Zoning Ordinance calls for and I would submit to the Board that, RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~t Mmln St., l~iverhe&d, N.Y., 11~1 (S16) 727-316~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 31 in fact, is a very substantial variance in relation to what the requirement is. The second criteria is if the variance is allowed, what the effect of increased population density would have on available governmental facilities. This is really not, I don't think, a terribly strong argument on that point other than what has been brought up regarding fire safety. The third criteria is whethe~ or not substantial change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a substantial detriment to adjoining property owners. I would submit to the Board that both those things would occur. While there are houses in the neighborhood of substantially similar or even in some cases slightly larger proportions than this house, none of which, I don't believe, are located on lots of this type of configuration. When the Milazzo's purchased this property, I'm sure that they were aware or by law should have been aware of what the zoning requirements are. There was a very small cottage on the property and the fact is that when they purchased RAM Court Reporting Service Main ~Jt., Riverheed, N.Y., ~zqaz (S1~) 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the property, the same. that time, 32 the zoning requirements were So they would have had to know at that to build a house on the scale that they are proposing in this application, there was going to have to be variances granted. So to a certain degree, I think that is a self imposed hardship. The substantial change in the neighborhood I think would be setting a precedent in that you are allowing a very substantial house on a very narrow lot and if it is allowed here, I think there can be an argument that it should be allowed on other lots. I know it is not binding, but I think it certainly does set a precedence. A substantial detriment to the adjoining property owners with all due respect, to pine trees, I think that a building of this size and scope that is illustrated before you tonight, is a much more difficult thing to see through than a pine tree if you ~are attempting to take a look at the water view. I am not suggesting that there are necessarily legal rights to these water views, but I think the Board certainly has the discretion to RAM Court Reporting Serviee 633 E~t Main St., Rivarhaad, N.Y. 11901 (516} 72';-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 33 take into consideration what impact a building of this scale is going to have on the adjoining property owners and that is certainly going to be a substantial impediment to the view of the creek. There was proposed building is of the old building. some mention made that the in the same basic footprint That is totally untrue. ~hile the northwest corner of the proposed building coincides with the northwest corner of the existing building, the existing building runs at a very market angle away from my client's property line. The proposed building runs basically parallel with the property line at 5.7 feet. It's a two story rather than a one story structure. So I think it's very easy to see that this is going to much more severely restrict my client's view and enjoyment of the water front. The next criteria is whether the difficulties can be obviated by some method feasible for the applicant to pursue other than a variance. I think there are two possibilities here. One, I have submitted a RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~t M~in ~t., Rlv~rh~ad, N.Y., 11~01 (516J 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 34 letter to the Board along with a reduced size copy of the site plans in which I have turned the building at an angle similar to the angle of the existing property or the existing building. I think if that were done, at least we would have a substantial side yard as we are getting closer to the water and would do much less in restricting my client's use and enjoyment of this water view. The second obvious possibility is to scale down the size of the house. Well I certainly have no reason to want to impede the Milazzo's from having their family out here, you are going from a 500 square foot building basically up to a $2,000 square foot building and maybe there is some medium point in there where they can reasonable enjoy their property without putting such a substantial structure on such a narrow lot. Then the final requirement criteria for you to look at is the view of the manner in which the difficulty arose and consideration of all the above factors, the interest of justice will be served by not allowing the RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~t M~ln St., Riv~rhemd, N.Y., 11901 ~516} 727-316~ 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 5 variance. Again, at the time of the purchase of the property, the zoning requirements were the same. They're deemed to know what those zoning requirements are and I think if you take all of the factors into consideration the proposal is just not fair or not just to the adjacent property owners. They're right on top of the property line. They're asking to build on a straight line, parallel to the property li-ne with my client's property and all these factors really place a very strong burden on my client. In addition to the loss of water view, of course there is loss of privacy to some degree an addition to the problem with the possibility of the access for fire, there is the problem of simple repair and maintenance on the house. If the building is located that close to the property line, it may be necessary for them to encroach repeatedly onto the Baldwin's property in order to do relatively routine maintenance and repairs on that side of the house. I think that is something that should be taken into consideration RAM Court Reporting Service 633 East Main St., Rlvorhead, N.Y., I1~01 (il6) 7:Z7-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 by Mr. to of past. Thank you. MR. BALDWIN: 1045 Island View Lane, like to address myself 36 this Board. At this time I would like to have ~aldwin come up and make some remarks the Board and perhaps to give his version some of the events that have occurred in the I am George Baldwin from Greenport. I would to Mr. Mi~azzo with reference to conversation that we had. This conversation, by the way, I remember the conversation and it was after many others. Mr. Milazzo had indicated last year that he wanted to -- that he was planning to change his house and.to put a second story on it. My concern at that time was the -- was not the view that I'm concerned with here today. It was the view over the top of this house. In the winter time we enjoy a view of the sunrise over Mr. Milazzo's house. If he puts a second story up, we will be deprived of that view. I feel for us to complain about that would be unreasonable. I feel that I would RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~t M~in St., Rlverhemd~ N.Y., 11~ol (S16) 7~';-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 37 have to give that up because you can see it's a nice looking house and I felt that would be a trade off. The first time we spoke of the view on the side was when I questioned him as to where the location would be. questioned Mr. Milazzo~several times prior to this and he said he didn't have the plans and he would give me an opportunity to take a look at the plans when they were first available. When I saw that he had put stakes out, I asked him what the -- where the house would be located and he said and I quote him, "You'll see this map I made." And it had strings attached to it. I stood there and looked at it and I evaluated it for a week and realized it would take away my view not only of the bay, but of Shelter Island Heights. It would completely close me out. The way things are today, I can sit in my back Heights. A week after this the Milazzo's were Out into my family room and I showed family room and look at Shelter Island particular conversation, again and I invited them them. I held RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E4mt Main St., Rlvorhead~ N.Y., 11901 (S16) 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 38 a long pole up at the location where the corner of the house would be, the one that is closest to the creek. I said, "What you see to the left is what I would see. That's what I would be able to see. I would be able to see across the creek and over into my neighbor's yard, Mulholland. To the right is what I will be deprived of." His response was that he was acquainted with these things and maybe when we have a Hearing we could work something out, that we could change things around. The next conversation and this is the conversation that Mr. Milazzo refers to was after I had received the notice in the mail, the notice. The first notice in the mail was dated July 12th of this year and I said, " I received the notice and there is no change in that, John, it's the same way." He said, "Is that right? I didn't know you got it. I didn't know I gave Mr. Caradona the authority to deal without me and I didn't know that he had sent it out." He said, "But I did tell him to call you," and he indicated that RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~t Mnin St., Rlvorhead, N.Y., 11901 (516) 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 he would direct him to call me. conversation as I remember it and I the way it occurred. I have been open day one. I don't know why Mr. not responded to my request. 39 That's the feel that's to acco~aodation from Milazzo has I wouldn't be here if he had responded to my request. He talks about the trees that Qere blocking the view that have since died. Those trees, they did not disrupt my view of Shelter Island. They did take away some of the view of the bay, but did not disrupt my view of Shelter Island. I have written a letter to the Board and I would like to submit it. What I did, I looked at the application and I challenged those parts of the application that I feel are not accurate. I would like at this point to submit this letter to you (%~hereupon, letter was handed to the Hearing Officer.) HEARING OFFICER: Thank you, Mr. Baldwin. Do you have anything else, anything you would like to say in rebuttal? Is there somebody else that would like to speak in this RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~t Mmin St., Rlverhemd~ N.Y., 11~1 (fi6) 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 I0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 case? MR. 40 CASA~SINA: My name is Nicholas Casamasina and I live to the right of this house. Now I see a big house going up next to me and i have a small cottage 15 feet away. I have no privacy, nothing left if this variance is granted. That's why I put an objection to this size building. I think you should take that into consideration. HEARING OFFICER: Thank you,~sir. MR. MAZZOLA: I would like to address myself to the factors that Mr. McLaughlin mentioned that the Board~should~ake~ into consideration. Nun~er one, how substantial the variance is in relation to the requirement. Well, Mr. Caradona has told you he designed the house for the requirements of the Milazzos. They have four children. The requirement is not any greater than what they need. In other words, it's the absolute minimum that they would need in order to accommodate the family. So, in terms of how substantial is in relation to the requirement, I believe that's been adequately addressed by Mr. Caradona. RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~t Main ~., Rlverhomd, N.Y., 11901 (516) 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 41 The next that the variance would have in the increased population and density and on available government facilities. As a matter of fact, the Milazzos would not be residing there on a full-time basis with three children there all of the time or four children there all of the time. They're out here mostly on weekends and when they do take up residency as retired folks, the children will not be living with,~hem full-time. It's a part-time matter in terms of the size of the population. I don't think this is an area that couldn't handle a few more people coming out on a weekend or on a casual basis from time to time. So I think the argument about the population is not one the Board should take into consideration. The other factor was whether a substantial change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a substantial detriment to the adjoining property. Well, you have a letter from Mr. Heffernan, which indicates he is a local real estate broker who lives in the area. He has indicated many of the houses in this RAM Court Reporting Service 633 East Main St., Riverhead, N.Y., 11901 (516} 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 area have been renovated, to be used as full-time residences, year residences and certainly a building like is going to do nothing but improve the value of the other houses in this neighborhood not- withstanding the objection of two neighbors. In terms of the size of the house, if you look out the Baldwin's house, it's probably a third larger than the Milazzo's plan~ to put on there. Admittedly, it's on a larger piece of property, but it is not out of place and it's in the character of the neighborhood. Even the design fits the character of the neighborhood. It's a design that Mr. Caradona said which fits in. You can't do anything to the rest of the neighborhood. Again, notwithstanding the complaints of the two neighbors, but it will increase the value of the neighborhood in general and again, that point is addressed by Mr. Brezlin in his affidavit that I handed to you. The factor of whether or not this could be obviated by some other method, my client is 42 have been renovated 'round this RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E4~t Main St., Riverhemd, N.Y., 119o1 (~16) 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 willin~ take Mr. He is willing to turn the house slightly. is willing to move the house over a little further as you suggested yourself, but in any case, no matter what he does there, he has a practical difficulty. He meets the practical difficulty tests Which the cases address themselves to for this particular parcel. It's an irregular shape.piece of parcel. There is not much else he can do with it. He cannot move it back any further. He will further violate side yards and he can't go any further closer to the bulk head because if he comes to close to the water, then he will violate whatever the DEC rules are. He has got to be basically in that spot. As hardship, again, that is have addressed themselves an area variance, significant as Mr. may be more significant to a use variance 43 to realign the house in order to Baldwin's concerns into consideration. He far as the argument about self-imposed something the courts to and in terms of I .don't think it's as McLaughlin indicates. It RAM Court Reporting ~rvic~ 633 Ea4t M~ln St., Riv~rh~ad, N.Y., 11~I {~16) 7~7-316~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 44 and the courts say that it is more significant to a ~se variance, ~but an area variance, I don't think the Board should take into consideration the fact that this may be a self-imposed hardship. In terms of whether it is a self-imposed hardship, my client, prior to purchasing this property, called somebody in the town and asked whether or not it could be expanded. Now this is many years ago but she was told that it could be and, in fact, that's been their plan all along. ~hen they ~bought it, they realized, obviously, it was too small. Again, I don't think this is something that the Board should take into consideration as a deciding factor and whether or not to grant or deny this application. I realize the Board has sort of a balancing act to do, but in terms of whether or not my applicant is willing to accon%modate the neighbors in the best way he can, he is willing to do that and his architect has indicated he is willing to do that. He is willing to take into consideration your objection about access for fire apparatus and RAM Court Reporting Service 655 East M~in St., Rivorhead, N.Y., LI~01 (516} 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 45 he will move the house over. Again, that may impair Mr. Casamasina's enjoyment somewhat, but I don't think anymore than the way it is now. In other words, by moving over another · two feet, Mr. Casamasina is not going to lose any additional privacy. I think the Board should grant the application based on that~ HEARING OFFICER: Before you sit down, you have no specific objection as to scheduling the house paralleling it to the south property line? MR. MAZZOLA: No HEARING OFFICER: objection to that. Do you have any objection to asking your architect to show us the footprints looking like that and allowing us to place it basically eight feet at its closest point to the Baldwin property and then showing it~ parallel? MR. MAZZOLA: They have no objection to He will be able to provide you with that. that. HEARING OFFICER: Bearing that in mind, then what I will do is recess this Hearing to our regularly scheduled meeting which is RAM Court Reporting Service &35 E~t M~ln St., Rlv~rh~md, N.Y., I~I (516} 7~7-31~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 46 December 13th at which time we would hope we could have that before us so we could start deliberating on that particular matter and close the Hearing on that date. So it is approximately two weeks from tonight. It does not have to be a terribly formal thing as specific as the site plan, but something we can use as a working model. Thank you. Yes, Mr. Casamasina? ~ MR. CASAMASINA: I object to that because you are bringing the house 13 feet away from my property, two floors up and it isn't like they show it there. You don't see my house there at all. So, if you actually see the situation, that's what I'd like the Board to know. HEARING OFFICER: I was there. I know this piece and I was there and I will be back. After we get the actual thing from the architect, the actual footprints, will look at it prior We I will be back and we to making the decision. are just going to close the Hearing -- MR. CAS~4ASINA: What happens to the people RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~t M&in St., Rlverhemd, N.Y., LI~I (516) 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 move to Florida for the winter? HEARING OFFICER: You can leave us 47 your address or you can give afford you a copy of that. for Florida prior to that? us a call and we will Will you be leaving MR. CAS~SINA: I figure by January 1st. HEARING OFFICER: Okay. Leave us your address or give us a call on the 14th which is approximately two weeks from tomorrow and we will send you a copy of this ~nd if need be, we will meet'you there. I have no problem with meeting you there as long as it is on a Saturday. We are not here to cause anybody a hardship. We are here trying in our best possible way to get everybody in one specific unified type body which is sometimes very, very difficult. I should point out for the record, in years g~ne by, we did send people out in the hall and tried to get them to work out these things and so on and so forth and we almost had a fist fight one time so we do not do that anymore, but we will do the best we possible can and we thank you very much. RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~t Main St., Rlverhead, N.Y., I~1 (516) 717-31~8 ,( 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 I0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Ic) 20 21 22 23 24 25 48 MR. CAS~4ASINA: Let's have them make a smaller house. That's all. HEARING OFFICER: That may very well be the case in the situation. We don't know at this point. Thank you. Would you state your name for the record? MRS. MILAZZO: Rose Milazzo. I just want to mention one thing. Our neighbors to the right and our neighbors to the left are each from a residence. We are speaking about a house which would be used as a full-time house. They bulk winter in Florida and prior to purchasing -- this little piece of land was purchased about five years ago and before we could purchase it, we had four children then just as we do now. I called the Town to find out if there was a possibility we could enlarge that house and they said of course. We would work with you. They gave us great assurance they would be able to do something which would accommodate our children. Interestingly enough, the seed for the two story house came from our neighbor to the RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~t M~ln St., RIv~rhemd, N.Y., LI~I (516) 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 $ 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 49 left who said that one of the children were interested in purchasing that particular piece of land to build a two story house because really the property was so narrow, there was nothing else you could do with it. That's when we started to think that's a very good idea. We will consider a two story house. We suggested this to Mr. Caradona when he was working on these plans. The house currently sits 5.7 feet away. It is now at that distance. What we tried to do is accommodate the neighbors. Our neighbors to the left are quite a distance behind us. The neighbor to the right is adjacent to us. Therefore, the side yard on his side remains rather large so that we wouldn't infringe on his privacy. We have a photograph, a Xerox of the photograph, which I took that indicates that everything has waterfront property -- water view. Possibly losing two degrees of water view should not be so significant as to keep someone from moving to a place that they really love and I really would appreciate if you would consider all these RAM Court Reporting ~ervice 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 5O things when you make your decision. HEARING OFFICER: Before you sit down, my only question that I did not ask, maybe you can answer; how high is the ground water? Are you anticipating a basement in this house at all? MRS. MILAZZO: No. HEARING OFFICER: Thank you very much. MR. CARADONA: If I may address Mr. Casamasina with reference to ~he size of the building, it's a 26 foot wide building. I think that by any standard is not a large building and in addition to that, the side yard requirement as of right now is 15 feet and in addition, 10 feet on the other side. The other side is impossible to get. As far as Mr. Casamasina is concerned, we are complying with that regulation inasmuch as we are trying to stay as close to the 15 feet as we possibly can. That is really not an objection to the addressed. HEARING OFFICER: Mr. Caradona, we had in the past asked people to construct some sort of expansion. In this particular case, RAM Court Reporting Service 633 East M'tn lt., Rlverhosd~ N.Y., 11901 (516) 72';-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 51 it could be something as small as a two by four attached to the present dwelling to give us a height of what the ~able end is going to be on that particular structure. Is that going to be a problem? I realize it would have to be erected. Is there a problem? Could you do that for us? MR. MAZZOLA: my client. HEARING OFFICER: I will have to speak with I will probably be going there on the 15th of December. So if there is some possibility of doing that for us, it would be helpful. Just nothing more than a 14 foot 2 by 4 or whatever the situation, some- thing that can be supported, something that will not fall or will not hurt anybody or that will not roll over. MR. MILAZZO: I think it's possible. HEARING OFFICER: If it is possible. We thank you so much. MR. MCLAUGHLIN: I just want to set the record straight on a couple of things. One is that my clients are year 'round residents, not sun%mer residents, there all the time. RAM Court Reporting Service 633 ~ Main St., Rlverhead, N.Y., 11~I (516) 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 91 22 23 94 25 52 The second thing, I'm sure the Board understands, I just want to reiterate for the record, it is not the same side yard that we are talking about as presently exists except at the northwest corner of the building. The third point is; all their arguments are premised on the fact that the house has to be this large. With all due respect to children and everything, perhaps this lot just isn't wide enough to accommodate the size building that they're talking about and I think the Board ought to take a serious look at that in determining whether or not whatever square footage there is on the first floor and use as necessary. Thank you. If there are no further comments, I make a motion to recessing this Hearing. This is completing the Hearing until or additional verbatim portion of this the receipt of new footprints footprints from the architect on or before December 13th so that we might go down and reinspect the premises on December 15th. I will offer that as a resolution, RAM Court Reporting Service 633 East Main St., Riverhead, N.Y., 11901 (916) 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 gentlemen. Ail those in favor say aye. BOARD MEMBERS: Aye. HEARING OFFICER: for your courtesy and 53 Thank you very much for coming in. 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 (Whereupon, the above-mentioned Hearing concluded at 9:45 P.M. and at 9:50 P.M. another Hearing commenced.) HEARING OFFICER: We would lfke to reopen the Hearing at this time of Dominick Sblendido and Auricchio, Number 3955. Would you like to state something for the record? MR. CARNELLI: Yes. as quickly as I can the remarks that I had begun on the last Hearing and I understand that Mr. Victor La Sarde is here. One of the three reasons for the extension to the November 1st date was to speak to Mr. La Sarde. The purpose as I understand the adjournment to November 1st, was to provide additional information to the Board as requested by the Board, specifically the Wilmott case decision which I entered last I would like to complete RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~t MaI~ St., Rlverhead, N.Y., 119~1 (516) 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 54 time which I would ask ~he Board to very carefully look at not just the determination which, of course, goes our way, but also the technique of looking at the definition of the one family dwelling, definition of family and then concluding as to the Riverhead Town or neighboring town that there is nothing about eating arrangements f~or kitchen in either definition and hence, one or two kitchens is irrelevant to the d~termination of a one family dwelling. As I now know, you have inspected the property as a Board. That was one of the other items of information, so I'm sure you are familiar with the layout as well as its plans. The information you requested about the square footage of the stoop area and the interrelationship of the kitchen and the great room as shown on the second set of plans I know is now available to you because you have seen the place. The second purpose of the three of the extension as I understand it, was to obtain the presence of Mr. La Sarde for inquiry from the Board and to confirm, for RAM Cou~t Reporting $~rvlc~ 6~3 E~t M~i~ St., Rlv~rh~d, N.Y., 11~4~1 ~516} 7~-316~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 55 my purposes at least, the sequence of events related by me on behalf of the Petitioner to the Board at the Hearing pride of November 1st about how we came to be before this Board and specifically, about those issues which concerned Mr. ~ in his Notice of Disapproval and in his June 1st stop work order. They were clearly defined, and, in fact, I believe I offered it the last time, a letter that I had sent to Mr. La Sarde on October 2hd which indicated that as the matter had been extensively delayed since the Notice of May 29th, letter of disapproval, since my clients were anxious to get going on this work before the cold weather sets in, they were planning removing, pending final decision of the Board, the plumbing pipes from the wall of the great room in order to have the stop work order lifted. Even at that time, Victor indicated that was, in fact, the problem here, that it stopped the work in May and has been stopping it for the last five months, that he was concerned that the piping in the great room, which we had indicated would be used for RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~t Main it., Rlverhead, N.Y., 119o1 ~516) 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 56 a wet bar and that might be converted to a kitchen, but that if we took the piping out, the stop work order would be listed. The final purpose, as I understand, the extension was to allow me to review and reply to the memo, supplemental memo and subsequent letter 10/22/90 of Ms. Ongioni, which quoted a number of cases and I think you have the text of the cases in regard to that. indicated last time I don't want~to beat this particular area to death in light of time and other factors, but Ms. Ongioni, on behalf of the neighbor told or asked that you consider their opposition as an application to revoke this permit, declare this two family with or without a kitchen and essentially tear down half of the house. I don't think you are going to do that. I have offered to you the position that under the applicable statutes, which interestingly enough, we both quote, State Law and Town Law under 100-271 of the Town Law. I don't think you have the authority to revoke the permit. I think the purpose RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~t Main St., Riverhemd, N.Y., L~Ol (516) 7:Z7-3168 ! 3 5 7 10 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 of this ZBA Hearing, Hearing by bringing the petition, the Notice of Disapproval and to 57 since we commenced the is to review give us the interpretation we sought in regard to the second kitchen and give us the determination on the front yard variance and I pointed out further that, yes, the neighbor could have brought a petition to you, but if she had brought a petition to you, the burden of proof would have been on her, whereas here it is on me to convince you I'm entitled to a variance and also to ask you for this interpretation favorable to us. You can't piggyback, as I said, the two applications. Either she brings it or I bring it. Since I'm bringing it, it is find in the petition. at that. There for the purposes to I'm going to leave it is a number of cases on it, but I think I'll leave that for you and the Town Attorney. In any event, I'll be brief. Even if you had the authority, you can't revoke a permit that was legally granted in the first place. It is our position now and it has been RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~t Main St., Rlverhead, N.Y., 11~Ol [516) 727-31~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 I0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 58 our position that every single argument which has been advanced for the premise or the principal that we have an illegally issued permit is not valid. Just to review the ones that I recall, first we were told the lot coverage was excessive. That was dismissed. The lot coverage is not excessive. It's 13.5. It can be as much as 20% with the new house or expanded house. Second, we were told watch out for the wet land violations. I handed up to you last session an indication that there is 300 feet Ms. Ongioni speaks of, has following a series of exceptions one of which is a manmade structure more than 50 feet in width which is the definition of the road which is intervening between the water and our premises. Again, sure there is 300 feet in there, but there is also an exception. The exception essentially occurs from the exhibit I gave you right after the 300 feet. So I submitted to you to show you that that is also not accurate. The bed area was the contention that we RAM Court Reporting Service 633 Ernst Main St., Riverhead, N.Y., L1~oI (516) 7~7-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 I0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 59 need a front or rear or side yard variance because of the expansion. That is simply not true. Interestingly enough, again, we quote 100-242 of your code. She quotes the same thing. You have to read it. What it says, as I understand it, is if a non-conforming dwelling is expanded as long as the degree of conformance is not increased, there is no problem. It isn't. We built no further front, nor any further back, nor~anywhere near the side lines. The only thing that expanded further is the stoop and we are speaking here, as you know, an area variance for the stoop only. In regard to that area for the variance for the stoop, I would point out that we are seeking on interpretation an area variance. We have not now nor do we ever seek a use variance and I saw the Board for, finally, the notice for this meeting, getting the issues correctly stated in the notice and an interpretation is requested regarding a second kitchen facility and its relation to single family versus two family use and a variance for an addition with an insufficient RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~t Main St., Riverhomd, N.Y., LI~I (516~ 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 60 front yard set back with the stoop. That is what we seek. That is not a use variance, small area variance for a stoop only and for an interpretation. In regard to the argument to the area variance, we are arguing that there is an unnecessary hardship which would result if you did not give it and practical difficulty requires you to give it and the summation of those arguments is that this is a preexisting, nonconforming smaller lot. The neighboring pieces is an 18 feet set back which is what we seek and we seek it for a stoop, not for a building line. The average within the 300 feet is 26 feet. Our house is 27 on one end and 30 on the other and back. So the only thing that would exceed that would be the surrounding stoop entrance area. The area that we are in, what we seek is consistent with that area as evidenced by a series of photographs that I will submit with our comments and let you review. I am pretty sure you are familiar with this area because you have been over there and I believe that makes the RAM Court Reporting Service 633 East Main St., Riv~rhaad, N.Y., 11~I (516) 727-316~ f 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 lO 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 61 case for practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship and consistency with community standards. In regard to the arguments that are advanced through Ms. Ongioni, as to bad faith, self-imposed hardship, I think that you don't believe that and I think it is not credible in light of the facts. If anything, there has been complete good faith on behalf of these individuals, but with a little mo~e light, they probably would not have had the problems they had. They certainly have made good faith attempts as I think Mr. La Sarde will attest to to comply. They applied twice and got approvals twice per plans submitted. The final comment I would like to make is in regard to the cases that are in the supplemental brief and in the letter, I do not think the cases are correctly summarized or correctly characterized. I cannot stand here and make a three hour argument because I would suggest you take it up with the Town Attorney, but I also asked to submit two cases that are relevant, one a Court of Appeals case and I RAM Court Reporting Service 633 East Main St., Rivarhemd, N.Y., 11901 (516) 727-3168 1 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 24 25 think I can make this in about one minute. principal case in this area of kitchens 62 very straight forward One of the cases, the appears to be Baskin, which is a 1976 ultimately Court of Appeals case. It is quoted by Ms. Ongioni and the Court of Appeals case is not quoted. It is the Appellate Division case that is quoted. What happened here was that the Board of Zoning Appeals, the Supreme Court and the Appellate Division~were all involved. It got to the Court of Appeals. HEARING OFFICER: The point you are trying to make -- MR. CARNELLI: The point I'm trying to get across is that in the final decision, unquoted in the paper you got from Ms. Ongioni, the decision was reversed and confirmed on the descending memorandum of Justice Irwin Shapiro. Shapiro's memorandum is exactly supportive of our position, not of the adversary's position and impertinent parts he says, "Zoning ordinances should not be used to bar owners and legal occupants of a one family home in a one family zone from RAM Court Reporting Service 633 East Main St., Rlverhead, N.Y. LI~01 (516) 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 15 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 63 using available space to provide kitchen for themselves with such subsidiaries as additional kitchens, sitting rooms, et cetera, simply because in other hands such facilities could be used for the maintenance of a two family house. It is clear that the existence of a mere opportunity for a future evasion of violation of law does not raise a presumption that such presently exists. There will be time enough for the petitioner and neighbor to take action to end the violation when and if it occurs, should not receive the aid of the Court to fend off a mere possibility of future violation." In 1989, in another case, Bennett, which is the last case i will indicate to you, and this is the whole point of this. The quote which is in the Shapiro case, the '76 Court of Appeals case concludes by saying, "A standard is not designed for potential use, but actual use." In the later April '89 case of~Bennett, the language is as follows, "To prohibit construction based on a possible future illegal RAM Court Reporting Service 633 Ernst Main St., I~lverhead, N.Y., 1I~01 ($16) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 64 use was arbitrary and capricious." In that case, the Board did this, they based a finding not to permit upon the reasoning that the place would be readily convertible into a nonconforming two family house. The point I'm trying to make, it's.use is what you have to look at, not what it could be. That's about all I have to say. Thank you for listening. HEARING OFFICER: I do not think in the structure of the four Hearings we have had on that particular application that we actually had given you an interpretation that was done by our Board at the request of the Building Inspector, which is possibly one of the reasons and I will ask him in a minute. There was a request on October 21, 1987. We rendered a decision on 1/8/88 concerning the fact of a one dwelling unit requires one kitchen and this is for you. Could you also afford us a copy of the survey of the original dwelling when it was purchased, if you have an old survey? MR. CARNELLI: I will look for it. I RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E4iot Mai~ St., Rlverhead, N.Y., 11901 (516) 727-31~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 believe t may. 65 HEARING OFFICER: Ms. Ongioni, I would like to speak with Mr. La Sarde. We thank you for coming down at this late hour. Is there anything you could shed as to the light on the subject here that would help us understand this application a little bit better without getting into any specifics? MR. LA SARDE: The house as~it was originally applied for, was altered to the point where we had no choice but to issue a stop order and have the owner or the contractor resubmit plans for what he really wanted to do. That's probably what constituted the first stop order on top of the fact, the contractor never bothered to call for any inspections. When he submitted the second drawings, we saw then that it was now being converted to a brand new dwelling as opposed to an addition. So the necessary fees had to be adjusted and the whole plan had to be reevaluated. At that point in time, we had seen that he had put an entirely different porch or stoop, if RAM Court Reporting Service 633 East Mmln St., Rlverhead, N.Y., I1~01 (516) 727-3160 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 you wish to originally submitted. the new stoop exceeded to be now problem. 66 call it that, than what was Now, the fact that 30 square feet had looked at as part of the setback If he had stayed at the 30 feet, there would have been no problem. It is not considered part of the set back requirement. I don't suppose it is a secret that the contractor was a very arrogant sort of individual and further down the road when we asked him about the plumbing in the so called great room, innocent of temper, he made enough remarks that I said Whoa. I would rather the Zoning Board take a look at that because I have a bad habit of looking at something and if it looks like a skunk it acts like a skunk and it smells like one, it's a pretty good bet it probably is. The pipes in their design would indicate a rapid conversion to a second kitchen. At that point I recall that the ZBA made a decision on that and I understand that the ZBA doesn't set policies for the town, but because of the remarks that the contractor made, RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~t Mmln St., Rlverhe~d~ N.Y., LI~I ($16) 7~Z~-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 67 I guess none of your business what are they going to do with the second part of it, gave me the authority to stop everything again and bring it before this Board for their determination. As far as the height is concerned, or the set back on this building outside of the stoop, there is nothing wrong with it. It is not a nonconforming building. It is not a nonconforming building outside of the fact that the stoop is an %ncroachment in the front yard. The contractor or the owners indicated that should the Board of Appeals not grant the variance, they would be more than glad to knock it down and go back to where they belong. The original blueprints indicated a square entrance four feet off the building with two entrances on the side. The new one, of course, is a half round -- I don't know. On sight dance hall as far as I'm concerned, but that is my opinion. So that's where we're at. i would like an interpretation on the visibility of a second kitchen. I don't see anything in black and white that says it's prohibited. The fact RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~at M,ln St, Rlverhe,d, N.Y., 11~01 (f16} 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 68 that the ZBA made a decision on it, I felt that's the way I would go to see how this Board would like to address this. HEARING OFFICER: At this time, do you feel this building, as it presently exists, has been increased by more~than 50%? MR. .LA SARDE: don't understand. Probably 90%, but I It's a permitted use and it meets the requirements. HEARING OFFICER: In reference to size? MR. LA qAD~: Yes. HEARING OFFICER: Certainly, for the record, Victor, we went over there and the applicant showed us the entire dwelling and we did go through it. I will raention for the record that it certainly was interesting to see two separate heating systems and so on and so forth as is the case in this particular dwelling and you know we are going to do the best we can in dealing with this application. It's not an easy one. How to understand it and deal with it to the best of our ability. MR. LA SARDE: I would also say there is nothing in the law that does not permit two RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~t M~in St., Rlverhosd, N.Y., 119O1 (51~) 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 69 furnaces. I suppose when people get up to my age, they get eccentric. I'm certainly not about to design the houses for them. Again, while I'm on my feet, I apologize for not having a jacket on. This is probably the fourth meeting I have been to since 4:00. If you would excuse me on that, I appreciate it. MK. DINIZIO: Before you sit down, Victor, this is not a problem with it, but you see buildings and plans for the buildings and you probably see thousands of your business and I two stairways, upstairs, the of them in the course am just wondering if the configuration of the two bedrooms and the bathrooms, the separate basements so to speak, the separate stairways to the downstairs, two doors in the front, would you consider that unusual? MR. ~%,-~R~: ~e probably have about 15 of the same similar designs. It's like taking a piece of paper and folding it in half and both sides are equal. Again, to answer your question, I haven't got the luxury of RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~t Main St., Riv~rhea~, N.Y., I19~1 (516) 727-316~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 70 assuming what will happen after the CO is obtained. The best I could do with that is I could be highly suspicious, I could keep an eye on the place and if a violation occurs, hopefully I will catch it. Until that happens, I can have all the thoughts in the world, and I keep them to myself because I don't like to go to court. ~hat I'm trying to say, Al, is you can't assume, something is going to happen. MR. DINIZIO: I was wondering, two stairways within six inches of each other -- MR. LA DARvS: And a solid wall between. I know what you are saying. HEARING OFFICER: Is that unusual or something you would see? MR. L~-SAKLE: No. The law is very ambiguous as far as family is concerned, as far as blood relation is concerned and God, if the Supreme Court of the United States would design a family, I'm.not about to. I'll tell you right now, that's the best I can do on it. HEARING OFFICER: Ms. Ongioni? RAM Court Reporting Service 633 East Main St., RIvorhead, N.Y., 11~o, (5,6) 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 71 ~4S. ONGIONI: I am not going to belabor the point with the Board at this time. I believe that the record is more than adequate in favor of my client's position and our position to this application. Both the law and the facts clearly dictate a finding against the applicant. I know it's a very difficult decision to make because of the fact that the building is close to completion, but notwithstanding that, it is apparent that the law has been violated and that it has come before you at this late date a year and a half after construction began because of the opposition that was being imposed by my client. I have one final submission for the Board which recounts very briefly all of the facts relating to this. (Whereupon, a document was handed to the Hearing Officer.) MS. ONGIONI: I have a few things. First of all, the applicants has relied on very little law in support of its application. The primary case that it has relied on is a Riverhead Zoning Board of Appeals case which RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~t M~ln St., Rlvorhoad, N.Y., 119o1 (SI6) 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 2,3 24 25 72 has no precedent setting value for the Zoning Board of Appeals. The only precedent setting jurisdiction is the Supreme Court or any other court. A neighboring jurisdiction or a neighboring municipality does not set law for the Zoning Board of Appeals. I'm sure you are aware of that. Secondly, the Southold' Code defines a one family dwelling is that which contains a one dwelling unit and conversely a two family dwelling unit contains two dwelling units. The question is what is a dwelling unit. The code further defines a dwelling as a minimum area of 850 square feet containing complete housekeeping facilities for one family and having no enclosed space in common with any dwelling unit. Now, what is facility; electric, layout, a bathroom. a second kitchen is a complete housekeeping heat, kitchen, entrance, Whether or not there is irrelevant. This particular structure has two complete housekeeping units. That is the inescapable conclusion. There is no other alternative. The question whether or not this is piggybacking onto the application that RAM Court Reporting Service Mmln St., Rlverhea4, N.Y., LI~I (~16) 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 73 is pending before the court, is adequately addressed in all of the papers before you and I will not belabor that point. I think that when you look at the entire history of this project, you have had statements and restatements by the applicant. Now the applicant is saying that this is not going to be a two family house. However, the applicant has also stated in the past, to be restated at a later date that %here would be two kitchens, that there would be one kitchen, that there would be one kitchen and a wet bar and finally now we are back to two kitchens. The applicant has also stated that the house is not within 3~0 feet of the wet lands. Notwithstanding the DEC violations, that the fact is that the application for the building permit stated that the house was less than -- was not less than 300 feet for the wet lands. That was a lnisrepresentation. The applicant also stated that there would be two separate dwelling units. Now they are characterizing it as an interrelational state. What does that mean? The applicant has stated RAM Court Reporting Service 633 East Main St., Rlverh0ad, N.Y., L1~1 (516) 727.3168 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 74 on the application that this was a renovation to a one and a half story house. It turns out to be totally new construction and enlarging a house from approximately eight or 900 square feet to approximately 3500 square feet. The ~applicant stated that the renovation would cost about $80,000. Now they are claiming it's about $175,000. When the trees were cut down, the applicant said that it was a mistake by the builder. Which~statements are we to believe. Basically, it appears that this is a flagrant disregard for the rules of the town and I think it is an encumbrance on the Board to take a very hard look at everything that is before it, the facts, the history, the law and make the tuff decision to revoke the building permit which I contend was illegally issued because there was a substantial degree of an increase in the nonconformity of the building. The building was a nonconforming structure on this lot because it requirements. was increased from a 900 square did not comply with the code That degree of nonconformity foot house to a RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~$ Main St., Rlv~rhead, N.Y., 11~01 (~I6~ 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 75 35 square foot house. In my opinion, that is a substantial increase in nonconformity and for that reason they should have been here a year and a half ago to build. i thank you very much seeking permission for your time and your careful deliberation. MR. CARNELLI: I have rebuttal on one or two things. One is that I would present to the Board the full texture oMthe Baskin case, that is the Court of Appeals case, it's on point. It supports our position as does the Bennett case. Also a conception of which you are familiar with vested rights, we had a building permit here. issued, one in March of We had two of them '89 and a reissue in Dece~ber of '89. Everything we built, Which is $176,000 advance was advanced on a building permit which was granted by the Building Department. Your Building Inspector stood before you this evening and disagreed with Ms. Ongioni and one very, very important matter. The house he maintains is now legal as it stands. If it is legal and there is no RAM Court Reporting Service 633 Em~t Main St., Rlverhead, N.Y., LI~ol (510) 727-316S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 76 legality in any building permit, a part from the arguments that I don't think that you have the authority to revoke the permit, the fact is that you would have no reason to. Your building inspector has indicated to you, available to question, this building as it stands now is legal. As to the issue of the staircases, I want to clarify this. This is a home where we were working around an existin~ home. So you asked me last time and I wanted to answer the question that there are here two staircases. There was one which was left and an additional staircase was put in. There are here two oil tanks. There was one that was there for 250. If you want a 500 gallon oil tank, the one way to do it is by putting another 250 gallon in. There was a heating unit there because we were doing essentially an addition very much like the existing home. You ca~ld pull out the existing heating unit or put in one to handle the whole house or put in an additional unit, a smaller unit. That was what was done. There was a basement. You RAM Court Reportlng Service 633 Eut Main St., Si~rhomd, N.Y., ~I {516} 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 77 could make a big basement or leave the existing basement and have a second basement. The interrelationship is apparent to you if you saw the house. There between both floors. The offered for the two boilers think is quite reasonable. as I understand it, there meter going in this house is an interrelationship explanation I just and two tanks,. I I point ou{ to you, is one electric and there is one hot water heater in this house, r~ot two. The fundamental thing I would like you to consider very carefully here is Nuraber one, get by the issue of your authority. Even assuming you think you did have the authority, think of the issue of investment when someone spent $176,000 which your inspector told them then and now. Think about the fundamental of substantial justice which you are here to do. If you elect grant this variance for the front yard conditionalizing it on some other actions, I would urge you to conditionalize it on those actions which the applicant can take in fairness, not by ripping out things, but by the noncompletion of their construction, RAM Court Reporting Service 633 Eut M&in St., l~lverhead, N.Y., IAgo1 (516) 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 78 adding or substracting. That and the entire scenario here of a year and a half, of a lot of money, they never built what they didn't have a permit for. I would like you to consider that and as to the law, please speak to Mr. Arnoff. I will give you a copy of Baskin which is a Court of Appeals case and a copy of Bennett which supports my argument that you cannot look at an art construction in your eyes for its potential future us~% The same people who bought the house in 1977 are going to live there. They continue to live there and it's the same family and whether an alteration may be made, is not fair game for your consideration. One other thing, the decision that you gave me from the town which indicates that, if I read it correctly, that any building containing more than one kitchen and/or kitchen facility shall be deemed a dwelling unit. This concludes more than one kitchen and/or kitchen facility in a one dwelling unit. This is a January '88 decision which I wasn't aware of. This is a better interpretation. If you are RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~t Main St., RIv~rhead, N.Y. 11901 (SI~) 727-316~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 interpreting interpreting, the same I don't 79 language that we are see it says that. More important than that, the fact that, I'm sure the Board is aware, that there are numerous, numerous places in this town that have two kitchens. HEARING OFFICER: religious purposes. MR. CARNELLI: We are say saying that the We allow a second kitchen. But you are aware that there are second kitchens. You have kitchens coming in off the water and coming upstairs. HEARING OFFICER: I know of only one house that was built that way. was the Hardy house. MR. CARNELLI: I know of another. HEARING OFFICER: It must have been put in after the CO or overlooked, but unless it I know of one And that is for religious purposes, way we are addressing the MR. CARNELLI: Also, that is the only issue. in this regard, we have offered two covenants that we would not use %his as a two family house and one final note, we initially said we wouldn't put in a second kitchen, but we want to put the piping in RAM Court Reporting Service 633 East Main St., RiverJlead, N.Y., LI~OI (516) 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 80 for a wet bar. I would assume that a variance not necessary to put a wet bar in in the great room. In your decision, I would ask you to direct the issues of whether or not the wet bar and the great room as configured is permissible because that is actually what started this entire thing. HEARING OFFICER: If there are no further questions or comments -- MS. ONGIONI: My client had ~ent me a letter which he would like me to submit. He is still recuperating from a heart attack. HEARING OFFICER: I just want to say that we are, of course, going to be receiving something from Mr. :Carnelli. We will afford you a copy of that. I would appreciate if you would come down in a couple of weeks and find out if we received it. We will recess the Hearing tonight in reference to the verbal testimony and close the Hearing pending receipt of other information. Also, a survey we are looking for, the basically what I If original survey and that is am going to do at this point. there are no further comments, I make a RAM Court Reporting Service 633 Ea~t Main St., J~lv~rhend, N.Y., 11~X {516) 727-31~e f 1 4 5 6 ? 8 9 ~0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 81 motion to close this Hearing, the verbal testimony pending receipt of some additional data from Mr. Carnelli. Hearing in total at the in favor say aye. BOARD MEMBERS: Aye. We will close the next meeting. Ail those (Whereupon, the above-mentioned Hearing concluded at 10:35 P.M. and another Hearing commenced at 10:40 P.M.) HEARING OFFICER: HR. WAGNER: Hefter and Angel Mr. Wagner? John Wagner from Esseks, in Riverhead for Sun Refining and Marketing Company. We are here this evening as a continuation of the Hearing that was commenced on November 1, and I represented at that meeting that I would have an expert come in the next time who would present testimony on two issues. The first is whether a canopy is an assessory use or an accessory structure to a gasoline station under Southold Town Code and whether or not a so called convenience store is an accessory use RAM Court R~portlng Service 633 E~t M~i~ ~t., Rlv~rh~d, N.Y., 119~I (516} 727-316~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23, 24 25 as defined in the Southold Town a gasoline station. The expert 82 Code as to is here this evening and ready to give his testimony. Before I call him up, however, I would like to take care of a few housekeeping matters to more or less complete the record in the matter. I have for one thing a review of the transcript of the last Hearing and I had to make some corrections on the transcript and I have a marked up copy here this evening I would like to resubmit to you. One substance of change in particular, I have to blame myself, on Page 97 of the transcript I made a statement regarding the Hess Station in Mattituck as having a canopy. I was mistaken about that. I was really thinking about the Mobile Station, which was further east on the south side of the road. So I have corrected the transcript to indicate Mobile Station and it applies to a few thousand yards down the road. The second thing that I have done over the past month, I have ordered a single and separate search of the property once again to complete the record of this matter. I do RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~t M~ln St., l~lverhomd, N.Y., /1~01 (516) 727.3168 ,( 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 I1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 83 have it here tonight and I would like to hand the original ~p to the Board. HEARING OFFICER: Fine. MR. WAGNER: I would also like the Board to have a few of our documents in case they are not already in one of the several files on this matter over the passed few years. The first is the deed for the property as recorded at Libre 6563 Page 542, the deed from Mattituck Shopping Center, Inc. to Art Prop. Inc. and it is dated June 5th, 1969. The second thing I would like to give you is a copy of the special exception approval, which was issued for the original gas station use established on the property. back to January 2nd of 1969 This ~dates on the original application. Excuse me. That is the date of the actual determination itself. It was Appeal Number 12225. The last thing I would like you to have is a Certificate of Occupancy for the property which was dated August 28, 1970 which I alluded to previously, but I had not supplied you a copy of it. Some of the things we are going to be RAM Court Reporting Service 633 Eaat Main St., Rlverhead~ N.Y. 11~1 [516} 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 84 discussing tonight involves the definitions of the accessory building or structure, accessory use and principal use as contained in the Southold Town Code. So for your assistance, I have duplicated the copies of those definitions so you may have them in front of you as you hear the testimony before you. Rather than waste anymore time, I have also duplicated a copy of Section 100- 101 Subsection C of the General Business Section of the Code. This is the section that provides for accessory uses allowed in that particular zoning district and the structure of the section is such as it refers outward to Section 100-31C 1 through 8 of the Agricultural Conservation District for the specific uses. I have duplicated not only Section 100-101, but also the referred to section 100-31. I have two copies of each of these for you. At this point I would like to call Mr. Roderick Green, who is the expert I promised to you the last time we were here. Would you state your name for the record. RAM Court Reporting Service 633 East Main St., Rlverhaad, N.Y., ~19ol [SI6) 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. GREEN: residing New York, 11946. MR. WAGNER: Green? MR. GREEN: 85 Roderick S. Green, Jr., at 36 Rampasture Road, Hampton Bays, What is your occupation, I am a licensed real estate broker and a practicing appraiser. I have been so for the past 18 years. I maintain Southampton, By whom are you employed? I am employed by and I am my office in the Village of New York. MR. WAGNER: MR. GREEN: the Vice President of the Morley Agency, Inc. located in Southampton. MR. WAGNER: In your work as a broker, appraiser, do you have occasion to appraise commercial or residential properties? MR. GREEN: I do. MR. WAGNER: document and ask MR. GREEN: qualifications as an appraiser~ I normally attach them to a report and submit them for things such as this. I would like to show you a if you recognize it. Those are my preprinted RAM Court Reporting Servl~e 633 E~t M~n ~t., Rlv~rh~d, N.Y., 11901 (51b! 727-~168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 86 MR. WAGNER: With your permission, I would like to submit such a copy to this Board. By virtue of your employment, are you particularly familiar with the various gas station uses in Suffolk County? MR. GREEN: Yes. MR. WAGNER: Are you familiar with the B General Business Zoning District of the Town of Southold? - MR. GREEN: Yes, I am. MR. WAGNER: Are you familiar with the various principal and accessory MR. MR. property that application? uses permitted in that district? MR. GREEN: Yes. I have reviewed that section of the ordinance. MR. WAGNER: Are you familiar with the definitions of principal use, accessory use and accessory building or structure contained in Section 100-13 of the Southampton Zoning Code? GREEN: Yes. I have reviewed them. WAGNER: Are you familiar with the is the subject of this RAM Court Reporting Service 63~ E~st Ms/n St., Rlverhoad, N.Y., 11901 (S16) 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 $7 MR. GREEN: Yes. I have inspected it. MR. WAGNER: Do you have an opinion as to what is the principal use of the property as defined in the Southold Town Code? MR. GREEN: station. MR. WAGNER: It's a gasoline service Did there come a time when I asked you to perform a ta~k in connection with this application? MR. GREEN: MR. WAGNER: MR. GREEN: Yes, you did. What was that task? Well, you asked me to make a survey including photography of existing service stations on Long Island's east end to determine your visual and customary accessory uses as defined in the ordinance incidental to the operation of a service station. You also asked me to study the customary and usual accessory structures utilized in the current operations of the service examined service stations the Town of Southampton, Riverhead and Southold. basic areas of discussion, stations. I from eastern Brookhaven, Easthampton, Since there were two I separated the RAM Court Reporting Service 633 East Main St., Rlverhe&d, N.Y., 11~1 (SI6) 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 88 photographs that were taken into those which showed service stations with additional accessory use or uses as evidenced on inspection. There is another set of photographs which show gasoline stations that are equipped with canopies connected to a building or in every case covering the pump island. MR. WAGNER: ~ould you have a copy of those compilations? MR. GREEN: I do have them, ±f I may submit them at the appropriate time. MR. WAGNER: It might be helpful if I reviewed them and you can use my copy. MR. GREEN: I had a few other comments. It might be helpful for the Board. In accomplishing the assignment that was given to me by Mr. Wagner, I think it's fair to look at in terms of accessory uses just to briefly look at the history of origin of automobile filling stations. The early filling stations were typically accessory to a general store in the rural areas or an accessory to a vehicle dealer in the horse and buggy days. As time went on, we saw that followed by the RAM Court Reporting Service East Main St., Riv~rhead, N.Y., LI~01 (316) 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 '7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 franchised automobile dealer who sold gasoline. the traditional 89 frequently Then we saw a development of service station as we tended to know it from the thirties, forties, fifties and even into the nineteen seventies where the primary function or primary use of such a service station was the sale of gasoline and petroleum products. Th'e accessory use was the repair of automobiles, the sale of accessories, automotive accessories. As time went on, this servicing of automobiles changed with the complexity of automobiles. Some service functions can only be efficiently constructed by a dealer requiring expertise in terms of technical ability and also equipment required. Some of the other simpler, less demanding requirements have been transferred to the specialists, such as the muffler shops, the tire dealer and front end specialists, the lubrication specialists, Jiffy Lube as an example. With these changes in the market and the servicing of automobiles, we have witnessed the decline in the service aspects as the accessory use. We now see the convenience RAM Court Reporting Service 633 Est Main St., Rlverhead~ N.Y., 119O1 (516) 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 90 store which emerged in the south and first in the seventies according to the research that I have made, but now we have sort of come full circle. We have reversed the earlier configuration where fuel stations were the accessory used to the general store to the point where now the convenience store has become the popular accessory use for the gasoline filling store. I say filling station because they're not service stations as we traditionally know. I think filling station is a more appropriate term. The primary function is the storage, pumping and sale of gasoline and we see throughout the town a number of other accessory uses that exist. The sale of not only convenience items, but we see fuel oil as an accessory use. With certain service stations or filling stations, we see other items that are sold. If I may submit this, I have one copy for the Board regrettably because we were running short of the photographs due to the overlap with those of canopies and those existing multiple or single accessory uses in addition RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~t Main St., Rlverhea~l, N.Y., l~9oz (f16) 727-3168 ( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 91 to the service stations. I have one for Mr. Wagner, one for the Board and a photocopy for myself, if I may present this to the Board. HEARING OFFICER: Thank you, sir. MR. WAGNER: in this report. photographs? MR. GREEN: There are photographs contained Did you personally take those took them an'd I so indicated on Page 1 and the dates on which they were taken. MR. WAGNER: Would you say that these photographs are fair and accurate depictions of the various subjects of these photos? MR. GREEN: Yes, I do. Just to briefly cruise the report, the first photograph is from a former filling station from the nineteen twenties indicating, of course, there you have multiple use in that I think it is fair to say service stations as we knew they were automatically multiple use or accessory use combined with a principle use back even then. I would say use was the pumping of gasoline. to the right as you view the photograph, the principle You can see there RAM Court Reporting Service 63~ EIISt Main St., Rlverhead, N.Y., LI~OI (516) 727-3168 ,¢ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 92 is also a repair garage. Anotker one, Alex Mezorakis Garage in East Moriches, that dates from the twenties. He has owned it for the last forty years. I should say the pumps have been removed on the first two, victim of the increased requirements now that the costly fiberglass tanks that must be installed. In Center Moriches you see a situation where there is a large convenience store here. In this case it's a deli, but the original function and I think the original building to the right was a filling station going back probably to the nineteen thirties. Something similar with multiple uses, this is a convenience store. There is a repair garage repairing transmissions in addition to pumping gasoline at the service station located on Montauk Highway east of the railroad overpass in Center Moriches. The next is an example of a more recent construction. This is a mobile filling station with a canopy and convenience food on the Manorville Road adjoining the Long Island Expressway. The Riverhead Car Wash providing service, auto service, in terms of the car wash both a self RAM Court Reporting Servlee 633 ~ Main St., l~lverhe~4, N.Y., 119o1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 93 service and a service operation. We have a convenience store that is an accessory to the primary use of automobile service. The Hess filling station in Riverhead is again, a late example of the convenience store as an accessory use to a filling station. There is no repair conducted. The house mart name is clearly marked on the convenience store. The Shell Food Mart in Riverhead, the Route 24 circle is a filling station. It also has sizable convenience store. The Metor Filling Station in Flanders, that is a limited convenience store with a filling station and most of the new units as you will see now and also in the next photographic presentation, most have canopies. We have in Hampton Bays the most recently constructed unit in the Town of Southampton, Amoco Station with a opened the spring of several years of age a filling station, an convenience store. It 1990. We have one in the Village of Southampton, a Mobile Filling Station with a convenience store on Route 39 and North Sea Road. The next is a Gulf station directly RAM Court Reporting Service 633 East Main St., Rlverhead~ N.Y., 11~oI (516} 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 across the street limited to convenience food and a filling station. The next photograph is of an Enzines Mobile Service Station on Hill Street in the Village of Southampton. This has existed with multiple uses, accessory uses, although the primary use is an automobile filling station. There is a canopy that was installed prior to 1927. There is a photograph of the building in 1927 on display in the showroom. Also~ there is an automobile repair garage. Fuel oil and kerosine sales have been conducted there for many years as accessory uses. In Water Mill there is an Amoco Filling Station with a canopy and also convenience food. It was the first convenience food store constructed in an Amoco Station owned by the local distributors, Strong Oil Company. That is approximately eight years old, the convenience store. Similar the same ownership on the next Amoco in Amagansett, there is a repair garage operating in conjunction with the filling station. In Montauk there is a small former Getty Service Station presently vacant and offered for a lease. RAM Court Reporting Service 633 East MmJn St., Rlverhead~ N.Y., 11901 tSl6) ~7-316~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 95 It has a canopy and a repair garage. The repair garage being accessory to the filling station. Then in the Town of Southold, we begin at Peconic with a Mobile Filling Station with a convenience store. In Orient, you have something that is more typical of the older building and rural area, particularly a small community such as Orient where you have a~number of uses. The primary use automobile filling station. it, there they sell kerosene. is a repair garage, ice and fish bait, In Greenport, is still the In addition to convenience food, fuel oil and spano's Repair Garage, that had been a service station and repair garage. The pumps were removed early in 1990 according to the owner when I spoke to him yesterday. In Greenport we have the Atlantic Filling Station with a convenience food store as an accessory use. In Mattituck, there is the Mobile Filling Station with a convenience food store. In Mattituck, the Sunoco Service Station with gasoline sales. Quickly, this is the subject property with a bay devoted to a quick lube, the center bay to RAM Court Reporting Service 633 East M~ln ~t., Riverh~md, N.Y., LI~I (~16} ~7-3168 ! 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 96 auto repair and the third bay to an automated car wash. That is a structure that was perfectly typical for its age, '69 or '70, thereabouts. Then in Mattituck, there is another example of a three bay service station that is now operating as a filling station and Texaco Gas Mart, convenience food and the last photograph is the Atlantic Filling Station in Jamesport offering convenience food in a preexisting service station. I also, in my investigation, have had an opportunity to discuss service stations with David Hawk who, I believe, is Vice- President and part owner of Strong Oil Company. They are the Amoco distributor for the east end of Long Island. They own and operate four. retail service stations or filling stations David Hawk is also a member of the Amoco National Advisory Board on station design. So he was able to shed light on not only what he has done on the four stations that he owns on the east end of Long Island, what Amoco is doing in general perspective as a member of but also on from his their National Board. RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~st Mmin St,, l~iverhead~ N.Y., 11~ol [5Ie) 71';-3168 ( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 97 stations that he owns and operates, of them that is continue. station, a canopy or without been the age old Of the four all of them are canopied and two presently have convenience food, the original one in Water Mill, the most recently constructed one in Hampton Bays. He will be very shortly constructing a convenience food store or convenience store in Riverhead on Route 58. The only remaining unit in Amagansett is presently occupied as a repair garage and that probably will The indication is he would not build a a new station either without a convenience store. It has problem for any person in business trying to compete, if you find others around you with what appears to be a competitive edge providing additional service and appeal to the market that the convenience store has done, you're almost at necessity forced to do it. In each case, in each case for David Hawk at least, the two convenience stores he operates, both show revenues from the convenience stores of approximately 10% of overall sales. Also the indication from him was that is typical for RAM Court Reporting Service 633 Ea~t Main St., Rivorhemd, N.Y., LI~Ol (516) 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 98 Amoco stations in general that operate convenience stores as an accessory. I submit that only to indicate that it is my belief based on my research that the convenience store is clearly an accessory use. It is not a dual principal use. ~t is not a shared use. It is clearly accessory. Also, I did have an opportunity to review a prior affidavit to this Board dated 1988 in connection with the Tarton Oil Corporation application in which Barry Towering, the President of Tarton Oil indicated in the affidavit that there were in 1988 in excess of 55,000 convenience stores nationwide and I think we have to agree that this is not a brand new phenomena. They have been around. They are certainly growing. The convenience store apparently fills a need. It's well accepted in the market. Many of them function in the off hours when restaurants are closed and they become the sole source of food, particularly for night workers who have meal breaks three and four in the morning. Also, for emergency workers who have no where else to acquire food or convenience items and also even RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~t Main 0t. l%iv®rhea~, N.Y., L~I ($16) 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 I0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 99 for families where illness is a problem, in need of an aspirin or an analgesic in the middle of the night. I think it is fair to say the vendor is becoi~ing necessary from the standpoint of the operator in order to become competitive, it also fulfills the expectation of the consumer. The consumer is increasingly coming to expect such an operation if it possibly can be provided and there are certainly cases if you were next door to a convenience store it might not be appropriate. If its not the case, I think its certainly the way of the future. Another consideration in my reading, I had occasion to review the Building Evaluation Manual by and to the Commercial Manual and the indication when they were published in 1977, the typical life expectancy of a service station building ran between 15 and 25 years. In talking to representatives from the applicant, that still apparently holds true and it gives rise to large investments, well maintained property. I think the photograph of the subject property does speak for itself. It's clean. It's well maintained. There are no RAM Court Reporting Service 633 East Mnln St., RIv~rhead, N.Y., 11~oI (516) 7~7-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 100 derelict automobiles around. It's certainly as fine a station physically as you'll find typically anywhere in America, but here, it's simply something that nas to be updated constantly. It's part of the competition in the industry and for that reason they are constantly upgraded or at least changed whether you and I feel they are upgraded, the effort is made to maintain the competitiveness required in the industry. With respect to the sales, another interesting note in establishing the accessory character of the C Store also came from one of the files of this Board. Back to 1988 there were sales for the two days of the Peconic Mobile Station. They showed the sales for February 16th, 1988 and also February 17~h, !1988. If I may submit this to the Board, it is from your own record that the indication is that the sales from the convenience store are approximately 10% of the overall, again, in line with what I have been told by the local distributors and also its in line with my conversations with the applicant as to what their RAM Court Reporting Service Main St., Rlv~rh®ad, N.Y., LI~I (51~) 717-316~ ,( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 101 expectations are in 9eneral. The next area to discuss very briefly is the use of the canopy as a cus%omary accessory structure that is an item that also had its origin in the nineteen twenties and if I may submit this to the Board, this again is a very similar photographic presentation. The photographs were taken and exposed by myself on the dates indicated, November 27th to 29th and I think each is an accurate representation or depiction of the particular station view. There is a certain overlapping. Some ~ photographs will repeat and appear in both booklets siraply because they demonstrate the other item in question. There are photographs in there of properties that do date back to the nineteen twenties. What does the canopy provide, I think essentially it's a shelter from the elements. That was something that fell from favor by the late nineteen thirties. We didn't see much of it in the forties, fifties and sixties and it began to reappear, I am told, in the south in the early seventies. It didn't make its appearance in this part of the country RAM Court Reporting Service 633 East Main St., Rive~homd~ N.Y. 11901 (516} 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 102 until late in the seventies. It also coincided down south with the advent of the self service gas station and it provided not only, of course, for the service station, it was a shelter for the clerk who would be pumping gasoline but in the beginnings and even to this very day, it's shelter for the customer, the consumer who has popularized certainly the acceptance of self service. Consumers have voted with their dollars and it's the reaso~ why we see them throughout the country. I have seen, in my own experience, I've seen them all over Long Island, I have seen them in New England, throughout Florida. They are quite typical for instance on turnpikes. I've traveled the entire length of the Ohio Turnpike and also the Indiana Turnpike. Each and every service facility is equipped with a canopy. The canopy also, I think, provides a certain measure of security in that they are not only well lighted, but the light is of a sufficient height that it is a bright overall, almost shadow free illumination. I couldn't help but notice that traveling the main road this RAM Court Reporting Service '633 E~t Main gr., Rlv~rhemd, N.Y., ll~0X (516) 7~7.316~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 103 evening and noticed how well lighted those stations were, particularly from the standpoint of the frail, the elderly or women who are concerned about being alone in that type situation. I think this, again, it is more common sense than anything else and I don't mean to belabor this, but certainly I've come to these conclusions that the vendor is increasingly a customary accessory use and it is an expectation of the motorist. Et is a requirement from the operator's standpoint in terms of meeting the competition and where such stations do exist and they do exist in the Town of Southold, it seems virtually a necessity for a his competition. successful operator to meet The canopy covered stations are usual and customary. They are increasing day by day. From all I've been able to learn, both discussing it with the Amoco distributor and also discussing it with Sun, the major oil companies are not building any other kind and virtually all the renovation efforts that are going into existing stations are to install canopies over the pumping islands frequently RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~t Main St., Rlverhead, N.Y., I1~01 (516) 7:~7-316~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 combined with the store. The last 104 accessory use of a convenience item while it is difficult to quantify, but.the inability for an owner or operator of such a service station to either construct such a canopy or to operate a convenience store if the market demand is there, certainly has a negative effect on value. While it may be difficult to quantify it, certainly one would pay more for a site where such approvals were a matter of right as opposed to one where such approvals would be prohibited. So I conclude my comments to you. I stand ready to answer any questions you may have or Mr. Wagner or anyone in attendance. MR. WAGNER: for him. HEARING OFFICER: you we do have a time I have one or two questions I want to mention to constraint and I would like to wrap this up by a quarter after, if we could. MR. WAGNER: Mr. Green, you testified as to convenience stores being accessory to gasoline stations. Would you say as a rule RAM Court Reporting Service M-tn St., i~lverhoad, N.Y., I1~01 (516) 7~'f-316~ '' I 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 I0 I1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 they as to a gasoline MR. GREEN: MR. WAGNER: 105 are customarily incidental or subordinate function at the station? Yes. They are not there on a par with the gasoline filling station? MR. GREEN: No. I mentioned earlier it is not a dual principal use. It's clearly accessory. It's subordinate and I think it's subordinate to the degree that the sales figures give us some indication as to sales volume. MR. WAGNER: That is the only question I have. HEARING OFFICER: My only question may not be presented to Mr. Green, but more for you, ~r. Wagner, and that is to what degree, if the Board is so inclined, what degree will this accessory use of food retail sales involve? In other words, will it be a prepackaged food or more on the deli type of a use? MR. WAGNER: Fortunate for us tonight, we have with us Jack Wernari, who is a member of sales arm of Sunoco who will describe in great detail what that will involve. MR. WERNARI: I will hit your point right on the head. Our franchise program, which every RAM Court Reporting Servi~e 633 E~st M~n St., Riverhe&~ N.Y., ~I (516) 727-31~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 106 store is the same on the inside, we have a six foot deli case, a slicing machine and a scale unless we are prohibited by the Board and they ask us to covenant that and it is a discussion amongst the sales force and the marketing department that will make that determination. HEARING OFFICER: to if we prohibit MR. WERNARI: What are you limited that? I have a location here on Long Island that we simply have to go out and have packaged sandwiches, premade where there is no slicing or any way of the bulk cold cuts and able to be distributad over the counter. HEARING OFFICER: Such as Oscar Meyer or something like that? MR. WERNARI: That's right. That is at one location out of the 300. MR. WAGNER: Do you have any estimate for what percentage of sales are taken up by the deli side of it? MR. ~ERNARI: Yes. From a low of 5% of total monthly store sales to 6%. It is not a major function of a convenience store RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~st M~ln St., Riverhead, N.Y., LI9Ol (S16) 727-316~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 itself as items. MR. type of MR. 107 far as monthly sales and grocery WAGNER: Can you describe what other items you offer for sale? WERNARI: Sure. Dairy products, milk, eggs, all soft drinks, we normally have a hot dog machine, fountain soda machine, grocery items from candy goods, packaged goods, candy section, newspapers, coffee for the morning and rolls and doughnuts ~nd that type of thing. Again, I mentioned most of our locations do have deli cases and a cash register system where one cash register designated to also handle the gasoline purchases. The customer for the gasoline would come inside the store, pays for that product and we have the system set up for the gasoline pumps to dispense that to the car and have the ability to purchase products inside while they are waiting. HEARING OFFICER: My only question in reference to that is; this appears to be truly a convenience item for the person purchasing gasoline. At what point on a RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~t Main St., Rl~rhem~ N.Y., u~l [516) 727-31~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 108 percentage basis does it actually become a second primary use? In other words, do you have gas stations where the sale of food actually somewhat levels off the sale of gasoline? MR. WERNARI: No. Not even close. I think you mentioned and we had discussed that a little bit earlier. I gave him an extreme example of our top location on Long Island that is in Amityville on Route 110 in the heart of the town and the closest scenario is that. the gasoline sales are four times the sales on a monthly basis, of grocery sales as compared to dollar amounts of total gasoline sales. MR. DOYEN: How much is the bottom line? Which one pays the most? MR. WERNARI: Well, again, from the company's standpoint of Sun Oil Company, obviously the gasoline pays the most. That is where our margin is as in oil company. As an independent franchise or dealer, basically it is the same function. They obviously have a secondary income coming from the grocery items and the RAM Court Reporting Service 633 Eut Main St., RJverhe&d, N.Y., LI~ol (516) 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 109 sale of the gasoline is the primary function to bring the customer into the store. MR. WAGNER: That is also the business of Sun; is that correct? MR. WERNARI: Yes. HEARING OFFICER: You probably just answered this question, but truthfully, why would somebody want a convenience store aside from the fact that Mr. Green says it's now in -- MR. WAGNER: A retailer or a-customer? HEARING OFFICER: A customer. MR. WERNARI: The word convenience simply entitles them to come into a service station. The normal function is to buy gas once or twice a week and also the ability to purchase a product like milk, eggs, bread, candy, soda, beer on their way home instead of having to make several stops and the ease of that transaction, they're spending three minutes at a service station, at a pump, they have to come into the location and pay for the product. They pick up a secondary item to take home and 90% of the time the excessive cost in there is their so called convenience and that's what RAM Court Reporting Service 635 E~t Main St., Rlverhead, N.Y., I19~1 (S16) 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 Il 12 13 14 15 17 15 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 110 they pay the additional amounts for. HEARING OFFICER: How about from the franchisee's point of view? MR. WERNARI: From the franchisee's point of view, we have dealers that are at the location in this particular case, the .existing dealer was there for 11 or 12 years is staying on. He was a mechanic. He no longer wants that end of the business. He simply has addressed the fact~that he is going to pay a substantial amount of money for a franchise and have a convenience store franchise fee, a cleaner operation for himself and also the ability to make the increased profit for himself through a convenience store offering. HEARING OFFICER: Certainly, the utilization of existing square footage. MR. WERNARI: That's right. He will obviously also, again, getting back to the point about the gasoline, if this offering is something that the public has grasped and enhanced, it's going to increase his own gasoline sales. Thereby, the reflection of that, RAM Court Reporting Service 639 E~t Main St., l~lv~rhead, N.Y., 11~I (~16) 7~7-316~ 1 3 4 5 6 ? 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2~ 21 22 23 24 25 111 he makes the gasoline profit and as the oil company, again, we are having an increased volume through that location. HEARING OFFICER: The only other question i have, Mr. Wagner, is similar to the question that we from it MR. just asked, why the canopy, is a 1980 thing? WAGNER: a part in vogue 1990. HEARING OFFICER: '80, '90. I want to give you an idea. We have had people come before us telling us the only reason why they built a canopy was to support the suppression system and I do not buy that. I have seen suppression systems very accurately done without canopies. MR. WAGNER: Right. In fact, I reviewed the file of your Board in which that repre- sentation was made and I would like to make the representation to you that the canopy is absolutely essential because of the fire suppression element, but it is true that the adequate suppression system can be designed without designing it in the canopy. In fact, the one that is proposed is not in the canopy RAM Court Reporting Service 633 East Msin St., Rlverhead, N.Y., L1~I (~16) 727-316~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 112 and it is probably a safer way of doing it because the fire suppression elements, the sensors and also the extinguishing elements are closer to the mat where any fire would break out. Anything up in the canopy where it is feasible to design such a thing, is further away from the low cuts of whatever problem develops. I ca'not represent to you that the canopy is necessary for that. The canopy is necessary as we described to protect from the elements on a rainy night, especially when people are out self-serving themselves to be assured that they will be somehow protected. A lot of people have a little bit of a problem with self-serving gas. They get frassled a little bit. The pumps don't work properly and rather than be distressed by the fact that they are getting wet in the process, we provide a little assurance for them, a little protection so they can keep their heads cool and do whatever they have to do. In addition, you want to also think of it in terms of the marketing standpoint which I described to you earlier. It's become a RAM Court Reporting Service 633 Em Main mt., Riverhead, N.Y., 11~01 (516) 72;.3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 113 competitive necessity nowadays for a canopy to be there. It provides a certain psychological assurance for them, so to speak, for people coming on to the site when they see the canopy, especially when the weather is bad. They are more inclined to go to a station that has some protection than run out in the rain, such as current site is right now. I am not going to try to kid you that we could not build the site without a canopy,t- It could be built without a canopy, but it would place the applicant at a severe competitive disadvantage. HEARING OFFICER: Why not put a canopy over the existing situation as it stands right now? MR. WAGNER: I do not think that would be in the interest of the town. One of the things that we are doing is relocating the gas pumps, bringing the pumps back from the road somewhat and I think part of the reason for doing that is not only to bring the dispensers closer to the underground storage tanks, but also to provide enough space so there is a reasonable front yard for the canopy from RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~t Main St., Rlverhemd, N.Y., 1~9ol (516) 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 114 the road. Now, the canopy itself is not your typical structure because it doesn't have a footprint on the ground. It has a shadow on the ground, but not a footprint. So it doesn't provide any kind of a visual obstruction. As I tried to explain at the last Hearing in that respect, there is a sort of public benefit to be derived from enforcing the strict set back requirements. You are not having any problem with site distance around the corner and really to apply two 50 foot front yards on this property is excessive and as you can see from the exhibits I handed you last time, when you apply those setl,backs there is no room for a canopy. We have all the problems that we had just described, open air filling stations, we have psychological depression of the client that wants to come into the property and not finding it to be sheltered in the rain. Apart from that, I am not going to represent anything about fire suppression because it is not true. HEARING OFFICER: Mr. Green, you have given us a substantial amount of pictures. My RAM Court Reporting Service 633 East Main St., Riverhead, N.Y., 119~1 (516) '~27-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ll 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 115 only concern is that this is a corner piece of property. It is a very busy area. It also is somewhat attractive. It's coming into town. Is there some indication in the way of a picture that you could afford us from Mr. Green or somebody from Sun Oil similar to what we could see other than a blueprint of what this station would iook like assuming it was completed. We are primarily concerned with the canopy at this point. I~am concerned about what the canopy looks like and Z should point out to you this Board never did nor would it ever in my estimation as I said here before, ever have granted the Mobile Oil Station on the east side. MR. WAGNER: That has a two foot set back. HEARING OFFICER: That canopy is very, very close to overhead power lines. It is still the nature of an adjudicated lawsuit which we have come to some amiable results. However, this gentleman has still not come back and filed the necessary application with the Board and it happened overnight. It was certainly a situation that occurred. I will not RAM Court Reporttng Service 633 East Miln St., Rlv~rhe~id, N.Y., Z1~0z (S16} 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 116 read into the record the frustration I have had over it. I will leave it to a more appropriate time, but it happened. MR. WAGNER: That canopy, although it is at th~ present time illegal and will probably remain so until some modification is made, is a good source of comparison to what we are trying to do. That canopy is only set back two feet from the property line. We by contrast are 29 feet back. In addition, that canopy does not conform to the height requirements. I believe it is 19 feet high so it is over the structure which is 18 feet. to build within the limits. limit for an accessory We are proposing We are seventeen some odd feet but we are still conforming. Apart from the canopy, if you look at the diagram, they basically look much the same. The thing we tried to do is to have a canopy that is functional and yet reduce the amount of relief we require from your Board. We looked at it. We found that 29 feet was the maximum we could go back and still cover the pump area. The pump area can't be moved any RAM Court R~porting $~rvlc~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 further back without being in building distance 117 the preexisting itself and not allowing turning for people going through the pumps and having to swing around to get back out of the property again. MR. WERNARI: Would you like pictures? HEARING OFFICER: Could you. please? MR. WERNARI: I can supply you with pictures within ten days. MR. WAGNER: I believe we have two operating stations on the Island run by Sunoco. HEARING OFFICER: I want to know the density or the height of the canopy and how it will look from a wide angle shot coming down. MR. WAGNER: I am going to try to move to the left. I know we are running on overtime, but I will try to breeze through it for you. I have in addition to Mr. Green's analysis some data that was supplied to me by Mr. Dwyer who I also asked to go out and do some snooping around Smithtown and Islip and he was able to take some photographs and we prepared a summary cover sheet describing each of the RAM Court Reporting Service 633 East Main St., Rlv~rhaad, N.Y., 11~Ol (S16] 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 ? 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 118 stations in, question and annexed to that summary and cover sheet our photographs of the various sites and they are all cross indexed. I am going to ask him to come up for a moment. I show you two documents. One is entitled, "Examples of gasoline facilities of accessory convenience stores," and the other one is entitled, "Examples of gasoline facilities with accessory canopies." Do you recognize the date on that? MR. DWYER: Yes, I do. MR. WAGNER: There are photographs attached to the two documents. Do you recognize those? MR. DWYER: Yes, I do. Those are the photographs that I took on Tuesday and Wednesday of this week at locations in the Town of Brookhaven, Islip and Smithtown. MR. WAGNER: Are those photographs fair and accurate representations of the scenes depicted? MR. DWYER: MR. WAGNER: I would Yes. I would say so. Thank you very much. like to submit both of those to RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~t Main St. Rlverhemd~ N.Y. 11901 (516) 727-3168 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 119 Board and you can peruse them at your leisure. The purpose of this exhibit is to give you a broader scope of your consideration. As I am sure you appreciate the east end is its own world. MR. DWYER: I wou~d just like to add in the drawings we submitted to the Planning Board, we did provide an elevation drawing that shows the elevation of the canopy and if you would like such a drawing, provided for you. HEARING OFFICER: it-.will be It is very important from the point of fire access and the ability to fill fire vehicles. At present, we have to extract our tanks in Mattituck at our site on Pipe Street and we will be doing that before the first,of the year. I am not speaking for the Mattituck Fire Department. I am merely a member of the Mattituck Fire Department so it MR. DWYER: ground to bottom of the facier of the canopy and the facier is three feet high itself which makes a total height of 17. is our concern. The canopy is 14 feet from There RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~t Main fit., Rlverhead, N.Y., 11901 ($16) 7~7-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 120 is a clearance of 14 below the canopy and our delivery truck will be traveling underneath that canopy to give you an idea of the height of the canopy. HEARING OFFICER: Do you happen to know how high your hook and ladder is? MR. DINIZIO: MR. WAGNER: I need to recite It is not 14 feet. Just to complete the record, to you a prior decision of your Board which is Field No. ~3618 in the name of Sukru Ilgin and Mike Peksen doing business as Ocean Holding Corp. This is a decision. I will just describe it to you briefly. It was an application for 'a variance from the now defunct section of the Zoning Ordinance, Section 100-52 which was a shopping center provision and apparently interpretations were being made a few years ago that a convenience store combined with a gas station a shopping center made and a variance was necessary to get out from under the 40,000 square feet lot area requirement that was contained in that section. In this particular case, the applicant had a lot area RAM Court Reporting Service East Main St., RIv~hoad, N.Y., LI~I (516) 727-3164J 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 121 of 11,984 square feet and they applied for a variance of Section 100-52 which they were granted. So they went from 40,000 square feet down to 11,984 square feet. I worked out the magnitude of that variance for you That works out to about a 72.5% variance all totalled. Now, the other interesting thing about this decision is that it evidences that the Board at least at that time was recognizing that it was possible to conduct ~this kind of convenience store use as an accessory use to a gas station. In fact, the decision conditioned the approval upon the operation as such. It was conditioned upon the operation of the convenience store assessory and incidental to the gas station use and that is precisely what we are trying to do here. There is no intention to convert this into the principal use. I realize it is a different section of the code, but the principals of accessory use and the interplay of principal and accessory use are very much the same. That is why I decided to recite it to you tonight. If the Board is amenable to granting some relief RAM Court Reporting Service 633 East Main St., Rlverhead~ N.Y., 11~I (516) 727-3168 ,( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 I0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 122 on this application, I would suggest you might insert a similar condition that would maintain the control that the Board seems to want to have over these uses. In fact, that also answers the question that the Planning Board has raised in the memorandum that they submitted to the Board arguing against this kind of relief. They are concerned the use could get out of control. There could be two principal uses there, that a convenience store could have actually go out of business and something else such as a tape rental place could be placed there instead. You can control that by conditions in your decision and, in addition, I do not think your Zoning Code would allow that kind of replacement because no one has ever demonstrated that a tape rental place or any other business besides a convenience store is customarily incidental and subordinate to a gasoline station use. We have tried to make that showing tonight with respect to a convenience store. Let me sum up where our application stands. Our principal contention for the RAM Court Reporting Servlee 633 E~st Main 0t., RITerhemd, N.Y., 119o1 (516) ~-31~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 convenience store, is it, 123 part of the application that it does not as we proposed to operate constitute a separate principal use on the subject property, rather as an accessory use. We are therefore calling for an interpretation from the Board that the 60,000 square feet required by the bulk schedule for two separate p~incipal uses in the B General Business District does not apply. The building inspector chose to apply that standard. That is why we are here before you. We believe that because under such an inter- pretation, the applicant could undertake the proposed gas station an accessory convenience store use because basically it involved only a substitution of one accessory use for another, that is the convenience store or the service facility as they are presently in the existing structure. We also believe that because we have just a simple one to one substitution, that we could conduct that as a right being as we have a single and separate parcel. That is part of the reason I submitted the single and separate abstract view to RAM Court Reporting Service 633 East Main St., Riv~rhoad, N.Y., 11901 (516) 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 124 demonstrate that. Under Section 100-244 of.the Town Code there was a right to use a substandard parcel, not that we are trying to get away with anything extreme. When the parcel in question was created, there was only a 7500 square foot minimum lot size standard in force. That was pursuant to 1965 and 1966 Zoning Codes. There was a revision of the Zoning Code in November 1971 that raised that standard to 30,000 square feet, ~ big jump from 7500 up. We had a substantially oversized lot to begin with, 24,000 some odd feet and suddenly we were substandard. I have to address one last item and that is if for some reason the Board is not willing to grant the interpretation that we are requesting being that it is assessory use and that the square feet does not apply and we cannot conduct it as a right, we will require a variance from the 60,000 square feet standard. ~ submit to you that the 'applicant has sufficient practical difficulties under the applicable standards of Washberger versus McCallas to justify the grant of the variance. RAM Court Reporting Service 633 East Main gr., Rlv~rhead~ N.Y., 11~o1 (516) ~7-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 I0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 125 I will not go over the word for word standards again. You heard them several times tonight and it is already part of the record in this particular matter. I will recite to it by reference. I will run through and explain to you how we meet each of the criteria. HEARING OFFICER: You want to hold up on that until the January meeting? The reason I ask you that, have you painted the specific outline of the canopy or the cor~ers of the canopy on the ground up there? There has been'no spray painting? MR. WAGNER: No. HEARING OFFICER: Would you consider doing that, approximately where they would be, just the four corners? Also, would you spray paint, I do not care if it is in the parking lot on the ingress going in on the east side or west side, two of the Islands? I would like the local fire department to go up there and see if they can get around those. MR. WAGNER: As proposed. HEARING OFFICER: Hold up on that, if you do not mind, until the January meeting. Do RAM Court R~porting $~rvlc~ 633 E~t bl~i~ St., Riv~rh~d~ N.Y., 1I~I (~16} 727-316~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 126 this in five minutes and wrap it all up and we will see what the determination is. MR. WAGNER: I would like to do that, but I will have to consult with my client. One of the reasons, with such haste after the last meeting, is that the client is anxious to get some kind of a determination. HEARING OFFICER: I know this has been lengthy. MR. WAGNER: It has been a tong time and we are coming to the end of the fiscal year for Sun 0il and they have to decide where they are going to put their troops for the next year. If you want me to proceed with that in mind, or I will do whatever you would like. HEARING OFFICER: I would like you to wrap it up. We will just close the Hearing. If you do not show up, this is no big deal, but I would like to go up there since this is one of the sites that the fire department uses or will be utilizing once the tanks are removed. In fact, I was at the meeting the other night and this is the one the chief told us we would be using. We always use RAM Court Reporting Service 633 East Main St., Rlv~rhead, N.Y, w~01 (51~) 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Sunoco any way. MR. DWYER: tomorrow if you would like it then. HEARING OFFICER: 127 I can have that painted an you can look at You cannot guarantee how long it is going to be there? MR. DWYER: I can have it painted as soon as you would like. MR. WAGNER: He can do it tomorrow so you can go out and inspect it this week. HEARING OFFICER: I am going to meet with the committee chief on Monday night over in the last MacDonald's application. At that point I will then talk with them and ask them to take one of our trucks up there so if you can have it done, possibly Monday. I am not guaranteeing I am getting the boys up there, but the Island is of grave in~ortance to me so trucks can maneuver in and out of there. MR. DWYER: You are saying that your trucks use Sunoco gas and you want to be able to maneuver them in and out of the station. Again, we have a tanker truck that gets into the station that will have to go in and out of RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~st Main St., Riverhend, N.Y., 11~0x (516) 72~-3x68 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 128 the station. We sat down with Mr. La £ardc and made a scale model of the truck and moved it in and out of the station. MR. WAGNER: ©ne of the interesting things he found, I want you to know we have been through the Planning Board office and we are at the point where we are on the verge of a Public Hearing on ~our site plan. We met all the requirements that they can think of. One of the things that came up when we finally left their office and went over to Victor La Sardo's office was that the plan for access and egress from the site was not workable when you consider the size of the tanker truck coming in. That is the context in which we were doing diagrams and making scale models. HEARING OFFICER: We do not have any tanker trucks but they are about 36 feet long. MR. DWYER: Ours are 56 to 60 feet long. HEARING OFFICER: You could always use the outside of both islands so understand that is not the particular problem. I was more concerned about where the canopy was going to be. Try to get the painting done and we RAM Court Reporting Service 633 Esot Main 6t., Riverhemd, N.Y., LZ~OI (516) 72';.3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 will go up over the week. it is raining you are not,!,but I will over the week. MR. DWYER: I will get it done. go out and do it tonight if I can find a hardware store. MR. WAGNER: in mid-December HEARING OFFICER: meeting. MR. meeting. 129 I understand if stop I will You have a regular meeting sometime, I believe? That is a special WAGNER: I thought it was a regular I am not trying to be jumping the constraint. too long. but like I said, we are under some time I would not want to put it off HEARING OFFICER: what you are going to hard copy and give it and we will put it in Why don't you give us read into the record in to us before the 13th and attempt to close the Hearing on the 13th. We thank you very much, has been very informative. MR. WAGNER: I would like to more thing. The one thing I have gentlemen. It say one learned RAM Court Reporting Service 633 Ea~t MaI~ St., Riverhemd, N.Y., Llgol {516) 7~7-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 130 reviewing the files in the Town is that I think we are the first applicant for something of this sort that has tried to do everything by the book. We have gone through the Planning Board. We have been with them for several years. We have been trying to accommodate their every wish and I think we have reached a workable plan. We have a relationship with them. We have come to a conclusion. Now we are going to get everything in place with this Board that has to be in place. We could have gone out and did what the other guys did, just put the things up and started making money, but we didn't choose to do it that way. I want that to be noted, we are the first ones. HEARING OFFICER: Thank you so much. I make a motion of recessing this Hearin~ to the regularly scheduled meeting and we are closing the verbatim portion of this Hearing. All those in favor say aye. BOARD MEMBERS: Aye. (TIME NOTED: 11:40 P.M.) RAM Court Reporting Service 633 E~t M~In St., RITorhead~ N.Y., 11901 (~16) 727-3168 1 2 3 4 5 6 131 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 CERTIFICATE I, JANICE TAMBASCO, a Shorthand Reporter, certify that the proceeding as transcribed herein is a true and accurate transcript as transcribed from my stenographic notes. E TAMBASCU- ~ 21 22 23 24 25 RAM Court Reporting Service 033 E~t Main St., Riverheed, N.Y. 119o1 (516~ 727-316~