The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutZBA-04/02/1992 HEARING PUBLIC HEARING SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS April 2, 1992 P r e s e n t : GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, Chairman CHARLES GRIGONIS SERGE DOYEN JAMES DINIZIO ROBERT VILLA LINDA KOWALSKI, ZBA Secretary-Clerk ~Approximately ten persons in audience.) Page 1 Public Hearing Southold ZBA April 2~ 1992 Appeal ~ 4088 Applicant(s): Margaret F. Weidmann Location of Property: 3245 Wells Road, Peconic, NY County Tax Map No.: 1000-82-2-7 The Chairman opened the hearing at 7:38 p.m. nad read the Notice of Hearing and application for the record. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I have a copy of a survey, which was .amended on October 25, 1985 and it was initiated and surveyed onMay 3, 1968 by Roderick VanTuyl, P.C. or VanTuyl and sons at that time. And I have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. Mrs. Weidmann would you like to use the mike? MRS. MARAGRET F. WEIDMANN: Do you have any questions? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Yes, we always have questions. MRS. WEIDMANN: I am ready. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The addition that you are proposing is over the existing foot print of the house or is it .... It appears that it is an addition for a second story apartmen2. Is that correct? MRS. WEIDMANN: Yes, but it is over the existing. It is not... CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Do you have a porch in the back that this is what .... Is there a porch, what is underneath this out- side? What is the first story of this? MRS. WEIDMANN: The first story CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Yes, what is it over the top-ofo What is it to be placed over. MRS. WEIDMANN: The first floor of the main floor of the house. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: What is in that main floor of the house of the house. MRS. WIEDMANN: Two (2) bedrooms, a living room, a dining room, kitchen and a great room. It is not over all of that. Page 2 Public Hearing Southold ZBA April MRS. WEIDMANN (con't.): It is only over the living.room, the dining room, the two (2) bedrooms and bath. It is over that part of it. It is not over the kitchen and the great room. CHAIRMAN GOEF_RINGER: And what is the approximate size of the apartment? MRS. WEIDMANN: I think it is .... CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Square footage wise. MRS. WEIDMANN: I think it is ten, five, ten, ten or something like that. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: If the apartment was not granted, what would be the other avenue that you would have to do. First of all you mentioned to me prior to this hearing, that the apartment was for your daughter. MRS. WEIDMANN: Yes. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: And you also mentioned to me that she is expecting a child. MRS. WEIDSL~NN: Yes, that is correct. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: What would be the other avenue if you did not have the apartment? What would she have to do? MRS. WEIDMANN: She would have to find another place to live, because there isn't enough room, you see, on the first floor to accommodate. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is there anything that you have thought about concerning this particular hearing that we didn't discuss prior to hearing or any other questions that you had of the Board concerning this? MRS. WEIDMANN: One thing that I did want to mention is that on the. drawings I think you have there is an outdoor .... CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Stairwell. MRS. WEIDMANN: That has been deleted. Because I don't think it is necessary, because we have the indoor, in the living room, there is a stairway upstairs. And I don't want the outdoor thing, I think it is not proper, it doesn't look well. Page. 3 Public Hearing Southold ZBA April 2, 1992 CPLAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You don't have an architectural rendering of this, what it looks like, what the house would look like with this completed do you? MRS. WEIDMANN: I think, don't you have the... CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I was looking only at floor plans when i looked. MRS° WEIDMANN: You have both the plans for the house, the side there and the other side CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I am sorry, I apolozize. So okay, the stairwells meeting the fire code would be internally placed within the dwelling or structure itself. MRS. WEIDMANN: That is correct, yes, that might be believable because of the expense. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: And what is your approximate feeling of of the cost of this construction? MRS. WEIDMANN: Well, CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: There is an easier way of saying this, what is it going to cost? MRS. WEIDMANN: I have had all kinds of figures thrown at me, anything from like fifty-five (55) to ninety-five (95). And you know, originally had taken things away. You realize the taxes are going to go up. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Right, What is the approximate, I mean how long have you actually owned the dwelling. MRS. WEIDMANN: Well my husband built the house originally. And he died in 1988. So you know~ we had it~ ever since it was built, I think you have the~original survey there. CHAIRMAN GOE~RINGER: Okay. There is no other way of dealing with this accessory apartment. I did ask you prior to the hear- ing. We discussed it right down here and front if you could utilize the existing garage, you told me that was out of the question. MRS. WEIDMANN: You mean to build, to do away with the garage? The thought never occured to me to do that. It just wouldn't occur to me. I would prefer to have her have her own little Page Public Hearing Southold ZBA April 2, 1992 MRS. WEIDMANN (con't): nest, and I have my own little nest down stairs. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You are the only person that presently lives downstairs? MRS. WEIDMAN: Yes. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. Well, as I mentioned to you prior to the hearing again, we have two (2) options. I did, out of a curtesy to you, discussed this with the Chairman of the Legislature committee prior to this meeting, only some ten (10) minutes ago and I have no idea if it is an agenda item or not an agenda item. Certainly, the present situation as it exists and as you propose, it is not necessarily fall within the guide lines of the accessory apartment as they were created in this law in 1984, okay. I should point out to you that this law came into being as a result of this particular Board going to the Association of Towns in 1982 and understanding what the Town of Babylon did in their establishment accessory law. We then culled those particular areas that we cared for, okay, en- hanced them, changed them, modified them, abridged them, and then came up with an accessory apartment law, which Says that you have to have a C.O. prior to January 1, 1984, which I am sure you have on your house. However, it does not allow for the external construction either up or out, okay, of the existing foot print of the house. And that is the problem that we have. MRS. WEIDMANN: What does it allow for? CHAIRMAN GOEMRINGER: It allows for an existing internal modification. MRS. WEIDMANN: Oh, I see. In other words, you are saying the garage, use the garage. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Yea the garage or a portion of the house. MRS. WEIDMANN: That is impossible. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Well at this particular time, I will ask if anybody has any comments and we will probably close the hearing. We will do the best we can for you, that is all we can do. MRS. WEIDMANN: In other words, what you are saying there is no way I can put a second floor on my home? Page Public Hearing Southold ZBA April 2, 1992 CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Well, you most certainly can put a second floor on your home. The problem that you have is that you cannot ~se it as an additional living unit. Which very simply means that you cannot place a kitchen in that second floor. And that is the problem. MRS. WEIDMANN: Oh, I see. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You see, what you are creating here is not necessarily a family situation. You are creating a legal, you are asking for a legal accessory apartment for the sole purpose of renting to XYZ tenant, not necessarily your daughter. MRS. WEIDMANN: I see, even though it's a non-revenue apart- ment, its just. I see as far as you are concerned. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: My sister-in-law did the same thing for her daughter, she lives in Mattituckt however her daughter utilizes, she is a college student, utilizes the kitchen in the house. And that is the problem. And I didn't want you to get confused with that, and that is basically the reason why we are addressing it. But, rather than belabor the topic, we will again continue this process and see if there is anything else we can deal with. If for any reason, you take a long hard look at this within the next couple of days because we are not going to address this for at least two (2) weeks, and you feel that there is a utilization of the existing house° Which, of courser may require you to build an accessory garage, to house anything that you have in your garage, you know~ in another accessory building. MRS. WEIDMANN: There's just not enough room. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I understand, I know it is very tight and I have be~n down and looked at the property. MRS. WEIDMANN: There is just no room. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Right, sight. We will do the best we cant that is all we can'do. Is there a specific, before I close this hearing, is there a specific financial hardship involved here with your daughter, and I don't mean. There are no press here tonight and this is not going to be published in the paper. MRS. WEIDMANN: I understand what you are saying. Page 6 Public Hearing Southold ZBA April 2, 1992~ ~ ~_ · CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: It is a public record. MRS. WEIDMANN: Economically, this is the wisest thing for us to do at this time. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. Well that is certainly one situation that we will have to deal with. And we thank you very much for coming in. If there is anything else that is generated throughout the hearing, of course, we will be back to you. MRS. WEIDMANN: So, I should keep in touch with you or... CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Yes, we will be discussing it ongoingly. Give us a call in about two (2) weeks. Preferably the week after Easter, which is really three (3) weeks. Okay. MRS. WEIDMANN:Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is there anybody else who would like to speak in favor of this appticatiQn? Anybody like to speak against the application? Questions from Board members? Hearing no further questions, I make motion closing the hearing and re- serving decision until later. MEMBER GRIGONIS: Second. All in favor - AYE. End of hearing. Lorraine A. Miller (Transcribed by tapes recorded 4/2/92) Page 7' Publiu Hearing Southold ZBA April 2, 1992 Appeal $ 4089 Applicant(s): Evelyn P. Turchiano Location of Property: 450 Deep Hole Drive, Mattituck, NY County Tax Map No.: 1000-115-12-5 The Chairman opened the hearing at 7:52 p.m. and read the Notice of Hearing and the application for the record. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I have a copy a survey dated August 30r 1989 indicating the parcel in question with a two (2) story frame house, almost directly located in the center of the property from the high water mark. And a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. Is there somebody who would like to be heard concerning this application? MR. TURCHIANO: I am Mr. Turchiano. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: How do you do sir. Is there anything you would like to add to the record? MR. TURcHIANO: Mr. Chairman we are located on the water, Deep Hole Creek, a very narrow piece of property, it is fifty (50) feet wide. We would like to put this accessory garage on the road side of the house and have the doors facing away from the road~ so that we have a place to pull in and turn and turn to drive out, instead of backing out. We do have a small garage, a one (1) car garage and the house~ but we would like to put an extension on the front of our house. The house was built, I built the house 1969 and we have been occupying it since. We would like to put a formal front entrance in the front of the house with a living room. Now, if we tried to put a garage on the front of the house, that is twenty (20) foot wide, you are not going to see the house anymore and it will block the sunlight out of the living room and everything. So~ we would like to put the°garage up on the road, detached from the house. That is pretty much our argument. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Am I pronouncing your name correctly. MR. TURCHtANO: Tur-chi-ano. CF~IRMAN GOEMRINGER: I noticed that you had some really greau ground cover in that area. Are you going to continue with that ground cover to hide the garage to the best of your ability? Page 8 Public Hearing Southold ZBA April 2, 1992 MR. TURCHIANO: Yes. The front trees are going to remain where they are. The entrance is going to be pretty much where the driveway is now and will make that turn into the garage. The doors will not face the road. MRS. TURCHIANO: Excuse me, we will have the trees and the shrubs there to continue that look, to keep the look. CHAIRMAN ~OEHRINGER: What is the approximate height of the garage to the ridge, do you have any idea? MR. TURCHIANO: It will be about sixteen (16) feet high. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: And as for utilities, electricity only? MR. TURCHIANO: We will bring electricity into it, yes. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I have no objection to this, I understand your particular hardship and it is not unkind of many lots of this particular nature. I do live in Mattituck and are very familiar with Deep Hole Drive and I was there on a very beastly Saturday, you weren't there. MR. TURCHIANO: We took a lot of pictures of ..... CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: No, I appreciate that, that is very helpful. Thank you very much. Is there anybody else who would like to speak in favor of this application? I just want to measure something. Anybody like to speak against the applica- tion? We will wait and see if Mr. Villa has any questions. MEMBER VILLA: Mr. Tur~hiano you said you were going to put an addition on in front of the house? MR. TURCHIANO: I intend to apply for a permit to put an addition on the front of the house. MEMBER VILLA: Hew far will that stick out. MR. TURCHIANO: It will extend out about twenty (20) feet. It is going to be a living room and a formal entrance. Right now our entrance is, to the house, is on the water side% And we have always considered the water side as the front of the house. But this is what we want to do. We want to make it a formal entrance. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Any further questions from any Board members? Does anybody have any specific objections to this Page 9' Public Hearing Southold ZBA April 2, 1992 CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER (con't.): particular application? I don't have any objections either. In light of that, I offer a resolution to grant this as applied for~ with the following restrictions, that the only utility be used in the garage is that of electricity and that the garage be placed no closer than five (5) feet to the... I would assume, if we are facing west it probably pretty much south, southeast, southeasterly property line and it not exceed the height it has been applied for, I am sorry the width that is has been applied for, which is twenty by twenty (20 x 20) and approximately sixteen (16) feet in height° I offer that as a resolution gentlemen and only be used as a garage only, not habital, no bunkhouse, no sleeping quarters~ no anything of that nature. MEMBER GRIGONIS: Second. All in favor - AYE End of hearing by , ~/?~J · ~ Lorraine A. Miller (Transcribed by tapes recorded on 4/2/92) Page 10 Public Hearing Southold ZBA April 2, 1992 Appeal ~4087 Applicant[s): Bart and Christine Ruroede Location of Property: 450 Maple Lane, Greenport, NY County Tax Map No.: 100G-35-5-6 The Chairman opened the hearing at 7:57 p.m. and read the Notice of Hearing and the application for the record CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: A copy of the survey dated January 19, 1978 from R. VanTuyl indicating the nature of the application is, appears to be an extenstion or a elongation of. We will just consider it a modification of a deck, approximately fourteen and one-half by twenty (14 1/2 by 20). Approximately eighteen (18) feet from the neighboring lot, which is Lot ~ 80 on the original subdivision map. And I have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. Is there somebody who would like to be heard? How do you do sir. Could I ask you to use the mike? or at least come up this way? I believe we have all been to the site, we understand your situation and is there anything you would like ~o add to this particular record? MR. BART RUROEDE: If you would like to ask me questions, I would be happy to answer them. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The deck is to remain open and unroofed? MR. RUROEDE: yes. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: And it is approximately fourteen and one-half by twenty (14 1/2 by 20)? MR. RUROEDE: Yes sir. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: There is some sort of a deck ~here or something now, was there. I looked at it three (3) weeks ago, I apologize. MR. RUROEDE: It hasn't changed, it is still there. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I don't have any particular questions. What is your time on this? Do you want to get going on it fairly quickly? MR. RUROEDE: Yes sir. Page tl Public Hearing Southold ZBA April 2, 1992 CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Alright, we will see if we can take care of it for you tonight, we will do the best we can for you. We thank you for coming to the hearing. MR. RUROEDE: Thank you very much. CHAIILNLAN GOEHRINGER: Is there anybody else who would like to speak in favor of this application? Anybody like to speak against the application? Questions from Board members? Bob? MEMBER VILLA: My question was basically I understood it, that the deck was built at the same time as the house was. Right? MR. RUROEDE: No sir. MEMBER VILLA: When was it added? MR. RUROEDE: About two (2) years after I built the house. MEMBER VILLA: Which was when? MR. RUROEDE: That would'be fourteen (14) years ago. MEMBER'VILLA: The house was built fourteen (14) years ago? And the deck was added two (2) years after, so it has been there for twelve (12) years? MR. RUROEDE: Yes, right. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I thought I was incorrect in this discussion, I thought that this was an elongation of an existing deck. The entire fourteen by twenty (14 x 20) foot deck is there now. MEMBER VILLA: The Whole thing is there. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, I had no idea. I thought it was only half of the deck and that is the reason why I was asking the question. MR. RUROEDE: No, there was never a deck there before. I put it on two (2) years after, after I moved in. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is there anything you are doing with that deck, except legalizing it at this point? MR. RUROEDE: Legalizing it. Page .12 Public Hearing . ~ Southold ZBA April 2, i992 ~ CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: That is all you are doing, you are not resurfacing it, you are not changing it, you are not modifying it in anyway. I apologize and I thank you Bob for bringing that up. Because I thought that there was half of the deck was there now. Thank you again. Is there anybody else who would like to speak concerning this application? Seeing no hands I will make a motion closing the hearing and reserving decision until later. MEMBER GRIGONIS: All in favor - AYE. End of hearing. --Lorraine A. Miller (Transcribed by tapes recorded 4/2/92) Page .13, Public Hearing Southold ZBA April 2, 1992 Appeal ~4087 Applicant(s): Bart and Christine Ruroede Location of Property: 450 Maple Lane, Greenport, NY County Tax Map No.: 1000-35-5-6 The Chairman opened the hearing at 7:57 p.m. and read the Notice of Hearing and the application for the record CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: A copy of the survey dated January 19, 1978 from R. VanTuyl indicating the nature of the application is, appeaus to be an extenstion or a elongation of. We will just consider it a modification of a deck, approximately fourteen and one-half by twenty (14 1/2 by 20). Approximately eighteen (18) feet from the neighboring lot, which is Lot ~ 80 on the original subdivision map. And I have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. Is there somebody who would like to be heard? How do you do sir. Could I ask you to use the mike? or at least come up this.waY? I believe we have all been to the site, we understand your situation and is there anything you would like to add to this particular record? MR. BART RUROEDE: If you would like to ask me questions, I would be happy to answer them. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The deck is to remain open and unroofed? MR. RUROEDE: yes. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: And it is approximately fourteen and one-half by twenty (14 1/2 by 20)? MR. RUROEDE: Yes sir. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: There is some sort of a deck there or something now, was there.. I-looked at it three (3) weeks ago, apologize. MR. RUROEDE: It hasn't changed, it is still there. CHAIRMAN GOEPiRINGER: I don't have any particular questions. What is your time on this? Do you want to get going on it fairly quickly? MR. RUROEDE: Yes sir. Page 14 Public Hearing Southcld ZBA April 2, 1992 CHAIRMAN GOER-RINGER: Alright, we will see if we can take care of it for you tonight, we will do the best we can for you. We thank you for coming to the hearing. MR. RUROEDE: ~hank you very much. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is there anybody else who would like to speak in favor of this application? Anybody like to speak against the application? Questions from Board members? Bob? MEMBER VILLA: My question was basically I understood it, that the deck was built at the same time as the house was. Right? MR. RUROEDE: No sir. MEMBER VILLA: When was it added? MR. RUROEDE: About two (2) years after I built the house. ,{EMBER VILLA: Which was when? MR. RUROEDE: That would be fourteen (14) years ago. MEMBER VILLA: The house was built fourteen (14) years ago? And the deck was added ~wo (2) years after, so i~ has been there for twelve (12) years? MR. RUROEDE: Yes, right. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I thought I was incorrect in this discussion, I thought that this was an elongation of an existing deck. The entire fourteen by twenty (14 x 20) foot deck is there now. MEMBER VILLA: The whole thing is there. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, I had no idea. I thoug~ it was only half of the deck and that is the reason why I was asking the question. MR. RUROEDE: No, there was never a deck there before. I put it on two (2) years after, after I moved in. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is there anything you are doing with that deck, except legalizing it at this point? MR. RUROEDE: Legalizing it. Page 15 Public Hearing Southold ZBA April 2~ 1992 CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: That is all you are doing, you are not resurfacing it, you are not changing it, you are not modifying it in anyway. I apologize and I thank you Bob for bringing that up. Because ! thought that there was half of the deck was there now. Thank you again. Is there anybody else who would like to speak concerning this application? Seeing no hands I will make a motion closing the hearing and reserving decision until later. MEMBER GRIGONIS: All in favor - AYE. End of hearing. / --Lorraine A. Miller (Transcribed by tapes recorded 4/2/92) Page Public Hearing Southold ZBA April 2, 1992 Appeal ~ 4085 ApplicantIs): Andrew and Ann Monaco Location of Property: Corner of the northerly side Aqueview Ave. and East side of Rocky Point Road East Marion, NY County Tax Map No.: 1000-21-2-1 The Chairman opened the hearing at 8:00 p.m. and read the Notice of Hearing and application for the record. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Can I ask you to use the mike. I should point out for the record that I know this gentleman before me because I do work for the organization of which he is a contract vendee to purchase this property. ANDREW MONACO: If I may approach the dias, I can hand this out to the Board members so, give each a copy and it will be a little easier for me to explain what I am trying to do here. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: In qualifying my statement of what I just said, Mr. Monaco came to the Suffolk County auction and purchased this particular piece of property at public auction. Isn't that correct? MEMBER VILLA: Are you the Monaco that is a builder? MR. MONACO: That would be my father. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Before you start again, let me just ask is there anybody here that has any objection to my sitting on this particular case. I see no particular problem with it, but if there is, gentlemen, anybody? Okay, continue sir. MR. MONACO: As the Chairman made everybody aware, this parcel was purchased from a Suffolk County owned land auction. I don't know if anybody is familiar.with the terms so I will bring everybody up to date. How the contract reads. They called it a memorandum of contract, I guess it is a better word of saying it. Basically, I am tied into this, there is no out for me on this lot. They asked you to do your homework. Prior to auction- ing the parcel, I went down to the Town of Southold and spoke to the Building Department and Mr. Lessard and the Planning Dept., the Health Dept., as a matter of fact we were given Board of Health approval on this lot today. Mr. Charlie Griggons called me at 4:00 and we were granted a conditional approval on the showing, as you see it on your survey, with a distance of Page 1.7 Public Hearing Southold ZBA April 2, 1992 MR. MONACO (con't.): a hundred to a hundred and ten feet between the well, which would be on the corner of Aquaview and Rocky Point Road, and the cesspool which would be located in the rear of the property. So we do have Board of Health on it. I will talk numbers only because I want everybody to be aware of what I have in this site, currently I have about thirty-five thousand dollars ($35~000.00) in this parcel right now. If I do not elect to close on the property, I have no out. Prior, again, to going to the auction I was assured that the plot was buildable. It goes back to 1931 single and separate back to 1931 and we are asking for a set back varience from the bluff. We conform to all other variences on the lot, that being the two (2) front yards because there is a corner, the side yard, which is only. My mistake, when I originally proposed, you will see the first survey that is not marked in yellow, I was under the impression that if I went for a varience and we were asking for a fifty-five (55) foot varience, that was at the closest point where you will see the bluff line comes in and starts heading south before she starts heading west again. That is the closest proximity poin~ to the bluff. My wife and I don't plan on building for-about five (5) years. Basically, what I am trying to do here is before I close within a few months, is to assure myself that I have a buildable plot. So when I was asked to apply a house here, we had not met with an architect, we don't know what are needs are going to be in four or five (4 or 5) years. So I tried to come in here and for my own protection~ I don't want to be that close to the bluff either° Back, if you take the property line that is on Rocky Point Road and heads from south to north, heading towards Long Island Sound° Back in 1912 there was a stake that was put on that property line, that distinguished the property line at the edge of the bluff. That stake is no longer in existence. Approximately, according to my surveyor, ten (10) feet of the bluff at that point has eroded since 1931. Again, if you look at Rocky Point Road, when ! purchased this piece of property, normally your road, edge of pavement, you normally have another eight or ten (8 or 10) feet to the property line, like you would if you see across Aquaview Road. You will see stake edge of pavement and you will see the property line that is set in at ten (10) feet° When I first looked at this property and again without having a surveyor or an engineer check it out, you will see on Rocky Point Road, as you head towards the bluff, or what would be the guard rail, the pavement actually comes into the property line and the guard rail and the fence actually is on, not on the property line, but just touching the edge of the westerly property line~ Am I clear, is everybody seeing what I am trying to point out here? The reason that I am bringing this out~ is that I have been in touch with Mr. Jacobs and I am Page 18 ~ Public Hearing Southold ZBA April 2; ~992 ~ MR. MONACO (con't. : sure you people have been out to the site. I thought that the property would start eight to ten (8 to 10) feet in from that edge of pavement. That would bring me away from that gully that is coming in. Evidently, that is a foot path or gully from people over many, many years walking down to the beach has eroded away that gully. And it has affected this parcel of land. There is erosion and is encroaching on the land because of that. I have met with Mr. Jacobs, I had sent him pictures, he has gone down, he has looked at the site. Last time I saw him was about thirty (30) days ago in his office and he promised me within sixty (60) to ninety (90) days that that situation would be taken care of. And I told him that I was going to tell Board. Again, I am looking for my own self protection here. I have a lot of money. I paid 155 for the parcel of land, so that is not that I bought it cheap, by any means and so I want the Board to be aware that thereis an erosion problem at the end of Rocky Point Road and I have been assured by the Superintendant of Highways that it will be corrected. Whether I have just opened up a can of worms and blown myself out of the water, I don't know, but I just feel it is safe to lay all the cards on the table now, and at least I will be protected. What I am asking for is if you look at the piece that is marked up in yellow, you will see a fifty-five (55) foot radius line. In the last couple of days, since I have called your Planning Dept. and I found out that basicallyr if a varience was granted by the Board they would grant it according to the foot print that I proposed. And again, that was just a rectangle that was put on there, it is not a very big house, thity (30) by forty-five (45). So what I have proposed is to, I would like to maintain the fifty-five (55) foot radius, if I could, only in case of any-future erosion in five or six (5 or 6) years of whatever that I am still covered by the fifty-five (55) feet from that point. If Mr. Jacobs fills that g~lly, like he does and the house is going to be set back further than the fifty-five (55) feet because that gully will be filled. That gully actually comes around and starts heading back out again, almost to the point where you see approximate top of bTuff, to the west of that~ It is an indentation that goes in then goes out again. What I am looking for, if possible, is instead of on the first submittal of the rectangle, it had shown, I believe, seventy-three [73) feet to the deck. And I am now asking for sixty-three (63) feet to the deck. Mr. Lessard had pointed out to me, that the deck can be campimetered by three or four (3 or 4) feet, which can add, give us three or four (3 or 4 ) feet, if we can only get sixty (60) foot setback from the bluff. That campimeter is allowable, unless I misunderstood him, that is the way I am reading it. Page 1 9 Public Hearing Southold ZBA April 2, 1992 CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Not in reference to setback, but... ~. MONACO: No, would that be considered to the structure, to the piers or the supports of the deck. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Well anything overhanging is still air MR. MONACO: Okay, so then I would be asking for sixty-three (63) feet to the deck, at that point. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Two (2) particular questions here Mr. Monaco°. Your required set back from Aquaview Avenue is thiry-five (35) feet, alright, you chose to go forty (40). MR. MONACO: No, its forty (40) feet. ~. CHAIRFL~N GOEHRINGER: It is forty (40) feet. MR. MONACO: If I may show you a picture... CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: There is no established setback on Aqueview Avenue? You did ask the Building Department? MR. MONACO: Yes, forty (40) feet, it's to code. If the Board and Mr. Chairman would look at that picture of mine, that is the corner of the property. My concern is that, and I was told that I may be asked, if you would accept the house being brought up closer than the forty (40) foot. My concern is this, Rocky Point Road, it is not a busy road, except for during the summer, when it is in use here. And I understand that there is a lot of problems here with people parking and going down to the bluff. This is all things I found out after. And I guess it is~ something that I am going to have to live with when the time comes. I have also been, even though I haven't closed on it, I have been maintaining this stretch of road here, going down once every two weeks cleaning up the debris. I have painted the guard rail, I have cleaned it up for the Town, for myself. My concern is the garage would actually be over here on this side, with a thirty-five (35) foot setback, I am concerned with people cutting the corner, I have young children. I feel that the further I can set the house back~ and I would like.to stay with the zoning requirement of forty (40) feet, so that my children or anybody playing in there are not up by the street. So I could fit two cars in the driveway, so if I could maintain forty (40) foot, I would appreciate that sir. CHA!RF~AN GOEHRINGER: The other thing that I should point out to you in situations like that where decks are required by Page 20 Public Hearing Southold ZBA April 2, 1992 CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: yourself, okay, sot necessarily by this Board, sometimes we make decisions exclusive of decks. And after the structure or the the dwelling is built, then we ask you to come back. Okay. And we do that for two (2) specific reasons. Number "1", there may be a need to readdress the rear yard area, okay with reference to a topigraphical situation, alright, where we may get an evaluation from Soil and Water Conservation, we may ask our own Town Engineer to go down and so on and so forth. Secondly, you should bear in mind that there are times also on these bluff front lots, that we ask that the deck not be attached to the house at all, that it be free standing. So if you see a decision from this Board, okay, exclusive of the deck, don't necessarily be concerned, that does not mean that we are not granting the deck at this time, it very simply means that we would rather take another look at the property after the dwelling is constructed and then...beoause we do, we have subdivisions in this specific area, one of which is Pebble Beach. There is a significant amount of decks that are always granted within that one hundred (100) foot setback area in the Pebble Beach area. And we have have, primary and secondary lips of bluffs throughout that particular subdivision that we are familiar with and so on and so forth. I thank you for the presentation and we will see if there are any questions, if there aren't any other questions, then we will inform you of that prior to the closing of the hearing. If you say anything you think about prior to the closing of the hearing, let us know. MR. MONACO: Okay, thank's for your time. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is there anybody else who would like to speak in favor of this application? Anybody like to speak against the application? Any questions? Robert? MEMBER VILLA: Yes. The question I had was, you said you had Health Department approval for the septic tank, which one. MR. MONACO: Okay, I'm sorry. They are requesting one hundred and ten [110) feet apart. MY understanding of the law is that I must be twenty-six (26) feet.away from the bluff, this is what I was told by the Building Dept. MEMBER VILLA: So it is the one mark up in yellow. MR. MONACO: Yes, that is correct sir. I am showing fifty (50) feet from the edge of bluff to the cesspool as proposed. Now it is a very rocky area, so I am going to need some lateral, we may hit a big rock there and that pool may have to be moved. A hundred ieet is the minimum that the Health Department will allow, the distance between the cesspool and the well. And that Health Dept. permit was given on conditional approval. Conditional in that the well, when it is driven down gets water Page 2I Public Hearing Southold ZBA April 2, 1992 CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER (con't): the dwelling is built, then we ask you to come back. Okay. And we do that for two (2) specific reasons. Number "1", there may be a need to readdress the rear yard area, okay with reference to a topigraphical situation, alright, where we may get an evaluation from Soil and Water Conservation, we may ask our own Town Engineer to go down and so on and so forth. Secondly, you should bear in mind that there are times also on these bluff front lots, that we ask that the deck not be attached to the house at all, that it be free standing. So if you see a decision from this Board, okay, exclusive of the deck, don't necessarily be concerned, that does not mean that we are not granting the deck at this time, it very simply means that we would rather take another look at the property after the dwelling is constructed and then...because we do, we have subdivisions in this specific area, one of which is Pebble Beach. There is a significant amount of decks that are always granted within that one hundred (100) foot setback area in the Pebble Beach area. And we have have, primary and secondary lips of bluffs throughout that particular subdivision that we are familiar with and so on and so forth. I thank you for the presentation and we will see if there are any questions, if there aren't any other questions, then we will inform you of that prior to the closing of the hearing. If you say anything you think about prior to the closing of the hearing~ let us know. MR. MONACO: Okay, thank's for your time. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is there anybody else who would like to speak in favor of this application? Anybody like to speak against the application? Any questions? Robert? MEMBER VILLA: Yes. The question I had was, you said you had Health Department approval for the septic tankr which one. MR. MONACO: Okay~ I'm sorry. They are requesting one hundred and ten (110) feet apart. MY understanding of the law is that I must be twenty-six-(26) feet away from the bluff, this is what I was told by the Building Dept. ~ MEMBER VILLA: So it is the one mark up in yellow. MR. MONACO: Yes, that is correct sir. I am showing fifty (50) feet from the edge of bluff to the cesspool as proposed. Now it is a very rocky area, so i am going to need some lateral, we may hit a big rock there and that pool may have to be moved. A hundred feet is the minimum that the Health Department will allow, the distance between the cesspool and the well. And that Health Dept. permit was given on conditional approval. Conditional in that the well, when it is driven down gets water Page 22 Public Hearing Southold ZBA April 2 ~t992~ ~ MR. MONACO (con't): at forty (40) feet and that is just another forty (40) foot distance at eighty (80) feet actually. But there is forty (40) foot distance between the top of the soil and the water. If that does not happen when we do our test well, then you have to have one hundred and fifty (150) feet. As you can see, I can't put one hundred and fifty (150) feet anywhere on this lot between the well and the cesspool. At that time I would have to go back for a varience at the Health Dept. for the the hundred foot. Because one hundred and ten (110) gives me a little bit more lead way and actually the furthest I can get it away, the cesspool from the well~ the safer I would feel. My concern also was that there may be a problem with the cesspool in the rear year. Mr. Lessard told me that that was not a problem. The Health Dept. because of the down hill gradient towards the Sound recommends that the well be put upgrade of the cesspool so that you get no leaching down to the well from the cesspool. MEMBER VILLA: Well, it is your direction that your ground water flow basically, it is not the grade of the soil, of the lot. MR. MONACO: Well, that is the grade, the direction of the ground water. MEMBER VILLA: I was just curious which one, because one has it. MR. MONACO: Well, they will accept one hundred (100) feet by the marks on here, we proposed one hundred and ten (110) feet here and they will accept one hundred (100) feet. MEMBER VILLA: Okay, thank you. CHAIRMAN ~OEHRINGER: Okay, any other further questions? Hearing nc further questions, I will make a motion closing the hearing, reserving decision until later. MEMBER GRIGONIS: Second. Ail in favor -- AYE. End of hearing. by ~A~/~_~ ~, ' ~ {_ (Trah§cribed by tapes recorded 4/2/92) Page 29 Public Hearing Southold ZBA April 2, 1992 Appeal ~ 4096 Applicant(s): Pat and Roseanne Iavarone Location of Property: 950 Strohson Road, Cutchogue~ NY County Tax Map No.: 1000-103-10-24 The Chairman opened the hearing at 8:22 p.m. and read the Notice of Hearing and application for the record. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I have a copy of a survey by VanTuyl dated March 10, 1992 indicating~that we have a request before us of a variable addition, actually enclosing and squaring off a portion of the rear of the house at a distance at its closest point to the bulkhead at fifty-four (54) feet. And I have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surround- ing properties in the area. Is the applicant or an agent for the applicant here. How do you do sir. State your name for the record. MR. PETER PODLAS: My name is Peter Podlas. I am the architect for Mr. Pat Iavaroneo CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I assume that this deck is also unroofed. MR. PODLAS: That is correct. It is open air. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Approximate elevation above the ground, do you have any idea? MR. PODLAS: It is probably going to be according to grade for maybefour (4) feet or so. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: At it's greatest distance you mean. MR. PODLAS: That is correct. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Not necessarily at the house. MR. PODLAS: Where it is now, there is a high stoop on it. CHAIRMAN GOER-RINGER: I don't have any particular problem with this application. It is a beautiful piece of property and I was there on a sunny day and I wanted to stay. MR. PODLAS: Makes two (2) of us. Page 24 Public Hearing Southold ZBA April 2, 1992 CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Let us see if anybody else has any questions. You might as well just stay there. Is there anybody else who would like to speak either pro or against this application. Bob, do you have any questions? MEMBER VILLA: Yes, I have a question. What is that addition that is being put on the north side, it sticks out a couple of feet, that is going up above the roof line? MR. PODLAS: My only involvement is just to apply for a deck. So if there is any building, or adding square footage to the house, I put nothing on the application for it. MEMBER VILLA: You only show a five (5) foot support set on the north side, and yer there is something that is sticking out about a foot and one-half, two (2) feet and it's got two by fours (2 x 4's) just laying down, it goes above the roof. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You know what that is, that is the chimney. That is a wooden chimney. MEMBER VILL~ For what? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: For a stove or a fireplace MEMBER DINIZIO: It has insulated pipe inside. MEMBER VILLA: But it is heating into that five (5) foot offset CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: No, it is permitted, even though it is made out of wood. Chimneys and stoops are exempt. MEMBER VILLA: It is not built, I mean it's just framing. ' CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: That is right. MEMBER VILLA: I couldn't figure out what they were-doing. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Also you are probably familiar with our discussion concerning the 280A aspects of this particular right-of-way. Are you familiar with that? (Nodded affirmatively). Okay, and this Board of course in granting this application and I am not pre-supposing that we are granting it. But in any case, we will be putting conditions in reference to some minor updating of the existing driveway area, when I say driveway, I am not referring to the driveway on site, but the private road area. Okay. Page~§. Public Hearing SouthOld ZBA April 2, 1992 MR. PODLAS: Mr. Iavarone is aware of that and he himself, being a family man, his concern is well taken for emergency vehicles to get down there. Because he has said, he doesn't mind a couple yards of loam going into the pot holes or whatever to smooth that out. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: We 'thank you very much for coming in. MR. PODLAS: Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Hearing no further questions, I make a motion closing the hearingr reserving decision until later. MEMBER GRIGONIS: Second. Ail in favor AYE. End of hearing. Lorraine A. MilleE - (Transcribed by tapes recorded 4/2/92) Page t2 6 Public Hearing Southold ZBA April 2, 1992 Appeal % 4095 Applicant(s): Dennis Davis Location of Property: 6010 Soundview Avenue, Southold, NY County Tax Map No.: 1000-59-8-5.11 The Chairman opened the hearing at 8:23 p.m. and read the Notice of Hearing and Application for the record. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I have a copy of a sketch of a plan indicating the approximate position of the proposed accessory building, which I believe there is a cement slab there now. And I have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. Is there somebody who would like to be heard? How are you sir. MR. DENNIS DAVIS: Good evening, I am Dennis Davis. I simply need this shed as I have accumulated so much tools. I can't deal with it in the garage anymore. I am just looking for the varience to allow me to put the shed up. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Approximate height of the shed? MR. DAVIS: It probably won't be greater than twelve (12) feet at the peak. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I see it is fourteen by fourteen (14 x 14). Electricity only. MR. DAVIS: Yes. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is there any particular reason why you chose this particular area for it to be constructed. MR. DAVIS: Well, primarily it is because i wanted access to a paved area. So I could get out some of the equipment. It would be easier and unbeknown to me, when I built the house, I didn't realize that the Town would consider the private road as front- age, which created a problem for me on building on that side of the house. And if anything my house is exactly in the wrong spot. And that is what brought me here with this structure. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Before you sit down, we will ask if any Board members have any questions have any questions. No questions. Anybody in the audience would like to speak pro or con concerning this? The gentleman has a slab in and I have Page 27 Public Hearing Southold ZBA April 2, 1992 CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER (con't.):no problems with this particular application, t will offer it as a resolution provided it only remain as a storage building with electricity only. MEMBER DINIZIO: Second. All in favor - AYE. End of hearing. ~ Lorraine A~ Miller Transcribed by tapes recorded 4/2/92) Page~8 Public Hearing Southold ZBA April 2, 1992 Appeal No 4094 Applicant[s): Anita Macrae Feagles Location of Property: South side of Oceanview Avenue and North side of Beach Ave., Fishers Island County Tax Map No.: 1000-9-11-2.1 the Chairman opened the hearing at 8:26 p.m. and read the Notice of Hearing and Application for the record. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I have a copy of a survey this and a copy of a site plan indicating the approximate placement of this garage and I have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map and several pictures taken by our fellow Board member, Mr. Serge Doyen. Mr. Doyen I understand that you have discussed this with the applicant and you have presented these pictures to the Board and you are aware of the necessity of this location. Is that correct. MEMBER DOYEN: That is correct. Yesterday, Cuyler Feagles, who is the son of the applicant, who happens to be an architect also, phoned me and informed me that he was unable to be here this evening. So I guess I will have to furnish what information there is. This is an ideal situation for granting a varience. First off, the setback, it is setback greater than the established setback on the main road. The area adjacent to the proposed garage is already paved and a vehicle exiting the garage will exit on a paved area, which is about thirty to forty (30 to 40) feet from the main road. And as far as the topigraphy goes, it will be-practical difficulties because just forward, actually the one side of this proposed garage falls, the land just falls off, which would cause building difficul- ties. But the simple reason is that it is the most practical place to locate the garage. I think that the varience should be granted. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. I also notice that it is not protruding much farther than the house, it is an approximate line of the house. MEMBER DOYEN: Yes, you see here on the map. You see here are the setbacks from these other properties down the street, and you can see the distance here. This is twenty-two (22) feet this is between thirty and forty (30 and 40) to the main road. And this area right here, all this is paved, from here, this is all paved, right here. It is an ideal situation for a garage. Page 29 Public Hearing Southold ZBA April 2, 1992 CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is there anybody else who would like to speak either pro or con. I am sorry, I didn't mean to cut you off Serge. MEMBER DOYEN: No, that is all. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, the approximate about fifty-five (55) feet. MEMBER DOYEN: I was just guessing, just safely forty (40) feet. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Seeing no hands concerning this, any questions from any other Board members? You want to offer it as a resolution Serge? MEMBER DOYEN: I will offer it as a resolution. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Provided again with a restriction that it only contain the utility of electricity and it only be used for storage purposes and the height limit be sixteen, eighteen (16, 18) feet, not to.. MEMBER VILLA: Seventeen feet, six inches (17' 6"). CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: That is what I meant, not to exceed the eighteen (18)-feet. MEMBER GRIGONIS: Second. All in favor - AYE. End of hearing. .. ---'Lorraine A. Miller Transcribed by tapes recorded 4/2/92) Page 30 Public Hearing SouthOid ZBA April 2, 1992 Appeal ~ 4097 Applicant(s): John G. and Marie Elena Brim Location of Property: Northerly side of Private Road off East End Avenue, Fishers Island County Tax Map No.: 1000-4-3-3 The Chairman opened the hearing at 8:30 p.m. and read the Notice of Hearing and application for the record. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: A copy of .... MEMBER DOYEN: You haven't got the retaining wall on that one. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: YOu have one with a retaining wall? MEMBER DOYEN: I believe that is what it is. Is that what that is suppose to be. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: In.any case, this is what I have, it is dated January 31,1992 produced by Chandler, Palmer & King, which is rather a detailed, topigraphical map of the site, indicating one hundred fifty-four thousand eight sixty-nine point eight (154,869.8). And a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. Mr. Ham are you representing this applicant? How are you tonight? STEPHEN L. HAM, ESQ.: Steve Ham, fine, thank you, 45 Hampton Road, Southampton, NY. First I would like to thank the Board for getting us on the calendar at the last minute here. Secondly, I have to ask your further indulgence. My client visited the site over the weekend an~ saw the staking on the site, talked with his architect Monday or Tuesday, was unhappy that two (2) Cherry trees were going to be removed. He hadn't realized that as he pointed out, Mr. Chairman, the plan is rather detailed and it is hard to pick up some of these things. His architect expressed to me, which I received yesterday, a re- vised plan on which he has marked a location which is farther to the east. He has drawn it in red on that map. I have prepared a memorandum which has an affidavit of the architect, which indicates the... It's Exhibit A of this memorandum, it is approximately, where as we had a proposal to have a minimum setback, sideyard of fifteen (15) feet, I'm sorry, I don't have five (5) of them, it would go down to two and one-half (2 1/2) feet. In that affidavit he indicates that the advantage, in addition to saving the cherry trees, would be to save on, Page 31 Public Hearing Southold ZBA April 2~ 1992 MR. HAM (con't.): there would be less regrading involved. There will be some grading involved, no fill will be brought to the site. So there is some advantage there. Further, my client purchased the property in January from Betsy Whitney, the neigh- borj who as part of the consideration of the contract, agreed and/I have the contract provision, I think it is Exhibit "E", that she would cooperate in his efforts to place a tennis court. So long as it was at the southeasternly site. So we anticipate no problems from her. cHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Believe it or not, Mr. Ham, we have been to this site. And we have had the distinct pleasure of looking at almost the entire site. MR.. HA~: By the way, I have pictures, which if I could get those back.'eventuatly for the architect. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, how high is the fence that you proposing. MR. HAM: Ten (10) feet. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: So you are proposing this fence MR. HAM: A standard tennis court fence. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, now, is this one (1) parcel of property, or was it two (2~) parcels, what developed here? MR. HAM: It is shown as two (2) lots on the FIDCO map--lA and lB, but as a practical matte~ it is mergered and it couldn't be redivided, since it would be substandard. We are talking lA and lB correct? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Right. MR. HAM: Not the Whitney parcel. CHAIRM3LN GOER-RINGER: There is still an existing Whitney parcel.that has a cottage on it or something else right. But this does include the swimming pool and the patio and, of course, a significant amount .... MR. HAM: Yes. From a legal point of view it is one (1) parcel of one hundred fifty-four odd thousand (154,000) square feet. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Well, you are certainly asking for a Page 3~ Public Hearing Southold ZBA April 2, 1992 CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER (con't.): precedent. We have never granted a ten (10) foot fence, within two and one-half (2 1/2) feet. You have any idea what the closest, I could measure it probably, what the closest area the tree would be placed to the fence at this point, assuming it was granted at two and one-half (2 1/2) feet. MR. HAM: The cherry trees? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Yes. MR. HAM: No, I would have to scale it out. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Could you do that for us and just let us know, we won't make a decision tonight. We will do the best we can, that is all I can tell you. We assume the court isn't going to be lighted or is. MR. HAM: It is illegal anyway, I believe. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay; on Fisher's Island. MR. HAM: I think under the Zoning Code, it is not to be. But, no it is not, we are not asking ...... CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The reason why I asked that question, as you know, things jus~ happen to exist at certain times, so, that is why we asked that question. MR. HAM: The argument, of course, as a general matter, whether it is two and one-half (2 1/2) feet or fifteen (15) feet is that there is no way to put a tennis court on that property, even though it exceeds, and I have made this argument in that memorandum. Even though it exceeds the minimum lo, area in that district by twenty-nine percent (29%), you just run into problems either with the Zoning Code or with the Coastal Erosion Law. And, also I want to point out that the wet lands that were, that we will be encroaching on consists substantially, and this is in that memorandum and in the architects affidavit, of a lawn and driveway. There is a culvert there, which I guess the DEC had picked up and therefore staked it for that purpose. But the Trustees granted a waiver on it, they don't even consider it a wet land from my understanding. Page 33 Public Hearing Southold ZBA April 2~ 1992 CHAIRFLAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, I just want to ask Mr. Doyen while you are standing here, although I have been to the site as you had graciously had taken us there, what is the degree of activity on the road in this area. It is relatively minimal, is it not? MEMBER DOYEN: By what standard? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: How many houses does it really serve? MR. HAM: I may be able to tell you. MEMBER DOYEN: It comes around, but I don't think that the traffic would have any particular day on the site of this tennis court, even if it was up against the road. In other words, if there was no setback from the road, I don't think it would. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: By the way, my statement of lighting and happen stances, does not necessarily reflect anything in this particular hearing, anything that we have here tonight. Okay, and I am referring to any hearing tonight. I am talking about lighting just happens to be placed on peoples courts, like it happens overnight, the electrician comes in all of a'sudden. The neighbors find out, and then, our decision is then rendered insignificant, is the word I am looking for° MR. HAM: Well, it would take a little doing, I did some research just checking to see if there were other tennis courts in the area. And I did find out which parcels were vacant, I didn't mark it on this map~ but, and this is 4-3-2, I guess. Is there 4-3-2~ they didn't give me that. It is a different section, it is hard to tell on this. MEMBER DOYEN: A couple of years ago, we ran through the varience for a tennis court for ...... MR. HAM: O'Brien. It is just down, I point that out~ that is on 3.5, you have a front yard tennis court. MEMBER VILLA: Can I ask a question? Is there a reason for the alignment of the court in this direction. MR. HAM: Again, most tennis courts, I am a tennis player, I didn't ask the architect that specifically, but they like to have them roughly in a north/south direction, for purposes of the sun. Because the sun rising in the east and setting in the west is, can interfere. Page 34 Public Hearing Southold ZBA April 2, 1992 MEMBER VILLA: If you excused that quote the other way, you would have a beck of a lot more latitude. The only reason it is tight is because it is running in the direction it is running. MR. HAM: There may be topigraphical reasons as well because there is quite a hill there. MEMBER VILLA: Well you are dealing with the hill regardless. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: At its closest point to the road now, you are proposing what setback? MR. HAM: Six (6) feet. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Six (6) feet. Okay, so to the Whitney property it is two and one-half (2 1/2) feet. MR. HAM: Right. SECRETARY KOWALSKI: To the wet lands it is thirty-eight (38) feet. ME. HAM: It would be, I would have to scale it out again CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, would you do that for us Steve. Do that for us and get back to us. And secondly ask if there is any other possible way that this thing can be skewed, so that we could either gain more set back. MEMBER DOYEN: What more? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: On side yard. MEMBER DOYEN: Oh, from any side yard. From the Whitney prop- erty? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I don't care about the Whitne~ property. They have got another six point something (6.?) acres over there. MR. HAM: Again, they have agreed to this location, so, if we are trying to protect them that is not critical. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I am not trying to, but just from the point of view of erecting a ten (10) foot fence within six (6) feet of the property, that is basically the situation. And if there is any... MR. HAM: Within two and one-half (2 1/2) feet you mean. Page 35, Public Hearing Southold ZBA April 2, 1992 CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Pardon me? MR. HAM: Within two and one-half (2 1/2) feet. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I thought you said it was six (6) feet on the road side. MR. HAM: Right, six (6) feet on the road side. Okay, you would like the distance of the Cherry trees to the fence, wetland distance and the possibility of skewing it. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: And any specific plantings that would be planted between the fence and the road. MR. HAM: FIDCO, by the way, I can point out that FIDCO of course, has covenants 'whereby they have to approve any structures that are on these east end lots. And our preliminary advise from them, and again this is in the memorandum, is that they would require it, a screening, but the Brims were going to do that as a matter of course anyway. I spoke to Mr. Brim late this afternoon, he suggested that it might be in the form of fruit trees, which he apparently likes rather than evergreens. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, just for the record, approximate cost that the Brims paid for this piece of property? MR. HAM: I would have to get back to you on that. I did not represent them when they purchased. MEMBER DOYEN: I had a question. What was the .... address the retaining wall, what purposes or... MR. HAM: To prevent erosion. They are going to do some regrading here. It will be as a parentheses on that one western side of it. And the other side will be even with grade. In a sense .... MEMBER DOYEN: will be on the Whitney ~ide. MR. HAM: No on the other side. MEMBER VILLA: On the east side. MEMBER DOYEN: You mean on the road side? MR. HAM: Where is the retaining wall? MEMBER VILLA: The retaining wall is where the steps are. Page 36. Public Hearing · Southold ZBA April 2,~992 M~. HAM: They are going from there to there as parentheses. My understanding .... MEMBER DOYEN: It is very difficult for me to picture a retaining wall there with the topigraphy and the way their land, they are going to have to level that and I just don't see how a retaining wall fits in there unless it is going to be raised up. Why couldn't they .... I just don~t understand why... MR. HAM: Well, apparently their garage serves in part of a retaining wall. The garage I am told by the architect serves as a retaining wall. It is holding up, holding back earth. It is .built in MEMBER DOYEN: You mean the building isn't going to be moved? (Several people talking at once, hard to decipher) MEMBER DOYEN: oh, I see, the opening is just to hold back that, rather than, I thought they were going to take more inexcavating .... MR. HAM: They are going to try to keep that to a minimum. MEMBER DOYEN: Oh, I see, okay, now I see why they would want a retaining wall there. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Could you just take this and blow it up a little bit for us, so we are not dealing with such minute areas and write those specific figures in there so we have it for the record and so on and so forth. It would be greatly helpful. And, I guess once we receive those, we will make a decision. Don't rush, a week or so, ten (10) days isn't going to make any difference. MR. HAM: I can probably get most of this tomorrow~ except for blowing it up. I will have to talk with the surveyor. MEMBER DOYEN: I .need to ask one other question, on the FIDCO map, I don,t understand, they bought three and one- half (3 1/2) acres here, approximately. Was that three and one-half (3 1/2) acres of FIDCO? MR. HAM: Well, Block. 18, Lots lA'and lB on the FIDCO map. I don't know if the surveyor actually put a line to indicate, oh here it is right here I think, lB. There is not enough room, guess on that side to put a iA. MEMBER DOYEN: This was a true FIDCO? - Page ~3 ? Public Hearing Southold ZBA April 2, 1992 MR. HAM: Yes, at one time it was. MEMBER DOYEN: Yea, at one time. It is an original map. That is it. Okay, well then, the property, this fill went about twenty ? (20?), well whatever, it is Lot 28. You know why they did this? You know why they chopped it up this way? Because they wanted to see this as the beach. They wanted to keep an access to the house that is over here~ Otherwise they would probably give them more land. (several people talking at once, hard to decipher) CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Why don't we give Mr. Ham his pictures back. We can photocopy them° MR. HAM: What I can do, not only blow it up, but move it to where, all you have right now is something that the architect. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Why don't we do this, why don't we recess it and we will close it at the next hearing, no further testimony. Just send it all in, in case we have any questions, and we have to call you back. But if for any reason, we don't have to call you back. SECRETARY KOWALSKI: Why don't we do the reverse, close it and if you have questions, we will readvertise it. MR. HAM: I would rather~thato Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Any further questions from anyone in the audience? Seeing no further hands, I will make a motion closing the hearing pending receipt of the information we requested from the applicant's Steven Ham. I offer it as a resolution gentlemen. MEMBER GRIGONIS: Second. All in favor - AYE. End of hearing. Lorraine A. Miller (Transcribed by tapes of 4/2/92) Page 38 TRANSCRIPT OF HEARING SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS REGULAR MEETING OF THURSDAY, APRIL 2, 1992 Board Members Present: Chairman Gerard P. Goehringer Members: Grigonis, Doyen, Dinizio, and Villa Linda Kowalski, ZBA Secretary and approximately 10 persons in the audience. Appeal ~ 4037 Applicant[s): Metro/808 Realty Corp. Location of Property: Corner of Main Road (Route 25~ and Depot Lane~ Cutchogue, NY The Chairman opened the hearing at 8:55 p.m. and read the notice of hearing and application for the record. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: In front of us we have the site plan in- dicating the approximate placement of all structures on the property, when I say all I am referring to also the pumps~ And I have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. I am ready, Mr. Smith, anytime you are. ALLEN SMITH, Esq: For the record, although the Chairman has mentioned the drawing, the drawing as I understand, it was last revised 2/27/92 to reflect the last comments by the Planning Board of the Town of Southold. I handed up to the Chairman and I asked that it be included in the record a picture of the site which is under consideration. I have three (3) witnesses and one (1) submittal. Mr. Dennis Eryou is a professional engineer and will address the safety issues pertaining to the canopy. I have Mr. Richard Strang who is also a professional engineer and will testify to the traffic aspects of the site and including the canopy. Mr. Robert Kull who testimony relates to prior uses of the site as a pre-existing non conforming business. I ask, if you will sit to admit the appraisal that I had done and submitted to the Board. If you would like the appraiser to be brought in, I will have Mr. Nickles come. However, if you find the submittal acceptable, I would appreciate it. The first witness I would call would be Mr~ Denis Eryou whose credentials I have handed up to you to testify the safety aspects of this canopy. MR. DENNIS ERYOU: Good evening, I have been retained by the owner to speak to you on the safety issues related to the canopy. On May 25th I visited the site, after the canopy had been installed. And compared all visible elements of construction with the Page 39 Public Hearing Southold ZBA April 2, 1992 MR. ERYOU (con't.): drawings for the canopy manufacturer, namely Mohawk Metal Products and found all visible elements of the construction being with Mohawk's drawings. And examined the drawings with regard to snow load and wind load and their conformance with State Code. The only element I couldn't examine the detail was footings~ which had been poured before I reached the site. However, I have inspected many other Mohawk installations, and when Mohawk installs their own canopies, they are normally diligent in the footings because of the liability that is involved in the canopy in a installed condition. Now with regard to the impact of the canopy itself on other safety aspects, the presence of a canopy normally allows better calcinating in the servicing area, so that during the evening people who are fueling vehicles can better see the vehicle and generally operate in a safer fashion. There is less glare because the lights are down lights in the canopy ceiling. Secondly, in terms of weather protection, in the event of snow, rain, or sleet like conditions~ the canopy does shelter the person that is filling the tank and allows them to operate in a safer fashion compared to their standing out in the driving rain or driving snow. And thirdly, in terms of fire suppression which is now required by the State on major upgrades on gasoline and service stations, the existence of a canopy has several advantages from a fire suppression point of view. It allows the nozzles to be located somewhat higher~ up to the fifteen (15) foot maximum level, where they will have a better dispersion pattern or a wider area in the event of a fire° In addtion to that the automatic fire suppression heat detectors are also located underneath the canopy where they can catch the heat rise from a fire much better~ if they were located seven (7) feet above the ground in a non-canopy situation where there has to be tin heat pan put over the detector to try and capture enough heat from the fire to trigger the automatic sensor. And then finally the existance of the canopy aids the nozzle dispersion pattern under certain gusty type wind conditions. So that a fire suppression system is generally more effective located under a canopy than it would be if it were located-on a set of pipe supports, seven (7) feet above ground on the canopy or on the dispenser on the center lineo And then finally there is another benefit that occurs which is environmental in nature. The surface, be it asphalt or concrete under the vehicles that are being fueled normally becomes stained with petroleu~a products over time. And the canopy~ if the grades are set right on the location, the canopy tends to keep rain water from running over the surfaces and running off the site as petroleum contaminated stormwater. So those are really the safety and environmental benefits derived from the existence of the canopy, even though the original motivation to be the Page 40 Public Hearing Southold ZBA April 2, 1992 MR. ERYOU (con't): a canopy in is usually customer convenience and shielding the customers from the weather. Those are CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Mr. Eryou, am I pronouncing your name correctly? I do apologize for not swearing you in, prior to your presentation. Quite honestly I didn't think it was necessary, looking at your particular qualifications. Certainly, the nature of this particular canopy is that, of course, it did go up rather quickly and of course I had no idea, nor am I an engineer in making that evaluation, but what would you feel in reference to looking at the specifications of this canopy in reference to a snow load. What could it actually support, in your opnion? ~IR~. ERYOU: The canopy is designed by Mohawk for forty (40) pound per.square foot snow load, which meets the State's stand- ards. And normally the canopy is certified by the manufacturer. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Does. that make, is there any specific difference if the snow is heavy, wet snow or light, a~ry, powdery snow. I mean, we are talking three (3) times the weight, is bacically the situation. MR. ERYOU: Well, basically what happens is New York State has published a snow map for the entire state. And for each area there will be icelar plats that tell you how many pounds per square foot is the appropriate snow load. And if you get up near the Rochester area, it is up in the eight or ninety (80 or 90) pound per square foot range, to accommodate the snow conditions. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The only reason I asked that question is the support situation, with reference to this particular canopy is somewhat limited in respect that we only really have two main supports, apart from the fact that, I am sure there is steel going out and so on and so forth. My other concern is assuming that this was well desirable for this Board to deal with this particular aspect and so on and so forth, and was so granted. What is the future life of a canopy of this nature? MR. ERYOU: I would estimate the life of the canopy to be in the range of twenty to twenty-five (20 to 25) years. The first thing that would go would be the sheet metal. The structure itself would have a much longer life, in that it is heavy rolled steel. Page 41 Public Hearing Southoid ZBA April 2, 1992 CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is there any inspection that should be made in reference to something like this over a period of time? I mean you mentioned Rochester in reference to, and we all know that Rochester has two hundred and seventy-three (273) days of cloudy and rainy and yuk weather sometime, okay and that is probably not the right word to use. But in retrospect we have a significant amount of humidity, we have more salt air down here, and so on and so forth. MR. ERYOU: It would probably be prudent to do an inspections on a ten (10) year basis, but the major structure elements. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I thank you very much. Bob, do you have any questions of this gentleman? No. Go ahead, Mr. Smith. MR. SMITH: Mr. Chairman the second nature that arises with this type of a use is that of traffic and traffic control and Mr. Strang will address that particular inspection. MR. STRANG: Good evening. My name is Richard Strang. I · represent the traffic consultant on this project, Dunn Engineering and Associates. We were asked to examine the traffic flow and safety problems in the vicinity on one (1) at the Metro Service Station. Our examination included a review of the historical traffic accident experience in the area and also the examination of internal traffic flow and safety at the site. The accident experience at the driveways is negligible. According to the records of New York State, the Department of Transportation, there have been no reported accidents at the driveways. At the intersection of Route 25 and Depot Lane over the last three (3) years, there has been an average of about two (2) accidents a year. With respect to site lines at the existing curb cuts. There is an existing easterly curb cut on Route 25 and a westerly curb cut. The site distance at both of those curb cuts~ is excellent. It far exceeds our engineering, our safety standards. And there is no evidence based on our observations during both summer traffic conditions~'and also non- summer traffic conditions that there are any operational safety problems at these driveways. The one (1) problem we did deter- mine was on Depot Lane, where the existing uncurbed roadway at the site resulted in unrestricted traffic flow into and out of the site. That particular problem will be corrected under this proposal with curbing and there Will be a curb cut provided some fifty (50) feet off the intersection of Route 25. Based on our examinations, and our traffic studies were done after the canopy was installed, we did not see any evidence that the canopy effected traffic safety at the site or traffic flow at the site and in our judgment, the canopy itself is irrelevant with Pawe42 Public Hearing Southold ZBA April 2, 1992 MR. STRANG (con't.): respect to the traffic safety conditions in the area. If there are any questions, I would be pleased to answer them. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Anybody have any questions regardin¢ Mr. Strang? Mr. Strang, I am not asking you a question, because I personally think, and I do concur with what you are saying, alright, with reference to this particular canopy. I don't see that it causes any intrusion of either light, darkness, change in condition, change of visibility, and I do agree with you. Thank you. MR. SMITH: Mr. Chairman, in that we are dealing with a pre- existing non-conforming use may I ask that Mr. Kull come forward and put before the Board for the record a short narrative of the history of the site and his operation of the station over the years. Mr. Kull. MR. KULL: I am Robert Kull, I am the ex-owner of that parcel that you were speaking of. I was there for twenty-seven and one-half (27 1/2) years. I ran a repair shop and a gas station. Now I had repaired cars, had cars there, pumped gas, all this time. I did have a fire and I did have to call the Fire Department twice. And if I had that system. It would have scared you out oi there. It would have put the fire out. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You are referring to the suppression system? MR. KULL: Right, I had nothing. I had a fire extinguisher inside, that on one (1) occassion did not put the fire out. I had to call the fire department. And it was scarey and dangerous -- because it was a service station, gas. And I would be glad to answer any questions anybody wants to ask me. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGE~: Bob, when did you sell the station? MR. KULL: Just.about two (2) years ago. A little over two (2) years ago. Two (2) years and three (3) months. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: And at that time you carried, you continued with a repair business up until the day you sold the property to this corporation? MR. KULL: And gas business. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: And gas business. It was Shell station was it? Page 43 P~lic Hearing $outhold ZBA April 2, 1992 MR. KULL: -No, I was selling Texaco. I leased it to him -~ Mr. Chase or 808 Corp. for I would say about three (3) weeks to after the fifth (5th) of the year. And then we dealt business on the fifth (5th) of the year. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The fifth (5th) of the day of January. MR. KULL: The fifth (5th) of January, whatever that... CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: So that would be 1989, approximately? MR. KULL: Yes, approximately yes. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is there anything else you would like to add to the record? MR. KULL: No~ that is about all, unless anybody wants to ask me any questions. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I just wanted to say again for the record, I did not ask Mr. Strang to be sworn in because of his qualifications, and I'm not asking Mr.~Kull. Mr. Kull is a very experienced repairman. We have known him in auto repair in the area for years and his a respectable repair individual and, again, there is no reason to swear this gentleman in. He speaks on his own merits. Any questions, gentlemen? MEMBER DINIZIO: Mr. Kull, what was the time someone repaired a car in that. Were you the last mechanic there and then they just sold gasoline after? Or was that service continued? MR. KULL: Now~ I can't really answer that. I don't know if he had any cars in there since I sold it or not. MEMBER DINIZIO: To your knowledge, you have no idea of whether they had mechanic's services° Did you... MR. KULL: I had seen, I had rode by and had seen a car inside the garage. But I can't say that everything had stopped. MEMBER DINIZIO: Okay, thanks. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you, sir. Nice seeing you. MR. SMITH: Mr. Chairman other than asking you to accept Mr. Nickles' letter (handed up) as to the effect upon the community. Page4~ Public Hearing Southold ZBA April 2, 1992 CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I have no problems with Mr. Nickles either. He is a respected real estate broker in the community. I have conceivably not read the appraisal because I'm here. MR. SMITH: It is limited to the effect of the canopy. Other than that, I will answer any questions any of the Board members have, if they are legal questions on evidentiary, or there are evidentiary items left out, I will try and solve them. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The only thing that concerns me is originally there was the nature of some legal question concerning this which was either dealt with in this Court within this Town or was done in Suffolk County. For the life of me, could you just refresh our memory on that issue? MR. SMITH: The client elected, for whatever reason, not to have an attorney, proceeded to run amuk. And the Town Attorney and I litigated that, whether I'm right or he's right or whatever is probably is not germane. The consequence of it is there is a stipulated fine of some twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000.00) that has been posted with~ the Town Attorney and assuming that we resolve our other difficulties, the Town will receive twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000.00) as a fine foe the way the work was conducted. CHAIRMAN GOEPIRINGER: So this fine will basically be placed within the Town, it is probably being held in abeyance. MR. SMITH: It is not basically, it is held by Mr. Arnoff and depending upon'the end of this, the Town receives from the applicant twenty-fi~e thousand dollars ('$25,000.00). CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: So, I mean, it is not going back to the applicant, is the question. MR. SMITH: That is correct, sir. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The only other question that I have is that of the stipulation. Was there any mention of what future use of the existing building was within the stipulation. 5~. SMITH: I don't have it immediately in front of me. I had litigation counsel. On that, I will find the stipulation for you, sir, and get it in to you. The litigation counsel was Mr. Ross (Allen), not of Wickham and Wickham, but of another firm. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Right, the only other question I have is that, of course, I frequent this station, and I had noticed Page ~5 Public Hearing Southold ZBA April 2, 1992 CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER (con't): for a fairly a long period of time there was a "For Rent" sign outside for the rental of the bays of this station and I have most recently, as early as last Saturday, passing by I noticed that the bays have now been rented° Can you tell me if that was the culmination of a lease agreement with someone? MR. SMITH: It is not a matter that I em involved with. What I have been hired to do is work on this canopy business to the degree that the Board wishes further information on that, I will obtain it accordingly. CHAIRMAN GOENRINGER: Terrific - I appreciate that and we will ask if -- Do you have another question (to Member Dinizio)? MEMBER DINIZIO: In the notice that we read tonight, the principal use is gasoline sales with an accessory office and necessary storage. Is that all that we are asking for here? ~IR. SMITH: That is all you have in front of you at the moment. I sense there is a concern about the use of the bays as Mr. Kull used them some years ago. If that is an issue, I will, assuming that the client wishes me to, I will try to solve that issue with the Building Inspector. MEMBER DINIZIO: Well, I think that there was some question that... MR. SMITH: I am not asking to evade you either. I am not asking for anything beyond what is in your notice. It would be unfair of me to do so. The Public Notice speaks for itself. I am here to try to deal with the canopy and get that over with. MEMBER DINIZIO: I just thought that we were clear -- to be clear on that, that we are not dealing with anything other than that. MR. SMITH: I am not baiting and switching anyone. (TAPED TURNED OVER) MEMBER DINIZIO: Thank you. C~AIRMAN GOEh-RINGER: Anybody like to speak against this application? (No one) I guess the appropriate thing to do here, gentlemen, is to recess the hearing to the next regularly scheduled meeting with no more oral testimony pending any Page 46 Public Hearing Southold ZBA April 2, 1992 CHAIRMAN ~OEHRINGER (con't): statements or briefs that Mr. Smith is going to give us concerning the questions that we have had. We will close it as a matter of a pro forma act at the next meeting. BOARD CLERK L. KOWALSKI: Will you have questions to ask of the applicant at the next meeting? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I don't have any other questions unless the - there maybe other questions. Okay, maybe we will just reces~ it to the next regularly scheduled meeting. I will .mention to Mr. Smith, however, that it is not necessary to bring the expertise that he brought tonight. I realize that that is a costly thing for you. And we thank the gentlemen that did speak and we accept your testimony. Thank you. Hearing no further questions, I will make a motion recessing this to (the last~ hearing of) the next hearing of the next calendar. (End of hearing.) LORRAINE MILLER (Transcribed from cassettetapes)