Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-08/18/1993 HEARING PUBLIC HEARING BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD August 18, 1993 (7:30 p.m. Hearings Commenced P r e s e n t : HON. GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, Chairman SERGE DOYEN, Member JAMES DINIZIO, JR., Member ROBERT A. VILLA, Member RICHARD C. WILTON, Member HARVEY A. ARNOFF, ESQ., Town Attorney LINDA KOWALSKI, Clerk-Assistant to Board ZBA Hearings 2 August 18, 1993 INDEX APPLICATION Pages No. 4180 JOAN AND ROY BERMAN 3-5 No. 4188 RUSSELL IRELAND, JR. 6-21 No. 4189 SALVATORE W. CAMPO 22-24 No. 4185 THOMAS J. McCARTHY (contract vendee 25-28 (Owners: Frank Majeski and others) No. 4186 JOHN E. ANDRESEN and others 29-36 No. 4187SE- JOHN E. ANDRESEN and others 29-36 No. 4184 CHARLES H. LEWIS 37-40 ZBA Hearings 3 August 18, 1993 APPLICATION NO. 4180 - JOAN AND ROY BERMAN. (Continued from 7/22/93 meeting). Variance for expansion of accessory storage-garage building which was recently altered under Permit No. 20895 issued 8/18/92 and which addition will be in excess of 20% lot coverage limitation for all buildings. Property location: 520 Rabbit Lane, East Marion, NY; Parcel No. 1000-31-18-11. This property is nonconforming at a size of 2614+- sq. ft. 7:32 p'.m. (The Chairman opened the hearing and read the Legal Notice and application for the record.) THE CHAIRMAN: This is a continuation of the prior hearing in behalf of Joan and Roy Berman, and I believe Mr. Williams --How are you tonight, sir? MR. WILLIAMS: Good, sir. THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anything you would like to add for the record? MR. WILLIAMS: NO, just hear the decision. THE CHAIRMAN: One of the rare times during my thirteen-year tenure on this Board I said something to offend the 8ermans, and I must apologize. I will apologize to you, singe they are not here. Will you please tell them that I apologize for upsetting them. I most certainly didn't mean to. MR. WILLIAMS: They were getting upset, but without reason~ I think. ZBA Hearings 4 August 18~ 1993 THE CHAIRMAN: Right. And please tell them I do apologize and most certainly didn't mean to offend them in any way, regarding the geographic location of some things; rather than getting into it at this points will you please extend my apologies to them. We are aware of the property; we have all been down there, and we are aware of what they are dealing with and what we are dealing with and we will see how it goes; and you are welcome to give us a call tomorrow morning. MR. WILLIAMS: Give you a call tomorrow morning? THE CHAIRMAN: Yes, unless you want to stay around. It is entirely up to you, and I assume we will get to it tonight. MR. WILLIAMS: Shall I call Linda then? THE CHAIRMAN: Yes. Thank you, sir. MR. WILLIAMS: Very well, sir. What time will that decision be rendered? THE CHAIRMAN: About nine-thirty maybe-- THE CLERK: Verbally~ it will be done. THE CHAIRMAN: Yes, verbally it will be done. MR. WILLIAMS: And if it is approved~ I'll talk with you tomorrow as to when I get the approval. THE CHAIRMAN: Usually within five days. That doesn't mean that the Building Department wouldn't allow you -- it is a storage area -- and I have no idea how the other Board members feel about it though. Okay? -- MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. ZBA Hearings 5 August 18, 1993 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much. MR. WILLIES: Thank you. THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anybody~else who would like to speak in behalf of the Berman application? Or against? (There was no response.) THE CHAIRMAN: Seeing no hands, I make a motion closing the hearing and reserving decision until later. (Motion seconded and carried; see Clerk's record.) ZBA Hearings 6 August 18, 1993 APPLICATION PNO. 4188 - RUSSELL IRELAND, JR. for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XXIII, Section 100-239.4B for permission to construct open walkway between the bulkhead and the existing deck addition at ~he rear of the dwelling, which deck was required to be modified under Appeal No. 4163 on ~ay 11, 1993 with a 15-ft. setback from the bulkhead rather than "~as built." Location of Property: 5400 Great Peconic Bay Boulevard, Laurel, NY; District 1000, Section 128, Block 2, Lot 12. This parcel contains a total area of 43,402 sq. ft. and is located in the R-40 Low-Density Residential Zone District. 7:35 p.m. (The Chairman opened the hearing and read the Legal Notice and application for the record.) THE CHAIRMAN: I have a copy of the survey indicating, penned in~ that specific area which is to be removed --You look at that one and I'll get the other in a second-- and I have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating th~s and surrounding properties in the area. Sir, would you like to be ~eard? Kindly state your name for the record? Appearance: Peter Wilson, Architect, for the Applicant. Yes, I am Peter Wilson. I am the architect for Mr. Ireland who, unfortunately, is out of the country for the hearing. ZBA Hearings 7 August 18, 1993 THE CHAIRMAN: Okay. What can I --What would you like to say? MR. WILSON: First of all, I am not too sure that the language of the application made clear that this is a pre-existing deck° It has been there since 1984. The reason that the deck takes the configuration it takes is because there is an unusual storm scouring action that occurs along that bulkhead, and it is very, very difficult for Mro Ireland to retain ~the soil, the sands fill behind that bulkhead, and the reason he has covered that portion and the reason it stretches out into such an unusual shape is to mitigate that kind of action. If he has to remove the deck, he will have to probably put in some form of retalnage behind it, and of course he is very concerned about the expense of doing that, as well as whether or not retainage would in fact do the job~ THE CHAIRMAN: What type of retainage would you be referring to? MR. WILSON: Well, I would suspect --I don't think we have really given that a great deal of detailed thought, but I would imagine that we would probably have to place a six-by-six CCA retaining wall running probably along the perimeter of the deck that is left over, that is, the 15-foot line-- something that would prevent the water from actually sweeping the sand back up underneath the deck and the house, which is what is happening now. In addition to that, I am not too sure that that ZBA Hearings 8 August 18, 1993 would really work. I imagine that he would have to supplement that with a considerably rigorous planting program, and I am not really certain that any of those things would work. Right now the deck, the waves come up over the bulkhead, hit the bulkhead, come up over the top, and the deck actually functions as a break for the water so that by the time the water reaches the soil underneath, it doesn't have any velocity. And the deck works fairly well. In fact, it worked pretty well in our December storm; although he did sustain damage to the deck itself, he didn't lose a lot of soil underneath it, and that is why he went to the expense of putting the deck in in that manner originally. THE CHAIRMAN: The thing that I found interesting when I was down there was the fact that there was really no backfilling in back of the bulkhead. MR. WILSON: Well, that is partly because, you know he really doesn't have to do that because of the presence of the deck. Now if he were to have to remove the deck, and have a 15-foot open area, he would have to backfill that; and in addition to backfilling it, he would have to put some kind of re~ainage in there to prevent it from being washed out again;' and from what I understand --I haven't been there during normal storm-- b~t from what I understand, water comes over that ::za~ wouza ~rev: bulkhead even during normal storms, notwithstanding the storm we had in December. ZBA Hearings 9 August 18, 1993 THE CHAIRMAN: Isn't there some sort of material that they now use on the inside of the bulkhead which prohibits-- MR. WILSON: I am not familiar with it. THE CHAIRMAN (continuing): There is, I mean --just a quick situation. On the side of the house now instead of using tar paper, they use tiebacks, okay. There is some sort of~ it is a type of matting material that they use which prohibits the sand from penetrating through the upright boards and~ conceivably, the bulkhead has to be partially~ you know, backfilledo There is no question of that. MR. WILSON: He'll have to bring it up to grade anyway because right now there is a substantial drop there from the deck level~ and so he'll probably have to fill that. Anyway, I certainly don't think he would want a canyon between his deck and the backside of that bulkhead. The bulkhead certainly isn't going to be very attractive to look at, and it certainly wouldn't be very safe. But it not clear to me that the placement of an add-in or anything else there is going to keep the wave action back from coming over the top and actually washing the sand underneath the house, which is what would happen if that deck isn't there. THE CHAIRMAN: I see. MR. WILSON: I am not familiar with the material you are referring to. I am not saying that it doesn't exist, but I ZBA Hearings 10 August 18, 1993 would frankly be skeptical as to whether or not it would actually w~rk. THE CHAIRMAN: Without getting too belabored, are you --I should/point out to you that the reason for the Board's decision~and I am not speaking for the Board because they are all here and they can jump in at any time-- was mainly because this Board is not necessarily tuned to the granting of zero line --and it is not really zero because it goes with the high-water mark, okay-- rear-yard setbacks in reference to decks; and we don't do it on the Sound because on the Sound you may be 40, 50, 60 feet in the air. You could be 150 feet in the air~ and we don~t do it to the lip of the bluff, and we don't do it usually on the Bay. This is something that we are not attuned to. It is not kin to us, all right. MR. WILSON: I would like to point out, if I may, that this deck I believe was constructed prior to the initiation of this law. THE CHAIRMAN: I am familiar with the entire case. THE CLERK: Without permits~ without a building permit. MR. WILSON: It was done under a construction permit a~_wa~r~ C of O'd, that's correct. It was not C of O'd. ~ ~AIRMAN: It was done under a-- ~E CLERK: No, there.is no permit on it; I 'checked ZBA Hearings 11 August 18, 1993 MEMBER WILTON: When you say the sand washes up to the house~ what is the source of the sand? Is that on the bayside? MR~ WILSON: No, it would be any sand that you placed in there against that bulkhead, would be sco6red Out-- MEMBER WILTON: Landward. MRo WILSON: You s~e, that whole section is a former drainage soil, if. you are familiar with that. THE CHAIRMAN: Yes. MR. WILSON: At one time apparently it was a creek perhaps~ In fact, I think it was a creek; as I understand now, the fresh water has gone underground and surfaces out at the bay, and so it's at a very low elevation. His house is indeed up on pilings. It is about 4 feet I think to the base level of the house, and apparently it is the way that that piece of property juts out into the bay at that point and gets the southeast "blast" if you Will, it comes across and catches that point and hits t~at bulkhead with a lot of velocity and comes up over the top of it. If you will notice on the plan, that the bulkhead does actually curve at that point and goes considerably inland, and that the bordering properties are actualy set back further. MEMBER WILTON: It appears when you look at the neighboring properties their grade line is at the bulkhead height or a little bit higher. When you look at Mr. Ireland's ZBA Hearings 12 August 18, 1993 property~ he has a hollow there, which would attract the water and trap it there. ~M.~R~. ~W~ILSON: As I understand, there is a reason that that hollow is- there, and that is because in the December storm, as I unders~tand it, it ripped out part of a deck and then proceeded to scour out what fill he did have in there° The properties that are to the west, that are further down the bulkhead, are apparently not affected by that velocity because they are further down the bulkhead. The area that he gets scoured out is the area that acts like an elbow that sticks out, it actually sticks out in to the bay; and as you get further and further away from that point, the scouring, the wave action apparently is not as effective. I think the same thing is true that people to the east of that, they are set way back and they don't have the same type of situation that he has. THE CHAIRMAN: I can understand your statement. The Only thing I don't understand is, if you had this velocity of wave, why hasn't it actually undermined or disrupted the bulkhead? Why hasn't it actually broken the stays out of the _b_u~lkhead, and so on and so forth? MR. WILSON: First of all, as I understand it, the bu~lkhgDds~ W~r_e replaced some years ago. I don't know exactly when-- ZBA Hearings 13 August 18~ 1993 THE CHAIRMAN: But I mean, when you have that kind of velocity against the bulkhead, which is not backfilled you know, it is amazing that the stays themselves haven't broken away. MRo WILSON: Well, I suspect that.the.deck structure has been acting as a brace for it, and that is probably the only reason why they haven't been knocked over. I know that he replaced that entire bulkhead along there some time ago. I did not see it prior to that, so I can't tell you why it was deteriorated. Perhaps it was just old. But I suspect that probably the battering'that Ghat takes had something to do with that° THE CHAIRMAN: I just want to tell you, as far back as I go, with this particular piece of property, is approximately 1960 when I don't believe there was even a house there. I believe what it was was a cottage, were a common-use building --I won't get into yacht club or anything of that nature-- for the community in the back and the surrounding houses around. I am perfectly aware of what happened to it in the early eighties and storm Nelson in 1983 because I went down and saw half of the house in the water and the other- half still up on the bulkhead-- MR. WILSON: I am sure you are more familiar with the property than I am. THE CHAIRMAN: And I do understand; you do bring an interesting twist to this whole dilemma. There is no question about it. Just so you are aware of the situation. ZBA Hearings 14 August 18, 1993 MR. WILSON: Frankly it does have a particular quality, and, as I said, the reason why he built the deck that way in the first place, he doesn't really need that much deck. I am sure you have seen it and know there is a lot of deck there. As I understand it, once again, I was not, I didn't know Mr. Ireland back then, but as I understand it, what he tells me, the purpose of that deck is to reduce the scouring action, that he had trouble keeping fill behind the bulkhead. THE CHAIRMAN: We do have an engineer on the Board. We will ask Mr. Villa: Is there anything you would like to ask this gentleman? MEMBER VILLA: Well, what are proposal A, B and C here where they are proposing to take some of the decking away? THE CHAIRMAN: Do you want to go through that with us? MR. WILSON: Yes, I believe --obviously he would like to keep all the decking, right, for the reasons stated. But in the interest of compromise, and he felt he would offer these three graphic scenarios. One of them removes a portion of the decking that goes right up to the far eastern portion and nips off a part a little bit of the area in the back. It is not clear to me, frankly, how he would combat the wave action along that edge, which is one of the serious -- THE CHAIRMAN (interposing): Which option are you on right now? ZBA Hearings 15 August 18~ 1993 MR. WILSON: This is the option '~A" which reduces as little as possible. THE CHAIRMAN: Okay. MR. WILSON: And I believe what his reasoning here was was to get within the side yard setbacks. I think that is the rationale behind that. THE CLERK: We don't have any dimensions for that though. MR. WILSON: I believe you can scale that. This is made to scale~ and I believe you can scale, if you relate it to the deck. What it does is it actually conforms to the side yard setbacks. I didn't draw these plans. Mr. Ireland did. This again is more or less arbitrary determination to keep some of the deck. I don't really understand frankly what the rationale behind that is. THE CHAIRMAN: You are referring to "B" now? MR. WILSON: Yes. I think "C"~ I think he was given to believe that he would be allowed to keep 250 square foot of deck. I frankly don't know where that came from, but the-- THE CHAIRMAN: So "C" would more or less go along with the decision that was rendered? MR. WILSON: I believe so, right. MEMBER VILLA: Not really because it doesn't go back --15-foot setback from the bulkhead. ZBA Hearings 16 August 18, 1993 THE CHAIRMAN: By the nature of the application before us he is requesting this effect --This is actually a bridge. _~R- WILSON: Obviously a little bigger than a bridge. ~HE~CHAIRMAN: What we need from him is the approximate size of the square footagewise and the lineal d~stgnce along the bulkhead if you would, if you would just give him a call.~nd ask him to-- MR. WILSON: I don't think I have to do that. I think I can give it to you right now. THE CHAIRMAN: Great. MR. WILSON: If we can stay with Scheme "C" for the moment, I think that gives him 24 feet of frontage. THE CHAIRMAN: Existing on the ramp you are referring to. MR. WILSON: On the portion that interfaces with the bulkhead. THE CHAIRMAN: Okay. What about the piece that is cut out now? MR. WILSON: On the easternmost piece reduces by approximately 38 feet; the westernmost piece reduces by approximately 25 feet; and I don't know that you need that other '~e aecza~on _rt~ leg in there,__~hat returns north, but that is somewhere in the neighborh0Pd_pf 26 feet. ZBA Hearings 17 August 18, 1993 THE CHAIR~LAN: Does anybody have an interest in Option "A"? On the Board, so that this gentleman doesn't have to go through it? (There was no affirmative response.) THE CHAIRMAN: Okay, we will eliminate option "A" then and go on to "B"o MRm WILSON: Option "B'~ leaves him with 48 feet of net deck area, and it removes about 15 feet from the westernmost portion and the same amount, about 25 feet, from the easternmost portion. THE CHAIRMAN: Okay. MEMBER VILLA: Either the scale is wrong, or something is not right because it shows on the survey 101 feet along that bulkhead; and if you add up with option "C" in three dimensions you gave us, you get 87 feet. THE CHAIRMAN: But that is on a diagonal. MEMBER VILLA: It is a diagonal on both sketches. THE CHAIRMAN: You know, Bob,to be perfectly honest with you, dealing with Peconic Bay Boulevard, I find that to be one of the most bizarre areas to try to develop frontage because even though you are buying a hundred-foot lot, you end up with 85 feet based on the diagonal. MR. WILSON: The existing bulkhead does not go the full length of the property line. It runs short of that. __ MEMBER VILLA: But there is no dimensions on that. ZBA Hearings 18 August 18, 1993 MR. WILSON: I am sure this is eight scale because I am sure he took it off the site plan. THE CHAIRMAN: Okay. We thank you very, very much. It was ~ pleasure meeting you, sir. Are there any other questions of this nice gentleman? MEMBER DINIZIO: Well, I am just wondering if you are concerned about the bulkhead and this deck is doing what you say it is there for, then why wouldn't he suggest that maybe just a 4-foot catwalk along the entire bulkhead, not connected to the dec~ at all -- Why wouldn't that be an option? Or why wouldn't you try? MR. WILSON: A 4-foot-wide catwalk would really not do anything. MEMBER DINIZIO: What do you say to 6 feet? I mean, would there be an option? Why are you --I would think you would be more adamant to try to save the land behind that and try somehow to preserve that land, as opposed to connecting the deck to the house, which is in effect what he seems wanting to do. THE CHAIRMAN: Well, I think he answered that question, and that is the strength issue, okay? The strength i~ue'~.o~-~o~ecting it is giving him the over-all strength he needs - one, the bulkhead gets back-- MEMBER DINIZIO: But it certainly won't when you only have 24 feet there. He has no strength whatsoever now on either end, if you go with option "C". ZBA Hearings 19 August 18, 1993 MR. WILSON: Excuse me. What he would have to do with any of these options other than what is there now, is he would have to place fill behind that bulkhead; and he would have to keep replacing it; everytime he had a storm ~ction that removed it~ he would have to put it back, or he would have to build another bulkhead back along %he fifteen-foot line that would be designed to keep the fill from scouring out. I am not too sure you understand the problem. The waves come up over the top. The waves would come right up over the top of the four-foot-catwalk and go right into that open gully and still scour everything out of there. Now these compromises that he is suggesting here are all just that. They are going to create some problems for him; but he felt that you were probably going to be unwilling to accept the status quo~ and so he is trying to respond to that. I am not too sure he has got all the answers here. If you have got a better one, I am sure he would be interested. MEMBER DINIZIO: That would be my answer° If not four feet, then what about six feet? If not six feets then what about ten feet? I mean, I think our concern was that this thing was attached --everything seemed to be attached to the house and seemed~ to be running to the houset and you know that was not a good s~tuation. MR. WILSON: The attachment is not necessarily his objection. What his objective is~ is to cover that area with a ZBA Hearings 20 August 18, 1993 horizontal surface that will prevent waves that hit that bulkhead and probably leap 20 feet into the air, in a good storm, and come down and then scour out that sand. I don't think he is as much preoccupied with attaching as he is keeping that.thing from scouring out. Obviously the deck also is a usable surface for him as well; and he would like to be able to get to the bulkhead. MEMBER DINIZIO: I have no objection to him having a deck, to him enjoying it. But you know, in light of the fact that of our decision before, okay, and what you are saying to me now, to my mind the next logical step would have been to try to protect what is behind that bulkhead as much as possible. MR. WILSON: You are saying that rather than have a 24-foot wide, what about a bridge if you want to call it, take that square footage and distribute it like a catwalk? MEMBER DINIZIO: Right, right. MR. WILSON: Well, the problem with that, once again~ I don't think it really would solve his problem. I think he would still have to fill behind that and underneath that catwalk, and he would still get washout there. I think what he was trying to do with the deck configuration he has got there, obviously if you stretch a four-foot-wide deck across the whole front of the bulkhead, you are going to spend every bit of that 259_~are feet and then some, and it is not usable surface. He is not necessarily trying to walk all along the bulkhead. That ZBA Hearings 21 August 1Sd 1993 is not his objective. What he wanted, he wanted two things: To prevent the scouring and, secondly, to give him an access to that bulkhead whereupon he can get back and forth to the beach~ MEMBER DINIZIO: Wellr like I said, I just thought that may have been a viable option. MR. WILSON: There may have been several different shapes or configurations he could have tried here° Frankly, these are the three he came up with. I can't really address that° MEMBER DINIZIO: Okay. THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you again. Is there anybody else -- who would like to speak, either for or against this application? (Ther~ was no response.) THE CHAIRMAN: Seeing no hands, I make a motion closing the hearing and reserving decision until later° (Seconded and carried; see Clerk's Minutes.) THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you again, sir. You are welcome to give us a call tomorrow. ZBA Hearings 22 August 18, 1993 APPLICATION NO. 4189 SALVATORE W. CAMPO for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III-A, Section 100-30A.3 for permission to construct addition to dwelling with an insufficient (front yard) setback from Landing Path Road (unimproved). This parcel has two front yard areas, contains a total area of 25,175 sq. ft., 100 ft. frontage along the south side of Clearview Avenue and 251.75 feet along the westerly side of Landing Path Road (unimproved), Southold, NY; County Tax Map District, Section 70, Block 09, Lot 53. 8:00 p.m. (The Chairman opened the hearing and read the Legal Noti'ce and application for the record.) THE CHAIRMAN: I have a copy of a survey produced by Young & Young, indicating the approximate placement of the proposed addition to the main dwelling area which appears to be approximately eighteen feet to the property line which is that portion of the road which we just mentioned of Landing Path Road, and a copy o~ the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding prope'rties in the area. How are you tonight, Mr. Campo? MR. CAMPO: Good. THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anything you would like to add please? MR. CAMPO: The only ~hing is really, it is kind of self-explanatory, but in planning for the extension, I just faced two problems, and that was the cesspools. For the amount ZBA Hearings 23 August 18~ 1993 of room I wanted, I had the cesspools as I planned it conforming to the setbacks. I went off to the side of the house and the problem was the cesspools. My neighbor would also prefer if I came out less off the side because of their winter water view from their house which is the adjoining house next to mine. So those were the two things; and if I go both, it would be preferable, for those two reasons° THE CHAIRMAN: When you refer to off the side, you refer t~ that diagonal you placed on the side of that, near the drive? MR. CAMPO: If you follow the diagonal, that is where the water view would be. THE CHAIRMAN: You were kind enough to show me the property line. I couldn't get out of the car that night~ I had a ~ad ankle, and I apologize. After I said that, I said, "I really should have said something to him." Does anybody have any questions of M~. Campo? MEMBER DINIZIO: I was there today~ and he does have a problem with the cesspools, and certainly a compromise with his neighbor-- THE CHAIRMAN: Is this going to be a one-story structure? MR. CAMPO: No, two stories. My neighbor is also here tonight, Mr. Gorbel, just to confirm that he would pre~er that outline. ZBA Hearings 24 August 18, 1993 THE CHAIRMAN: Any questions from the Board? Anybody? MEMBER VILLA: It is a pleasure to see two neighbors sitting together. THE CHAIRMAN: Yes. In view of that, I will make a motion to grant it as applied for. All in favor? (Seconded and carried; see Clerk's Minutes for "Conditional Approval.") THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much for coming in. ZBA Hearings 25 August 18, 1993 (Before the commencement of Application No. 4185, Harvey Arnoff, Esq., Town Attorney and Counsel to the ZBA, recused himself and did not participate in said hearing.) APPLICATION NO. 4185 - THOMAS J. M~CARTHY (contract vendee). Current owners: Frank Majeski and others. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III-A, Section 100-30A.3 for permission to modify area of proposed substandard lots (prior Appeal No. 4100 rendered June 30, 1992), each with a preexisting dwelling. Location of Property: 1270 Fourth Street and 305 King Street, New Suffolk, NY; District 1000, Section 117, Block 7, Lot 008. 8:02 p.m. (The Chairman opened the hearing and read the Legal Notice and application for the record.) THE CHAIRMAN: I have a map indicating the changes and which affect, I believe, Lot No. 1 and Lot No. 2 --and Lot No. 3 actually. They are all three lots, a minor change from the decision-- and a copy of Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. Mr. McCarthy, how are you? Appearance: Thomas J. McCarthy, Applicant pro se. Mr. McCARTHY: Fine, thank you. THE CHAIRMAN: Just briefly, for the Board, do you want to tell us what you did from our original decision in 19927 ZBA Hearings 26 August 18, 1993 MR. McCARTHY: Well, the lot line that separates Lot No. 1 and Lot No. 2 specifically included the cesspool covers . that you see that are now located on Lot No. 2 in front of the house. That was part of Lot No. 1. The reason for doing that was those two cesspools service that structure on Lot No. 1; and as a result of applying to the Suffolk County Board of Health and getting approval from their Board of Review, one condition they are putting on this application is that I install new wells and new septic systems, which doesn't make the lot line that I had drawn on there to include the existing cesspools necessary anymore. It was kind of an awkward layout, so this I feel is a better layout, as the lot line separating Lot 1 and 2 no lonqer runs in front of the structure on Lot No. 2; and it separates them in case there was any neighbor who wanted to put a fence between the two of them, it would not be in front of the other one's house. That is why I changed the lot line between No. 1 and Nol 2, and on Lot Line No. 3 we had 45 feet of frontage that fanned out to 50 feet in the back, and that was, the intention of that was for the same intent, the separation between the wells and cesspool in anticipation of what the Suffolk County Health Department was going to do. At the time of the last hearing when we granted the variance, I did not have the map showing the surrounding cesspools and wells in the neighborhood. I have since gone around the neighborhood and discovered the wells and cesspools that would be within 150 feet ZBA Hearings 27 August 18, 1993 of this property; and working with the Suffolk County Health Department, we came up with the best location for the wells and cesspools on each one of the individual lots. They have given the approval based on this plan. This plan does not alter the well and cesspool locations as you see them here, as to what I have shown the Health Department. It is merely a juggling of the lot lines. THE CHAIRMAN: Two quick questions. You are still removihg the one-story.frame house on Lot No. 3? MR. McCARTHY: Correct. THE CHAIRMAN: Secondly, are you placing any specific C & R's on this? MR. McCARTHY: With regard to-- THE CHAIRMAN: Fences or -- Have you thought about it? MR. McCARTHY: To be honest with you, no, I haven't gotten to that point yet, but it is certainly a consideration. THE CHAIRMAN: Does anybody have any questions of Mr. McCarthy? Bob? MEMBER VILLA: Do you have approval from the Board of Review now? MR. McCARTHY: Yes, I got a variance from the Board of Review and await the stamped plans when I get the well covenants back to them in the form that they need~ Then I will get the stamp from them. ZBA Hearings 28 August 18, 1993 MEMBER DOYEN: I don't have any objection to it. I think it certainly adds to the subdivision to straighten out the lines a little bit more, particularly on Lot No~ 3. MR. McCARTHY: Yes, I could have gone forward with it the way it was~ but I felt that, you know, if we have an effort to straighten, if we have that opportunity in front of us to straighten that out and make it a little bit better for the neighborhood and conform to everything else ~hat is going on. It was a little bit more costly to get the maps redrawn and the fees to reapply in front of you; but I think it is better for the project. THE CHAIRMAN: Again, in the liqht of the fact that you have done a substantial amount of work on this and we have, although the work was yours in the last year, with the Board of R~view and so on and so forth, as long as the Board will go along with the original conditions~ I will make a motion granting it, again, with those original conditions. And the main condition is that the house be removed on the road side of Lot No. 3; and the other ones that we mentioned. I offer that as a resolution. (Seconded and carried; see Board Clerk's Minutes.) MRo McCARTHY: Thank you. THE CHAIRMAN: Have a good evening. ZBA Hearings 29 August 18, 1993 APPLICATION NOS. 4186 and 4187 - DR'. JOHN E. ANDRESEN and others as contract vendees (Current Owner: Thomas N. Anshutz, Jr. ) concerning premises known as 1625 Main Road and Franklinville Road West, Laurel, NY; District 1000, Section 127, Block 2, Lot 5.'1 containing 59,984 sq. ft. in this R-80 Residential Zone District, for A) Appl. No. 4186 - Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-32, Bulk Schedule, for permission to locate principal building with a reduced setback from the southerly (front) property line along the Main Road (S.R. 25); and B) Appl. -No. 4187 - Special Exception for permission to establish use of proposed building for veterinarian -- office and animal hospital use in accordance with Article III, Section 100-30B(1) of the Zoning Ordinance. 8:08 p.m. (The Chairman opened the hearing and read the Legal Notice and application for the record. ) THE CHAIRMAN: The second from the last, both for Dr. John E. Andresen. I will open both the variance and the special exception concurrently. I have copy of the site plan which is generic to both the application and to the special exception, dated July 13, 1993; and I have a copy of the Suffolk County tax ZBA Hearings 30 August 18~ 1993 map indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. Mr. Danowski, how are you tonight? Appearance: Peter Danowski~ Esq., for the Applicant. Very food, thanks. THE CHAIRMAN: Before I ask you to speak, I just want to mention one thing to clear the issue that one of the contract vendees in this particular piece of property is Dr. Timpone and his wife. MR. DANOWSKI: That is correct. THE CHAIRMAN: They are both personal friends of mine. Does anybody have any objection to my sitting on this application? MEMBER VILLA: He is also a friend of mine° THE CHAIRMAN: He takes care of my dog. OTHER VOICES: Me too. Me three° MR. DANOWSKI: And Dr. Andresen's wife. She is also part of the contract vendee situation° So the husbands and wives are the contract vendees and have the permission of the owner to speak here tonight. THE CHAIRMAN: Okay. I just wanted to clear that so that everybody is aware of it, and you are welcome to develop it. MR. DANOWSKI: I think the letter I have submitted covers the issues as a special exception that is listed in the ZBA Hearings 31 August 18, 1993 Town Code. I have pointed out the general location of the proposed facility which to my mind is directly across from Elbow Two. There are some commercial establishments across the street. It is at an intersection of Franklinvil~e Road and the Main Road, which are two fairly traveled highways. The use I think is not contrary to other uses in the area and the Town Code saw fit to include this in the zone which would allow a special exception, listing the vet hospital, so I wouldn't think, 'unless there are some other thoughts on this Board, that people would be terribly opposed to it. The reason for the variance request is: We almost have three front yards here. We are at the junction of a couple roads and we need a certain distance away from the building. We almost eliminate a building envelope if we don't ask for the variance. If you push the b~ilding farther to the east, we come onto property where there is a residence, and reasonably we think we should distance ourselves away from the residence. There is some greenery that will remain on-site to the east, so there will be a further separation of the physical building from the neighbor's house, so there will be more screening between the vet hospital and the building itself. Also, the Planning Board suggested to us, and we are willing to live with this -- that there will be additional screening left open on the west side as well. They, I believe, have forwarded a letter to this Board, saying that they are in favor of the project and made a comment about the ZBA Hearings 32 August 18, 1993 clearing and grade. We are set to go back to the Planning Board with further details for them on the site plan. We have a pending application with the Health Department waiting to hear from them, and so I am here to answer any questions, and so are all the family members and any neighbors or people in the public who might have a comment° THE CHAIRMAN: The only question I have is, why the 75 feet from Franklinville Road, thereby creating the variance of 30 feet from-- .MR. DANOWSKt: You have in your Town Code provisions, if you are on two public roads, they are each a front yard, so you have to go one way or the other. And to set them back for traffic viewpoint and also for visibility of the building itself, in site plan discussion we concern ourselves with coming down Franklinville Road, you hit the entrance~ people won't see it necessarily. So, in talking to the Planning Board and Planning staff, how to site the building from a-site-plan view~ that was chosen as the best location. Also to (one word inaudible) the building, if we were pushed in a different direction, we would have to bring in more soil, because it slopes down further toward the east. THE CHAIRMAN: Okay° I am going to come back and ask you a couple questions; but I will yield to my engineer down there. Do you have any specific questions? MEMBER VILLA: No~ No problem. ZBA Hearings 33 August 18, 1993 THE CHAIRMAN: Jim? MEMBER DINIZIO: Are there going to be like kennels and things like that? MR. DANOWSKI: Everything is within the building itself. We've got basically a small animal/large animal facility, Much of the work of Dr. Andresen will actually be at sites at farms where there are large animals, so that is probably the exception when a large animal might come on for an opera%ion. THE CHAIRMAN: Okay, it is my understanding from your statement then everything will be done internally within the building. The building will be fully air-conditioned and heated, both first floor -- when I say first floor, I am referring to the ground floor, and then I am sure the basement will be utilized to a certain degree. MR. DANOWSKI: 'Right. THE CHAIRMAN: Is there any plan of having any type of paddock outside? So as to keep large animals on site? MR. DANOWSKI: I don't think that --we'd probably have to come back before the Board to'address that issue. At this point, that is not a consideration. I'd hate to think if a horse had to be left out for a minute that that would be a violation of what I just said; but we are not contemplating any large housing of animals as a routine. I was thinking of an ZBA Hearings 34 August 18, 1993 emergency situation with a horse standing outside the door for a minute. THE CHAIRMAN: I did forget about my other two members over here° I see -- MEMBERS WILTON AND DINIZIO: No. THE CHAIRMAN: I guess they have no questions° Is there anybody else on the Board that has any other questions? MEMBER DOYEN: Are they boarding dogs? THE CHAIRMAN: I think the boarding dogs is mainly for treatment. We will ask the question: Isn't that correct? MRo DANOWSKI: That's correct. THE CHAIRMAN: Any questions from anyone? Seeing no questions, we will see what develops. Anyone else who would like to speak, either for or against this application? UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I am a next-door neighbor° THE CHAIRMAN: Are you the §entleman to the east, sir? SAME SPEAKER: Yes. THE CHAIRMAN: How are you, sir? Would you state your name for the record? MR. KUESTER: I have no objection whatsoever. THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, sir. MR. KUESTER: I agree with every bit. THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you° THE CHAIRMAN: Lydia? __ (Applause.) ZBA Hearings 35 August 18, 1993 L Y D I A T 0 R T 0 R A made the following statement: I am Lydia Tortora and I live in Mattituck, and I think we are extremely fortunate to have two of the finest veterinarians in New York State that are looking to open a facility here in Southold. I have known Dr. Timpone many years and many occasions he has put aside his personal and family needs to answer emergency calls and care for sick animals and to take care with great interest in serving our community. The location is an ideal one, I think. It offers a buffer from the surrounding districts; it is a compatible use with the surrounding districts; it will enhance the character of the neighborhood and can only benefit us. I think most importantly, the establishment of this animal care facility will serve to help the health, safety and general order of the town by providing a much needed service to our residents. Thank you. (Applause.) THE CHAiR/~AN: Is there anybody else who would like to speak? Seeing no further hands, because of the nature of this application, I am not going to suggest an approval from the floor; but you are very welcome to stay here for a short period of time. We only have one other application, and we are going to be dealing with it, so -- and the other application is going to be postponed until the next regularly scheduled meeting, although we do have one gentleman who would like to speak ZBA Hearings 36 August 18~ 1993 concerning it, so just sit tight. I make a motion closing the hearing and reserving decision until later. (Seconded and carried; see Board Clerk's Minutes.) ZBA Hearings 37 August 18, 1993 APPLICATION NO. 4184 - CHARLES H. LEWIS for a Variance.as provided by New York Town Law, Section 280-A requesting acceptance of minimum improvements within a private right-of-way for safe and sufficient access by emergency, fire and other vehicles to: Lot No. 1, as modified, with its proposed access over a right-of-way extending from the westerly side of Lighthouse Road, Southold, NY, over premises now or formerly of Pantel, referred to as Parcel #1000-50-3-3.4, and over premises now or formerly o~ Suffolk County, known as Parcel ~1000-50-3-3.1. Lot No. 2,-as modified, with its proposed access over a right-of-way extending from the northerly side of Sound View Avenue, $outhold, NY, in a northerly direction over premises now or formerly of Regan, Lindermayer, Stanley, Kudinka and/or Garcia and Sileo, referred to as Parcels #1000-50-3-16, 7, 8, 23, 9 and/or 19.1. The property to which this application is requested for access and standards sufficient for emergency vehicles is shown as ' Parcels #1000-50-3-14, 15, and 16 for a total combined area of 2.2612 acres, and which is pending before the Southold Town Planning Board for re-division into two lots. 8:20 p.m. (The Chairman opened the hearing and read the Legal Notice and application for the record.) ZBA Hearings 38 August 18, 1993 THE CHAIRMAN: On the agenda is in behalf of Charles H. Lewis. i have a copy of a survey dated October 24, 1989, and revised on July 26, 1993; and I have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. The lots in question are two presently and personalty improved lots. Who would like to be heard concerning this? Could you state your name for the record please. R E G I N A L D M I N E R : Yes. My name is Reginald Miner~ I am the neighbor to the east of the two lots that are in question. THE CHAIRMAN: Okay° MR. MINER: My objection is the fact that the access road coming into Lot No. 1, the northerly lot, would put the access road within six feet of my house and my living area. My iiving room on the first floor, my two bedrooms on the second floor, plus a patio behind the house -- All would come in contact with this access road. He has not used the property~ as far as I can tell, in talking to the previous owners. I have owned this piece of property for three years-- approximately for the last fifteen years. I have no problems with him dividing the lots up, and so forth, making two separate building lots. My maln concern is my well in the back which is on the property line and also the access road coming in, into that plaid-marked Lot No. 1. ZBA Hearings 39 August 18, 1993 THE CHAIRMAN: What do you propose that we do, anything? MR. MINER: Well, if you look on the survey, there is a dirt road coming in on Lot No. 2; and that goes up north towards Lot No. 1 past what is presently now a gazebo. I th~nk on'the survey it is a shed. If it came up through the dirt road, then head east past that gazebo, and then follow the property line to Lot No. 1, I would have no problem with that. That would give me probably about 20 feet between where the access road and the house portion of my property is. THE CHAIRMAN: Okay, could I ask you a favor? We are requesting maps that are being drawn, which you probably are aware of, by the attorney representing this applicant. Possibly you could take a highlighter and a copy of this and highlight that specific area which you are requesting, so that we have it down pat. MR. MINER: Okay, it does show on a survey of the property, and I believe I gave a copy of the various surveys; but I would be more than happy to put it on another survey copy and-- THE CHAIRMAN: Would you just highlight it for us because this tends to be a little confusing, and feel free to come back at the next hearing, assuming we have the maps by then, which will be in September. ZBA Hearings 40 August 18~ 1993 MR. MINER: Just one question: Did you receive a letter from Mrs~ Rubin, Audrey Rubin? BOARD CLERK: It should be on top there if we have it. THE CHAIRMAN: i will check. MR. MINER: She sent me a copy in case you didn't receive it. THE CHAIRMAN: Yes, I did. MR. MINER: Okay. Thank you. THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anybody else who would like to speak? We did have a request from the attorney to postpone this to the next regularly scheduled meeting, assuming that the maps are forthcoming by then. Seeing no hands~ I will make a motion recessing the hearing to the next regularly scheduled meeting. (Seconded and carried; see Board Clerk's Minutes.) THE'CHAIRi~AN: Thank you for coming in, sir. (End of 8/18/93 Hearings) ZBA Hearings 40 August 18, 1993 MR. MINER: Just one question: Did you receive a letter from Mrs. Rubin, Audrey Rubin? BOARD CLERK: It should be on top there if we have it. THE CHAIRMAN: I will check. MR. MINER: She sent me a copy in case you didn't receive it. THE CHAIRMAN: Yes, I did. MR. MINER: Okay. Thank you. THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anybody else who would like to speak? We did have a request from the attorney to postpone this to the next regularly scheduled meeting, assuming that the maps are forthcoming by then. Seeing no hands, I wil~ make a motion recessing the hearing to the next regularly scheduled meeting. (Seconded and carried; see Board Clerk's Minutes.) THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you for coming in, sir. (End of 8/18/93 Hearings) JDR RECEIVED AND F LED BY THE SOUTPIOLD TO'~[~I4 CK._iJ-'i