Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-09/13/1995 HEARINGAPPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Serge Doyen, Jr. James Dinizio, Jr. Robert A. Villa Lydia A. Tortora Southotd Town Hall 53095 Main Road Re. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1809 INFORMAL APPOINTMENT: INC. BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOU/HOLD Re: SUKRU ILGIN and AMAC, Garrett Strang: This is in condition of the variances granted but we have a barrier generated between. This is from the opposite side of the variance. Everyone seen it of course, obviously the building itself. We can give these to the board. With reference to the issue that has arisen that by having the segregation between the front and making everyone use the rear entrance to the convenience shoes. It's created a conflict somewhat with the gasoline sales, because it's a station wherein gas is pumped. People pull their cars out, attempt to go in the front door, have the reailzation, can't get through, come back out go all the way around the building, walk around the back door, go in the back door, make their purchases. The gasoline is completed being pumped, and the car ~i. ts there empty until they can get back around the building. Chairman: Blocking the area. Garrett Strang, R.A.: Blocking the pump. It's creating a hardship and that we have congestion that can be created for one and then you get the frustration and the excerebration of the customers that wants to get gas and can't because there is a car blocking the pumps and leaves and goes elsewhere. Chairman: There have been no siting on this, nothing from the Building Department. Mr. Garrett Strang: There was at one point in time, I think it was called to there attention, but it had been left open at one point in time by one of the employees, brought there attention. It was closed and made secure in such a fashion that it could be dealt with. So, it's no citation, I think it was just a notice told to order the remedy or whatever, but there wasn't no citation. About 2 months ago. Chairman: It was about 2 months. It was right around the end of June because we were dealing with situation across the street, I think. I had gone there at one time with the Building Inspector. About the middle of June. He came back about 3 weeks later and I think he saw it opened one day. What do you propose Mr. Strang? Page 2 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 $outhold Town Board of Appeals Mr. Strang: Well, we'd like to be able to have that corridor opened to the public so that it more convenient for the user to come in an access the convenient store from the front of the building. Obviously, the back door would remain as well, which would be a rare if ever occasion because I think you'll find that most people that use the convenience store are getting gas. It's a rarity that people come just to use the convenience store and park in the rear. They are getting gas at the same time and going in to get eggs or milk or whatever else they need. I know myself, if I need to go to the convenience store and don't need gas, I go the Handy Pantry or shop one of the local Delhi's Chairman: If someone needs cigarettes and they are at the gas pump at this time, your guys w-ill supply them with cigarettes. Right. Mr. Strang: Most of the time. Chairman: Yes, right. Because' most of the time I have friends that frequent and I've been in. the car so on and so forth. So it's strictly grocery items we're talking about other than cigarettes. Mr. Strang. Yes. Chairman: Well, you got me at a quaere here because I don't know if it's an issue we can discuss of an off agenda item or jffst suggest that we come back with an application for a relief of that particular condition. So, what do you gentlemen and ladies want to do. Board Member Dinizio: No, I would think that that's the way to do it. Chairman: The process. Board Member Dinizio: That's part of our condition. Mr. Strang: That's one of the reasons we wanted to discuss it with you. To find out what would be the . Chairman: Jimmy had mentioned this to me, the middle of June. right. I was in getting gas one day, he came out and we discussed it. I know. Mr. Ilgin: That's the one' reason I guess, everyone was concerned about the traffic because the situation of the traffic. Now we are creating more traffic because cars sit there usually 10 or 15 minutes because it's costing us to go in there and usually takes his time. He walks in the back. If he's in the front, what I lose is time. I lose allot of sales because the customer doesn't want to wait because of the other car. Page 3 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Board of Appeals Chairman: How has the grocery store or the convenient store work, working in general. Is it successful or not successful at this point. Mr. Ilgin: It is not successful. Most of the people that come, they don't want to go in the back and leave there car outside. Most to the time, like the ladies, because we are a full service station. Only full service stations can make that accusation. Most of the time they have their kids in the car. They don't want to leave that kid in the car to go in the back and not be watching them. They say, they cannot do business with us because of reasons of that. Chairman: O K. Secretary Linda Kowalski: You had a parking lot on the other side. Why did you propose that, on the other side. Chairman: Well, you're asking him the question now. Secretary Linda. Kowalski: Yes. Chairman: Well the whole purpose of the board I think of the board reasoning, I mean. The board is here, they can answer it. The whole purpose of the issue was not to cause a stacking problem. Not to cause a traffic problem. It is a relatively narrow piece of property, you know, that triangular piece is something different then what we see in allot of the parcels that we have. Comp'are it to the station on the corner, across from Dairy Queen. It's a corner lot. You really have a corner lot too, but with no corner. Secretary Linda Kowalski: It's all corner, that's right. I was wondering on the parking lot on the side. Chairman: In the back. Secretary Linda Kowalski: On the east side. Mr. Ilgin: That is no parking lot in the back. The only parking lot we have in the back, which is the east side. Still, we have a sign in the front, anybody that just wants to get to the convenience store. We have two full time employees there who don't let the people park in the front. We still keep the doors , signs out there. If they just want to go to the store, specifically not to get gas. We can still direct them and keep the signs there, they can go in the back, park there car and go in the back, because we have a door there. But our real concern is, if the people can get gas. That's the cause of the problem. Secretary Linda Kowalski: They don't want to move the car. They want to leave it there. Mr. Ilgin: They don't want to leave it there. They don't want to move the car. Whatever comes first. They don't want to rush, which is the old-time. There going home, there going to work. Page 4 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Board of Appeals Secretary Linda Kowalski: That's right. Mr. Ilgin: They have really have no time. Chairman: Well I guess that's the best way to go Garrett. We'll entertain it whenever you want to make the application. We will do some studies though, when and if you do, make the application. Not that we don't believe you because I mean 3 months ago I discussed it with Mr. Ilgin and at that time I believe I said, you know. Let's see how everything flows and then come back and see us. So that's what in eff~qt what you are doing. O'K. Mr. Garrett Strang: Exactly. We are going the right avenue, pursuing it. Secretary Linda Kowalski: If you get your papers in on Tuesday, next week, we could put you on for October 11. Can you do that. Mr. Garrett Strang: O K. Secretary Linda Kowalski: And you can get the maps to us later. Mr. Garrett Strang: Well, the maps are the same for all intensive purposes. So it's just a matter of making additional copies and resubmitting the application. Chairman: They will hold that. Board Member Tortora: I just want to make sure that tl~ey are documented because is another administrative remedy. Secretary Linda Kowalski: Well their is. They complied ~-ith that. Mr. Ilgin: As soon as we get the notice, we will comply. Chairman: You will lock the back up. Mr. Garrett Strang: I don't know what the mechanic's of that is. I don't know ifs that's rescinded or how they, or if they. Chairman: They probably hold it in abeyance. Self ~iquidating. Board Member Dinizio: Mr. Garrette Strang: Board Member Dinizio: what the status is. Mr. Garrett Strang: You ought to find out. i'll check with the building department. Check with the building department and see To make sure it's satisfied in whatever action. Page 5 - Hearing Tr~uscripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Beard of Appeals Chairman: You tell them that you're making an application to ask for a relief of that condition. Mr. Garrett Strang: 0 K. Chairman: All right. So good to see you again. Mr. Garrett Strang: Very good. Thank you. Page 6 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Tow-a Board of Appeals 7:32 p.m. Appl, No. 4331 - DAVID AND CLAIRE Ail{. Variances based upon the August 1, 1995 Notice of Disapproval issued by the Building Inspector under the Zoning Ordinance, Articles XXIV, Section 100-241A and 100-243A, and XXlll, Section 100-239.4B, for a building permit with nonconforming front yard and side yard setbacks and with nonconforming use(s), and to construct deck additions, seaward of existing building setback line (within 75 feet of seawall). Location of Pl~operty: 2072 Village Lane, Orient; Parcel No. ~000-24-2-27. Chairman: A very nice tour of the premises this past week by Mr. Samuels who is the architect. He afforded us a very nice site plan. I have a copy dated August 1, 1995 indicating the nature of this public hearing and a copy of the SuffoLk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. Would Mr. Samuels like to be heard. Mr. Samuels: Just to review a little bit of the application, the reason for the appeal is two fold. Number 1 has to do with the use issue and the fact that the Air's bought and are operating them, a legal preexisting non conforming multi-family seasonal residence in that building, in that cottage. It's a M1 Zone. Originally this house was part of a complex of rental cottages and associated with the Bay, bathhouse which was an institution in Orient for 70 years ago and operated for many many years. No longer in '6xistence, this is now owned separately by the Air's. Regarding use, any change, the code states that any change we make to that property. There are two reasons for the 1{PO which you have. I understand that this is all on the application but just to sort of review some of important points, it's a multi-family seasonal residence, pre existing non conforming. It's been in operation plus or minus for 70 years. It's in a MI zone. My clients, the Air's who are here this evening would like to combine two of the units, two second floor unit's into one unit for themselves to use as a second home, on second home basis. Any change made to the house which continues a multifamily character, requires a variance, which is why we're here. We believe that, that because we're decreasing the non conformity by going from five units to four that we're improving the situation and coming closer into complying with the code. Nevertheless, we're requiring a variance and so that's why we're here. On that matter, a separate matter has to do with the deck which exists on the ground floor, on the bay side. Behind a preexisting stone wall which has been there a long time as well. We are appealing a decisio~ of the building department Tom Fisher, who understood and as he read the code to me, believed that the proposed deck infill was seaworthy of existing structure. I believe from being on the side and measuring and looking at the survey's as well, that our proposed addition to the deck is in fact is landward of existing structure. I think that, therefore we are appealing his decision more than we are appealing the code in this matter. Hopefully, when you were there, you had a chance to mention that Page 7 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Board of Appeals yourself and perhaps a least we'll shed a little light on my interpretation and his interpretation of the code in that manner. Chairman: Before you leave that point, I forgot what you had said to us about the DEC permit. Mr. Tom Samuels: We have a non restrictive. Chairman: O K, because of the Cl. Mr. Tom Sa~n.uels: Because of the C1 and also have a weaver from the Board of 'Tl-ustees. Chairman: 0 K Tom Samuels: Our hardship in this is regarding use, particularly is that any change made to the building which does not, which maintains it's use as multi-family requires a variance. That means that if we were to propose any change, we would have to go to single family at least than residential. This would be quite a hardship to the Air's, to rent a house on seasonable basis to tourist, you might call them and they bought the building with that in mind. If they had to go to single family they would obviously lose those rents and it would impose significant hardship on them. They are already anticipating a decrease in rent simply by combining decreasing units and occupying one themselves. They need more space. Also, they want to use the building themselves but they are restricted now to oue tiny Little unit. They would Like to combine two units, have some more space. Do a nice one bedroom apartment on the second floor and so not being able to do that is in effect the hardsh/p for them. They need more space. As far as the setbacks are concerned and the non conforming nature of those, we're not altering the setbacks. We are adding some space over an existing porch. But we are fully and wholly within the existing footprint except for the triangle portion of deck that we're looking to in fill. We believe tile project is, somewhat unique because even though there is allot of rental apartments and rental houses in this part of Orient, this is one of the few legal multi-family residence in the area. Most of the others are single family cottages. We are part of the bay house complex. This is one of only two in the immediate vicinity which are legal multi-family. Chairman: Do you have any history on this house when it was moved there? Mr. David Air: Not significant history. We were talking to Floyd King the other day and he was telling us a little more about bay house, that his family had operated and pointed out the different houses that were all part of this. People would go to the main house and eat and there was a dining room and eat there communally and then go to there little cotZages in the area. But, I believe it's been operating there, that house has been there for a long time. What we originally got from Van Tyle was old. Page 8 - Hearing Tr'an~cripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Board of Appeals Chairman: What is your determination or opinion of the word seasonal from an architect's point of view. Mr. Tom Samuels: Right now there is no heat in the building and it is rented out. I think between Memorial Day and a little into September. Mr. David Air: It's a 10 week season. Chairman: It's a 10 week season. Mr. David Ai~: June, July and August and a little of September. Chairman: When do you actually crank up the well and when do you actually shut it down. Mr. David Air: April and last year, October. Chairman: O K Mr. David Air: That doesn't reflect on the tenancy. Chairman: On the tenancy, no. You're utilizing at that time or whatever. You're working on the house yourself. Mr. David Air: The well is off the premises, so it's a full season well. ' ' Mr. Tom Samuels: As I was saying, the character of the neighborhood. It is a rental neighborhood so to speak at the foot of tile wharf. Allot of rental properties right there. By granting this appeal we believe that the character of the neighborhood would not be impacted negatively. In fact, it would simply be maintained as it is. There is always allot of activity in the area, pedestrian activity, vehicular, the wharf. The yacht club is right there. Allot of things happen there. The, right where the Village Lane comes to the bay, so it's seen as kind of destinar/on point, I suppose for pedestrians as well as motorists. We are, the house is inspected regularly, annually, by the Health Department. As a multi-family aIk~ of regulations already in effect, governing how it is maintained and cleaned and the sanitary kept up to date, and the water is tested etc. There has never been any violations or problems with that and we've spoken with them and they don't seem to feel that there's a problem with this kind of a project. Although, they haven't gone on record to that effect. To conclude, we are proposing to decrease the non conforming and that I really have to stress. The most I think there is going to be, if you grant the appeal, fewer apartments, fewer bathrooms, kitchens. Fewer cars because there is fewer people and ultimately less trash, and less impact. So, we hope that you will take it into consideration that this is decreasing impact on the neighborhood and bringing it closer in compliance with the code. We do know that there was another letter regarding the project from a neighbor and Mr. Air is Page 9 - Hearing Transcripts Reg-lar Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Board of Appeals here to respond. I don't know how you want to time that. If you want him to read the other letter. Chairman: He is welcome to read it. Mr. Tom Samuels: O K Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Samuels. Mr. Tom Samuels: Welcome. Mr. David Aft: I'd like to get copies of this so you can read along. So it would be a little redundant I think from what's been said already. There's also extra attachments to these statements. Has the other letter been- I'm sorry, I seem to be out of them. Secretary Linda Kowalski: Jerry, this is yours. I'm marking it for the file. Chairman: O K Mr. David Air: Members of the board. This is in response to the points raised by Mrs. Valentine Matassoni letter of September 5, 1995. Edgewater cottage is a seasonal rental property and has been operated as such for 70 years or more. The facility is Licensed by Suffolk County Department of Health Services under Permit 015698. It's inspected regularly by the County and is in compliance with all health and safety regulations. No complaints from any party are on file with the Department of Health Services regarding it's operation. The septic system is adequate and safe and there have been no problems with it. The system gets normal usages for the approximate ten weeks season and particularly no use for the remaining 42 weeks. Under the plan with less units and less people, the system will receive less usages regarding garbage storage. The numbers address the points made in the Matassoni letter. t{egarding garbage storage we as do the Valentine Matassoni's and most of our neighbors store trash outdoors in covered containers. Eight uniform green covered containers are provided. Three for trash and five for recyclable. We contract for the maximum allowable biweekly pickup from the North Fork Sanitation Company. At no time to our knowledge has overflowing trash flown into neighbors yards or Orient Harbor. All non recyclable are encased in yellow town bags. 1~efuse is not loose in containers. Our guests are informed of proper trash disposal in our orientation literature. A copy of which is attached to this statement. Under high wind conditions, we occasionally have a container top blow off or a can blown over. This is the exception, not the rule. Under the plan with less units and less people there will be less trash. On the issue of parking. Five units in the house yield a maximum of five cars and it is really fully rented. The average is three or four cars. The space is adjacent to the house and ample parking options across the street. Parking space in general is not a problem in Orient Village. Our g~ests are informed and our orientation literature, that parking in Page 10 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Board of Appeals the lane that runs behind the house is not permitted. See attached, we would be willing to amplify this by posting signs on the east side of the house. It should be noted that the properties immediate neighborhood to the south is the largest commercial enterprise in town. The Orient Wharf company and it's prime tenant the Orient Yacht Club. To our north is another rental property shared at times by several families and turning over in weekly and monthly interval's. Further, practically every tourist that comes to the village, stops at the wharf, parks and walks down the pier to take in the view. On weekends, and when there is a yacht club event, Mrs. Valentine Matassoni would be hard pressed to identify which cars are associate~l with, which property. Still, under the plan with less units and less people, there would be less oars. Mrs. Valentine Matassoni mentioned in passing that she has seen 25 to 30 people there at Edgewater cottage. With five units that sleep up to four guest each, the maximum number is 20. Because we are rarely fully rented and rent mostly to individuals and couples. This report was a gross exertion. But again, under the plan with less units, there will be less people. Unfortunately, for the Valentine Matassoni's, they are one of the very few properties owners that is in the wharf district who do not seasonal rent there home. We feel that they are inappropriately using this form to express what appear to be a dismay at a long established rental activity in the area. Thank you. Chairman: Thank you, Sir. Would anyone else like to speak in favor of this application. Would anyone like to speak against the application. Any questions starting with Mr. Villa of rhe applicants or the architect. Board Member Villa: Yeah. I favor the idea of condensing the two upstairs units into one. And in viewing it, it looked, it appeared to me that the upstairs was a pretty adequate size. So my one problem that I have is increasing a non conformity basically in a floor area by adding onto that upstairs floor. You know, Mr. Samuels said you're staying within the footprint but you're basically staying in the footprint of a porch roof and you're going to be increasing your floor area upstairs which to me, increases the non conformity. That's my problem. How much of an area, floor area upstairs are you adding. Mr. Tom Samuels: In square feet. Board Member Villa: Yeah Mr. Tom Samuels: Approximately 100 square feet. It's about five or six maybe by 20 across'. So maybe 120 or something like that. Board Member Villa: Is that essential to your plans. The upstairs looks like, you know it's a pretty good size. If you condense two units into one, I'd be happier if you stayed within the existing walls of that upstairs. Mr. Tom Samuels: Right. Well, it is I would say, important to the project because that extra area is living space, it's rather open Page 11 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Board of Appeals space. I think I submitted a set of plans. It is rather open space but the Air's are looking for desires of open space in that location with those used little outside deck area, and you saw a second store porch about six foot square. Board Member Villa: Well, the porch I don't mind so much. But the inside floor area is something else. To me that's increasing non conformity. Mr. Tom Sam. uels: Well, tike I said, it's within the equivalent. I'm not sure how.the town beard determines that. It was more my understandin~ that was, that the use was more of the issue than the area because we do meet the area requirements, if I go under the density requirements for that zone, which is M1 zone, about 30 percent. Board Member Villa: That's true, but it's also a non conformance use. Mr. Tom Samuels: That's true. Board Member Villa: So you're not suppose to increase anything. That's my problem. I don't have a problem with the down stairs deck in filling, but it's that upstairs that is my concern. Chairman: Thank you. Board Member Dinizio: I'd just like to comment on that. Tom, maybe you can verify it. In denying you the application did he site that you were not conforming with the setbacks. Mr. Tom Samuels: I think that's how what Linda said originally. Not on that side, but on the two other sides. They were within five feet of the property line existing. Board Member Dinizio: But you weren't encroaching on that in any way. Mr. Tom Samuels: No Board Member Dinizio: Yeah, but you're not asking to. Mr. Tom Samuels: No, we're not altering any of our setbacks except for those two little triangular porches of that. And even there I don't think we are but Tom did when he wrote it initially. Board Member Dilzizio: All right. Mr. Tom Samuels: But he changed his mind. Board Member Dinizio: But the upstairs never came into mind. Mr. Tom Samuels: No, the upstairs never. Page 12 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Board of Appeals Board Member Dinizio: So you never denied. You never made an application. Mr. Tom Samuels: No, we never referred to that more did he write it into his disapproval. Secretary Linda Kowlaski: i think it was all covered by the way it was advertised in the legal notice anyway, so it's not a problem. It's under the non conforming section of the code. It's all the same provision. Board Member' Dinizio: Were you saying setback. Secretary Linda Kowalski: Yes Board Member Tortora: They were four sections of the code that were quoted in the building department. Secretary Linda Kowalski: That's right. So it's covers everything that he's doing. Board Member Tortora: Exactly. The setbacks, the side yards, the expansion of the non conforming use as Bob mentioned. Secretary Linde Kowalski: right here. It was all covered. It's advertised Board Member Tortora: Tom, could you show us exactly what you view as the existing footprint on the map. Mr. Tom Samuels: The existing footprint is that dotted line across there, across here and back around there. And actually this portion is here too. Chairman: So this is the in filling. Mr. Tom Samuels: That's correct. Those are the increase in footprint. Now this dotted line here is a roof and a deck that are there. And the new second floor, that I was referring to, is the inner of those two lines. So it doesn't go all the way. We're not completely covering the existing deck. It's coming out about six feet. Board Member Tortora: The same question. Can this project be done by following the existing footprint without using this and that. Mr. Tom Samuels: It could be done but unless I'm wrong. Board Member Tortora: What hardship, you mentioned hardship. Mr. Tom Samuels: Well, it's area. it's area. I just believe that tkis in effect conforms to the code. Those two conforms because they are land wood of existing structure which is at this point here. Tom interpreted it to me, that's the way he's interpreted. Page 13 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Board of Appeals Chairman: Let us just ask you this question. Is there anything wrong with the existing ceiling on that porch right now? Mr. Tom Samuels: There's no ceiling. It's roof rafters that come down on an angle. It's an opened ceiling. Chairman: IS there anything wrong with that at this time. Mr. Tom Samuels: No, I mean it's, I don't think it's leaking or anything. It'.s not very well attached. I think in a catastrophic storm it may .uplift. Board Member Villa: No way could it be considered a baring floor for upstairs if you added to it. Chairman: No, it's got to beef it. It's got to be redone. Board Member Villa: It's got to be taken off. Mr. Tom Samuels: It's got to be reconstructed. We wouldn't do it only half way. Board Member Tortora: The only other thing I was concerned about was is the parking requirements in the area because you don't have dedicated parking on the property. Mr. Tom Samuels: That's right. Board Member Tortora: But you mentioned just two spaces. Mr. Tom Samuels: There are three spaces which are use by. Probably haif on the right of way and half on the property. It's been there, it's not clear from the survey exactly where they are but they have been used for a long time as spaces for this residence. Board Member Tortora: Could you indicate where the spaces would be on the map, that's number one. And number two, you said that the room equals and occupy a maximum of four persons per room. Mr. Tom Samuels: Per apartment. Board Member Tortora: Per apartment, and each three or four people are going to use one car. Mr. Tom Samuels: Well, typically they are not three or four. They are usually less. We inherited a long term tenants for the most part. Four people in occupancy is unusual. We have two units which rent for the entire season, with two people for five weeks and one person for the balance. Could four people bring more than one car, yes, they could. But alternatively another person, typically less than four, rarely four. Board Member Tortora: (Inaudible) Page 14 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Towll Board of Appeals Mr. Tom Samuels: At the point that there is more, close to four, there are family units we don't have sharing. We don't permit sharing or non family. People have visitors, but that's not promoted in terms beyond groups that we know. Chairman: Right. Mr. Tom Samuels: There are currently some parking spaces which I'd say is probably on the line, probably in and around there, there are three sp.aces. They are sort of diagonally in terms of the spaces from the roach. Otherwise, as Mr. Air 'has said, we try to discourage people. Alth6ugh in the evening when they are there, they want someone to park right there. We try to discourage that and have people park on the street, on Village Lane, across the street, or down the road a little ways so it's not no way near, no parking. People that are members of the yacht club do park out here but that's kind of difficult to do also. So, especially on the street on these three little spaces. Chairman: O K. Serge any questions. Board Member Doyen: No. Chairman: All right. It leaves me and the only question I have is the issue of the parking. So, in order to go on to my vote which you may not need, I'm very simply going to lessen the i.mpact of what I said to Mr. Samuels and to you Mr. & Mrs. Air. That as long as there is no parallel parking to the building, as we had observed from that the Toyota Celica, that older Toyota Celica, that the gentlemen lived upstairs, supposably or was staying upstairs. Very nice man, by the way. So I assume it's going to be Incorporated into the downstairs complex, somehow, all right. And he said, he's been there for some 30 years or something of that nature. I would expect or ask that no parking sig/ls be actually placed on the building or near the building, or near the trash receptacle or whatever the case might be. Because, you weren't part of the conversation this past week that I had but. I was out two Sundays ago in the afternoon, there were a substantial amount of cars parked parallel to the house, in back of the house toward the right of way. And that does inhibit fire and rescue, getting down the road. That's what I'm concerned about. Mrs. Claire Air: So you want signs on the house. Chairman: Yeah, we'll develope some sort of thing, so that if a police officer was to come down and was to see these cars there, he could ticket them, conceivably. Not necessarily that he would, but he could. He would probably say, hay listen. There is a turning radius. It's strange the way the read goes into the village lane and it's going to be very difficult, with those vehicles parked there. And if you end up with anyone parking across the street, that would only further, when I say across the street I mean across your private road. Directly in back of your house, against Matassoni property, if I'm pronouncing the name correctly. Then it would Page 15 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Beard of Appeals further inhibit and it would falsify the fire department and rescue square to tow vehicles, physically, to get down the road, if they had. And that towing you wouldn't want. That would be by hook and chain. The rear of the fire truck and towing it out of the thing. So that's basically it. I have no further questions. I thank you and I thank Mr. Samuels. We appreciate you coming down and I'm sorry about the long delay. This is for everybody, we did have a little fire delay here and had to vacate the premises. So making a motion, I'll make a motion recessing the hearing, excuse me, reserving decision, closing the hearing, reserving decision. Ail in favor say A~ry. 8:10 p.m. Appl. No 4327 - Robert and Denise Whelan. Variance based upon the July 31, 1995 Notice of Disapproval from the Building Inspector, Article lllA.4 ref. 100-30A.4 (ref. 100-33), for a building permit to construct accessory building in an area other than the required rear yard. The subject property contains an area of approx. 20,400 sq. ft. Location: 160 Bungalow Lane, Mattituck; Parcel ID 31000-123-2-2. Chairman: I have a copy of the survey revised on July 12, 1988 indicating the nature of this application. In the place of a ten by twelve storage building, accessory building. And a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. Is their anyone that wants to be heard? Hi, how are you. You would rather not speak. O.K. Well, you're.just in favor of it. O.K. Are there any utilities going to be placed' in the building? Mrs. Whelan: No. Chairman: O.K. We'll start with the board members. Do you have any questions of this lady? Are you the applicant. Mrs. Whelan: Yes. Board Member VilE: No. Board Member Dinizio: No. Board Member Tortora: Could you, I realize you may not want to speak but we have to establish something for the record other than, the exact purpose of the hearing. So could you a least describe what it is that you want to do and why you want to do it. Mrs. Wheian: I'd like to construct a shed. The reason I'd like a side yard because it's the best location for our neighbors and ourselves and in the back it would be an eyesore to our neighbors. Board Member Tortora: You have another property in the back yard adjoi~king you also. Correct, in the rear yard . So you're suggesting to place it next to another, really very close to another existing shed on the lot adjacent to, as opposed to placing it in the Page 16 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Board of Appeals rear yard where it would be, in your application you said, have it out in the open. Mrs. Whelan: And it would be an eyesore to our neighbors and their backyards. Here on the side it would be by their sheds and their fences. Chairman: Thank you. Mr. Doyen, do you have any ¢tuestions. Thank you. O. K. Anyone that would like to speak in favor of this application. Anyone against the application. Questions from board members? Hearing no further cluestions, seeing no hands making a motion of reserving decision, closing the hearing. Seconded. 8:13 p.m. Appl. No. 4326 - Stanley and Sharon Swanson. Variance based upon the August 5, 1995 Notice of Disapproval from the Building Inspector, Article IliA, Section 100-30A.3 for permission to exchange property (lot line adjustment) which will reduce the required total area of parcel 1000-141-2-21.5 (owned by Robert Hamilton) and increase the area of parcel 1000-141-2-21.15 (owned by Stanley and Sharon Swanson) approx. 8,129 sq. ft. Also referred to as part of Lot #3 on the Minor Subdivision Map Robert D. Hamilton. Chairman: I have a copy of a portion of the survey, surveyed by Peconic Surveyors PC indicating the area to be dealt with in this hearing. A copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. Is there someone that would like to be heard. Mr. Truglia, how are you tonight Sir. Mr. D. Truglia: My name is Dune Truglia. I represent the applicant Sharon Swanson and I'm hear to answer any questions. think our application is pretty complete. Chairman: We haven't had the chance to gmill anyone tonight so maybe we'll see that. Mr. Villa, are you in a grilling mood. Member Villa: No. Chairman: We don't want to upset the apple cart. We've gotten three hearing down here, and we're in the process of. Member Villa: You better watch out. If we're using the word grilling. Basically, as I see it, you're looking to get the piece of property that fronts on Horton Avenue and adding to your lot, so you have access directly. Mr. Truglia: That's correct. The bottom line is, we foresee no changes in the character of the usages or anything to do with the neighborhood or the property itself or whatever. This is just the culmination of a settlement worked out because of a dispute between these two existing property owners. The settlement was reached a couple of months ago. Unfortunately, I understand Mr. Hamilton just pasted away on Saturday. So, I think there will probably be some delay but he did sign the consensus so forth and being in touch with Page 17 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Board of Appeals his attorney, they don't really see a problem other than the normal delay. This sort of thing happens. Member Villa: So right now you're basically torsiversion over that piece of property to get in anyway. Mr. Truglia: Yes, that existing Dirt Drive has existed since about 1962. Mr. Swanson's predecessor John Haus Sr. built the house and he used that dirt drive to go from his property to Horton Avenue. His children caught the school bus there for about ten years or so: As a matter of fact, our original documents are in a complaint reflected that. We have about five or six affidavits of people that were around at the time that, that Dirt Drive has been used. We've been able to establish that it's been continually used since about 1962. When Mr. Swanson bought the property several years ago, he continued to use it. His three daughters used Dirt drive to catch a school bus. Subsequently, Mr. Hamilton's predecessor sold the property to Mr. Hamilton and then a dispute arose and there was a start of a legal action. And when we finally got everybody to sit down and look at it, everybody pretty much agreed that the triangular, piece was really no good to anyone and a good way to settle the dispute was just to have Mr. Swanson buy it. And so, everybody said O.K. and that's going to do. It's going to increase Mr. Hamilton's existing lot and hence the application before this court. Member: Villa: So actually, they didn't have to put a ~iew driveway in going through that piece of property. Mr. Trugiia: They are not going to put a new driveway in. They will just pretty much use. See, what they don't want to do , they don't want to have, they don't want to make it like a thoroughfare. O K, they have been very sensitive, all the neighbors around there. They are sensitive about that becoming a public thoroughfare. They would probably still continue to use it as a walking path. Member Villa: But right now there's not a driveway in, on that triangular piece of property. Mr. Trugiia: That's right. It's just a wooded, it's just a wooded lot. Member Villa: So they are going to leave it that way. They are not going to move the driveway? Mr. Truglia: Yes, they will. They will move it. That wouldn't be paved. Is that your question, unless I misu~lderstood. Member Villa: Yes, no I'm just saying that they are going to take the one that goes across the neighbor's property ut it over. Page 18 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Board of Appeals Mr. Truglia: That's true. What they would do, they would curve it around so that you could see where, if you have it in front of you, it's kind of a trapezoid shape. Member Villa O.K. Chairman: Jim, no I don't have any questions. Lydia. Member Tortora: Initially, you're taking 8100 square from on parcel and putting it in the other. Mr. Truglia: '- That's right. It will not exist as a separate property and an affidavit and a merger has been executed and so forth. Chairman: Serge. Member Doyen: No Chairman: I have no questions. I will substantiate what you have said. I went to school with Mr. Haus's son and I knew both he and his firstwife very well. Mr. Haus was a fellow fireman with me and a personal friend of mine. O K Therefore I will make a motion. Seconded Secretary Linda Kowalski: Chairman: Yes. To approve it, right. 8:20 p.m. Appl. No. 4328 - Robert Feger and Theresa Taylor: Special Exception under Article lllA, section 100-30B for an Accessory Bed and Breakfast use in conjunction with the owner's existing single-family residence for the purpose of renting and serving of breakfast to a maximum of (6) transients not more than three bedrooms (maximum) Location of Property: 5370 Nassau Point Road, Cutchogue, NY; Parcel No. 1000-111-8-19. Chairman: I have a copy of a survey from Robert Van Tyle PC original date was April 12,. 1979. We did have the luxury of viewing this one and a half story frame home. She's nicely set on a piece of property in Nassau Point Road. We have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. I have one letter of concern in the file. Who would like to be heard? Secretary Linda Kowalski: There are a couple of other letters, that are unfavorable. Chairman: Yes. How are you. Mr. Robert Feger: I am good, how are you. We requested permission to establish this bed and breakfast in our home of more than 16 years. Theresa has a history of summering back on Nassau Page 19 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Beard of Appeals Point as far back as 1950. In the Spring of 1979, we purchased this home as a real handyman's special and we invested allot of time and energy and sweat in renovating the place. Our primary investment in our home is emotional and not financial. We've developed close personal ties with many of our neighbors. We would not do anything that we believe had the potential to damage there property values or our friendships with them. Bed and breakfast as you know are an established world wide tradition and guests who frequent B & B's, have the reputation of being warm, fle.xible and friendly people. As to our issue of privacy or concern about the privacy, our guests would be no more noticeable than family coming to visit. There have been many tinge when I wish I could have come to the Zoning Board for help and limiting them to more than six and no less than six. As the owner of the B & B, we would certainly have more control over our premises. Premises, than year round rentals or summer rentals or monthly rentals of which they are many on Nassau Point. There are in excess of 30 homes for sale on Nassau Point at this time and a well run B & B would be one more way to bring potential investors to our community. The opposition to our application deals with the concept or opposition to having a commercial property that would supposedly lower property.values. For the record, their have been many commercial enterprises on Nassau Point for many years. One of the first structures on Nassau Point was a hotel. There was another hotel for many years where the Chester house now stands. There was a boarding house. The Rampert Marina contractors for many years, had it's home office and docking space on Wannaweta l{oad, right in the middle of Nassau Point. A boy's summer c~{mp housing over 100 young men backed up to our immediate neighbor's property and the right of way near that property is still affectionately known as the camp steps. None of these commercial enterprises has a deleterious effect on the property values or it's attractiveness as a place to live. Nassau Point was considered and it still is considered residential and traditionally premier ever when those commercial enterprises were there. At the Nassau Point Properties Owners Association Annual meeting of 1994 a show of hands did show opposition to B & B's as a commercial operation on Nassau Point. But there are several things that we believe that are worthily to note. The Annual meeting of 1994 was attended by somewhere between 50 and 75 people. There are over 300 homes on Nassau Point and 220 homeowners are members of the Nassau Point Owners Property Association. At the directors meeting following that annual meeting, there was spirited debate on the issue of B & B's. And a significant minority opinion on the Board of Directors. In the spirit of harmony, a minority elected not to assure minority statement at that time. We are aware that you have a letter of opposition from Mr. Gardner, and he quotes our application as stating that there is no public controversies on this project. We checked that box saying no, because when we filled our application we had discussed it with our friends and neighbors, and at that time we encountered no resistance whatsoever from them. As a matter of record, at the most recent meeting of the Board of Directors, the board elected not to send a letter of opposition to this Zoning Board opposing our application. To the best of our knowledge, MR. Gardner's letter is the only one that is in opposition to our Page 20 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Beard of Appeals application. And he provided you with a copy of the Nassau Point Reporter which had, the President's letter to Mr. Wickham. What you didn't see was the rest of the newsletter which had letters from people who were supporting the issue of of B & B's. And I can provide you with that if you would like to see. We provided you with a lest a dozen letters written in support of our application. Every letter of support comes from a member of Nassau Point Properties Association. They come from several current and past members of the board. A past president. A member of the Southold Town Historical Society. Members of the Stewardship Task Force and from Alice ~t.ickman and from John and Marlin Flynn who are immediate neighbors, whose property adjoins ours. This past weekend we were finally able to catch up with Charley and Betty Jantzen are third abutting neighbor. They live in Montana now and they have no opposition to our application. They received a certified copy we sent everybody a few weeks ago. Mr. Gardner is correct in stating that Charley and Betty are selling there home. And I reaily believe that if they felt a B & B would be deleterious to selling there home or devalue there property, they would have contacted you. I have been on the Board of Directors of Nassau Point Properties Owners since 1984. I'm a past president of the Association and I'm a long time chairman of it's membership committee. Theresa has been on the board since 1988 and is now serving her second term as vice president. We've worked hard and long in support of association goals and we would not do anything that we believe would be in constant or be damaging to our community. We place our trust in you and have faith our application be acted and placed on its merit in compliance with both the letter and the spirit of the law in regard to the establishment of B & B's in recent decisions the court is making in the Town of Southold. Thank you. Chairman: Before you sit down, we'll start the grilling process. Mr. Villa. Member Villa: Unfortunately, I was out of town when the rest of the town made the inspection, so I couldn't say. Mr. Feger: We haven't had dinner yet so you can come over. Member Villa: But I did drive by and I looked at it and I have an idea what the area is like. I did notice the house next door to you for sale. But I really have no questions for you at this time. I'll leave it up to the other board members. Chairman: Jim. Member Dinizio: I just noticed in one of the letters, someone mentioned, I don't have it with me but, they called it an existing B & B. Is that . Mr. Feger: No, when you were at our house we said we made attempts to accommodate certain of our neighbors. Someone asked to come by this weekend and before we filed an official application with Page 21 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Board of Appeals the town, we wanted to see if it was something we could really live with. So, we have not advertised anywhere. It's been word of mouth, where we said that our neighbors and friends. This is something we are thinking of doing and if you would like to have someone try it out, it would be a great thing for us to do. Member Dinizio: I believe the letter was in support of you. Mr. Feger: Right. Member Dini~io: But it did say, existing bed and breakfast. I just wanted to clear that. Mr. Feger: It's not in existing. We made an attempt at it, to see ff we could stand doing it. Before you open your house to people you don't know, you should give it a try to see whether you can stand having anybody else walk padding through your kitchen. Member Dinizio: Thank you. Chairman: Mrs. Tortora. Member Tortora: I'd like to hear the comments from the others. Chairman: O.K. Mr. Doyen. Member Doyen: No. Chairman: O.K. We thank you Sir. Is there anyone that would Like to speak in favor of this application. Anybody want to speak against the application. Mr. Gardner: I have a couple of things to say about him trying out a bed and breakfast, that's a funny answer. I would like to know were any of these commercial ventures, they were on Nassau Point, are still there. I know they're not for good reason but you all read my letter and it was rather complete, I thought. The okaying letters in favor, I have a few comments to make on them. Chairman: Sure. Mr. Gardner: I'd like to address the board on some theories I have on how the board's proposal are responded to by the residents of Southoid. These proposals are printed in the local papers and are certainly available for everyone to read. The first thing I look at when I get the local papers are the public notices and the letters to the editor. In my opinion this is where the real meat and potatoes items are affecting the property owner in Southold. What is my neighbor trying to build and how is it going to influence my lifestyle. And then, these are more important in my opinion to the average guy than the sign ordinance or how many people are mugged in Greenport while the police looked on. The only problem with this, I found over the years, that people don't read these notices. It's not your fault, it's jusl there fault. When I had some Page 22 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southoid Town Board of Appeals responsibilities, the Nassau Point Association, for the association, I made sure that any hearing notice published in the ZBA Planning Board or Board of Trustees affecting Nassau Point, received full notification to all the members so that they were aware of the situation presented and could take necessary action. Again at the 1994 annual meeting, Bob Feger mentioned and admitted that there was precipitous anti B & B feeling at the meeting. And eventually at the board voted a motion in against B & B. This was distributed at the whole membership and to Mr. Wickham. In the following Town Board meeting on this, people hearing on this subject, these are in front of the~, Wickham and so forth, Mrs. Romeril now president of the NPBO and I attended many hearings and work sessions and stated our oppositions to there proposals. Mrs. Romeril took the position that no residential areas should be burdened with B & B's. Well, I settled for wanting to make sure that ZBA review, would be made of every proposal. Eventually, the board gave up there radical views and kept the law about the same as it was. When I heard at the end of Aug~lst 1995, that this B & B was being proposed, I immediately wrote a letter to Mrs. Romeril suggesting that, because of the strong member opposition, she should issue a general letter to the membership advising them of the imminent problem. For some reason, she said that she was not going to do that, and I told her what I thought the probably result would be. And so it was. This morning I checked the file and I found what I call the group in parenthesis, who have a particular point of view on this subject at grapevine and sent in about 15 letters praising B & B's. And how much they should be on the point. My t~tter was the only one reflecting the feeling of the general membership and the only one objecting to the proposal. Doesn't that seem a little odd that all those people at the annual meeting have rejected the idea. Of course, I knew what happened. Without knowing about the hearing, the majority of the residents never had a chance to express their opinion and the result was about Bob's taken over by the group. I feel badly about this , but that's the way things work. The only way the membership will find out about what has happened, is if I write a letter to the editor to be published in the local papers, commenting on the result of what happened, i just don't know if it's worth it. Thank you. Chairman: Thank you. Is there anyone that would like to speak against this application. Any other questions from any board members. I have a question Jerry. Mr. Jim Fitzgerald: The Town's Zoning regulations permit B & B's. Is that not correct? Chairman: That is correct. Mr. Jim Fitzgerald: In a residential zohing, special exception. Chairman: Yes. Mr. Jim Fitzgerald: So that. Page 23 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Board of Appeals Chairman: It's also permitted as a matter of right, based upon a certain amount of rooms. Mr. Jim Fitzgerald. I mean, if a number of property owner association each decided that they didn't want B & B's in there area, then this would effectively eliminate that right. If indeed, that is a important factor to be considered. Chairman: Going back to the history on this, several Town Board's ago, when B & B's were first brought into the Town by special permit, I p~r. sonally had asked that they not be placed in sub-division &tea's. That they be placed on described property, and this has no effect on this Town board or prior Town board. That goes back about two or three Town Board's ago. And they have been since changed and there has been some refilling of the law and so on and so forth. The nature of the first application we had after we passed it, was in a subdivision and the board was sued based upon the fact that we. We did withstand that law suit however, and to my knowledge at this particular point, they're really no restrictions on what zone, you know I mean, on what specific area's. There are no area's isolated, it's an entire Town function, so to speak. Does that answer your question. Mr. Gardner: So it means, it would seem to me to be something that would be more important to the immediate neighbors just as an accessory building or a front yard or something like that. Chairman: That's good. Mr. Gardner: Not to oppose a whole property owner's association. Thank you. Chairman: O.K. Any other questions, comments from anyone. Member Dirdzio: f would just like to comment on that Gentlemen's. You are probably right about the neighbor's having objections to say a Bed and Breakfast. But, if you look at the law and the way it's written, any home in the Town. So you could have two Bed and Breakfast along side each other. Or you could actually have six. Or you could have a whole block full. Bed and Breakfast are nice as described and certainly as I see it this application meets every criteria of the Town. No reason why tkis shouldn't be a Bed & Breakfast. But a Bed & Breakfast could be construed and certainly hard to enforce when someone has a Bed & Breakfast that doesn't quite conform to lace and doilies and the nice. It could be an apartment house. It could turn into that and to my mind it's a dangerous situation. Certainly, Jerry's idea about subdivisions would be someway to limit that. But an association really. If the zoning allows it unless they have it in there covenants and people when they purchase it, actually are aware of it. I don't imagine that you could stop. Chairman: Hearing no further comment we'll make a motion closing the hearing, reserving decision. I offer that as a resolution. Page 24 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Board of Appeais 8:43 P.M. Appl. No. 4330 - Florence Tilden. Variance based upon the July 26, 1995 Notice of Disapproval from the Building Inspector, Article lllA, Section 100-30A.3. for permission to construct 18 by 22 garage addition to dwelling with insufficient front and side yard setbacks.Location of Property: 3100 Deep Hole Drive, Mattituck, NY; 1000-115-17-14. Chairman: I have a copy of a site plan indicating the appro:cimate position of the applicant's addition. I have a copy of Suffolk County Ta~; Map indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. Would,. you like to be heard Sir. Mr. Miltner: There is nothing other than what we have there. Is there any questions that I could answer. Chairman: No changes other than what you have here. 28 feet from Deep Hole Drive is what you're anticipating approximately nine feet from the, a little northwest property line. Secretary Linda Kowalski: I think that's Mr. Miltner, right Mr. Miltner: Right, my Aunt is Florence Tilden. Chairman: O. K. Bob, do you have any questions of this applicant. Member Villa: My question is, why is it so big. You're proposing closer to a side yard than allowed. You're proposing an 18 foot wide garage which is almost a two car garage. Mr. Miltner: It's a car and one half garage. There was two storage, actually three sheds on the property when we bought it about a year and a half ago. I've taken down two and the last one will be gone in about two weeks. We need the storage for tools and things like this and lawn equipment and a garage. Basically, we wanted 22 by 22 but I can't with the property. It's scaled as low as we can get it now. Chairman: O K Jim. Member Dinizio: No, I have no questions. Chairman: Lydia. Member Tortora: There is no way you can build at the side of the house, the existing side of the house. Mr. Miltner: No, because then I'm eliminating all my storage and work area. Member Tortora: I mesas, going into the flagged walkway. What is it, four feet, three feet. Mr. Miltner: Yeah, you would be taking four feet off and there really is. Page 25 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Board of Appeals Member Tortora: You'd be cutting off the property line, in other words, reducing your setback. Mr. Miltner: Yes. Member Tortora: Reducing this setback here, bringing this line in here so that the garage is further off that property line here. Mr. Miltner: Well, if I do that then I'm going to lose two windows in the front, of the house. Member Tortora: This is, what. Mr. Miltner: This area is four feet. Member Tortora: Four feet and if you come over four feet you'll lose two windows. Mr. Miltner: I have one window here now and if you come over any more, right up to the edge of this window now. The architect has pushed it as far as it 'can go and he scaled me down to 18 feet to get within the nine feet limit now. Chairman: We have one more person here. There are times Mr. Doyen. He doesn't want to ask any questions tonight Mr. Miltner. Mt. Miltner: Doesn't want to. Chairman: You're home free there. Is there anyone that wants to speak in favor of this application. Is there anyone that wants to speak against the application. Seeing no hands, I have no specific questions concerning it. I thank you for your presentation. I'll make a motion reserving decision and closing the hearing. 8:45 P. M. Appl. No. 4329 - Christopher Mauceri. Variance based upon the July 24, 1995 Notice of Disapproval from the Building Inspector, Article XV111, Section 100-181C(3) for permission to construct a single-family dwelling with insufficient front yard setback in this cluster development. Location of Property: 1455 Evergreen Drive, Cutchogue, NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. 102-1-4.4. Chairman: A copy of a survey of the vacant lot and a sketch indicating the nature of the application. It's before us and a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. Is there somebody that would like to be heard? Mr. Chris Mauceri: I'm Chris Mauceri, good evening, how are you. My wife and I are just asking for a weaver on that 100-181C(3) that the proposed house that we would like to build is not going to alter the lot coverage for that zone. So, when we purchased the lot we weren't aware that there was a paper road there and we weren't aware of the setbacks. So we sent our architect's. We had Page 26 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Board of Appeals our house picked out and he came to the Town and checked everything out and informed us that there is a 50 foot setback from the setback. And being that there is a paper road which I know a Melissa Spiro the Town Planning Board, Beebe the developer and the Town don't ever want to build a road. I'm not saying that they ever will because it's just completely wooded. Chairman: O K. Let's see what the board has to say. Mr. Villa Member Villa: Well, he answered one of my questions already. He said he wasn'.t aware of the fact that it was there because normaily when you bu5} a lot, you know what the situation is. And at looking at the house, you're certainly proposing to build a large house. Mr. Mauceri: It's a long house. Member Villa: 82 feet, 84 feet. That was my concern. You saying, you say it might not ever open it but planning boards put paper streets there in hopes that it will be opened when the property in front of it is developed. So, you've got that in the future. Right Mr. Mauceri: That part of the other house, that is the garage so it's not living area that would go into the setback area. Member Villa: I realize that. Where is the driveway go. ing to go out. Mr. Mauceri: Out on Evergreen. With a sketch up proposed drawing curving to the fire house and out onto Evergreen Drive. Villa: But the garage doors will face the street. Mr. Mauceri: Face north. Member Villa: No, I have no further questions. Chairman: Jim. Member Dinizio: No. Chairman: Lydia. Member Tortora: Yeah, this is part of a cluster subdivision and in the cluster the Planning Board has already reduced the setbacks from 60 feet in the front yard to 50 feet and 20 feet on the side to 15 feet. So you're asking for a frontal reduction of further increase. Mr. Mauceri: Right. I'm asking for 15 feet knowing that it's a front. It is technically a front yard setback. It isn't considered a road owned by the Town. Page 27 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Board of Appeals Member Tortora. One of the things that we are required to look at is other options that you have and it's quite a large parcel and there are other options that I can see on this other property that you would not have to increase your setback. The figuration of the house that you have. This is a brand new house. You have allot of options here to conform to the code because essential the Planning Board has already under it's Coastal provisions, increased it's setbacks. I would not be inclined to approve this based on an increase in the degree of nonconformity. And I would ask you if there are options you would like to consider on this parcel because it is quite a' !arge parcel. Mr. Mauceri: It's a very long parcel, not very wide because of the setbacks. I know there is 15 feet adjoined to Lot #5 but between the paper road and Lot #3, there is a large setback area. Member Tortora: As far as being a paper road, it reserved for the road in the future and one side is 15 feet. This road you're asking to be 35 and the depth of the lot is 299 feet on one side. I'm just asking you, have you considered other options. Mr. Mauceri: Not yet. This was our first walk through. We picked a house that we really liked and we had our architect came down and talked to the Town and told us we going to have to go to the Building permit applications approval and put it in front of the Zoning Board and so. Chairman: Thank You. Mr. Doyen. Member Doyen: No Chairman: We'll see what developes. You're welcome to stand or sit down. It's up to you. Thank you Sir. Is there anyone else that would like to speak in favor of the application. Is there anyone that would like to speak against the application. Any other further questions. For the record, over the years we've had several applications. I will admit to you that they are applications of preexisting houses, not preexisting in reference to zoning but preexisting in the effect that they have been constructed already. can't think of any at the moment where we've dealt with applications with unique circumstances as this one. We will do the best we possibly can Sir to assist you and I don't know what will develope. Hearing no further comment, I'll make a motion closing the hearing and reserving decision. All in favor Aye. Page 28 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Board of Al~peals 8:52 p.m. Appl. No. 4332 - Arthur Haf. Variance based upon the August 6, 1995 Notice of Disapproval from the Building Inspector, Article lllA, Section 100-30A.4 (ref. 100-33C) for permission to construct detached, accessory garage in a front yard area on this waterfront parcel with reduced setback. Location of property: 1020 Strohson Road, Cutchogue, NY; Parcel No. 1000-103-10-25. Chairman: .A sketch of a site plan indigating a proposed garage 20 by 24, five feet from the northerly property line, ten feet from the road. I have' a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. How are you tonight, Sir? Could you state your name for the record? Mr. Fitzgerald: My name for the record is Jim Fitzgerald and I representive Dr. Haf. I don't have anything to add to the application. But Dr Hal is here and if there are any questions concerning the siting, I'm sure he would be happy to describe his decision process. Chairman: The real reason is, why there and why not attached to the house. Mr. Fitzgerald: Dr. Haf Chairman: We'll be kind to you tonight Doctor. We're ki~d to everybody. Dr. Hal: It's a half acre plot on Strohson Road with the house located on the north side. In an attempt to keep the trees that are existing on the property. There are about 30 tree's on the property and in an attempt not to obstruct anyone's view, existing view of the water and keep it open as possible, that site was chosen. By choosing that site, the neighbors across the street retain a visibility of the water. And on both sides there is still an openness without the tree's coming down. For that reason, that was the site that was chosen. By putting it closer to the front, Z actually do not obstruct the neighbors view . While, if I comply with the 40 feet that the town reciuires, I will be right in front of there property. Chairman: O.K. Let me go over to Mr. Villa first and see if he has any questions. Dr. Hal: O.K. Member Villa: Well you know my feelings. My feeling is basically, I don't like to see anything as close to the road . There a lots of older houses that have it. But where it's possible to push it back and the letter that we have seems to indicate that they feel that way too. That would just be my feeling. Page 29 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Board of Appeals Dr. Haf: Well, to push it back I would then actually just be walling of there visibility. Which I think they stated in the letter as well. It's not that it can't be done , it's just that the trees would come down and I'd be totally opposed to doing that. I thought I was making it better for everyone concerned. Chairman: Jim Member Dinizio: I feel about the same way as Bob does. No way of attaching it or getting it or pushing, it closer to the front of your house.'. Dr. Haf: Yes, definitely. I could attached to the house. To do so, I would have to take down ten trees and I would obstruct there view totally. Chairman: Serge, do you have any questions. Doyen: No. Chairman: O.K. The only concern I want to mention to you is, if the board does denies it, O.K. We are concerned about closing up side yards. I mean, literally allot. We want to be able to have you get construction equipment into your rear yard. So just bare that in mind if there is a denial here. Dr. Haf. O.K. Chairman: Because in support you know, the fact that it doesn't do anything. We're just saying to you that one side yard has got to be left open to the best of our ability. Dr. Hal: The side yard on one side, it's about 50 feet. Chairman: The one where you'd be placing the garage, right. Dr. Haf: No, the one that would remain open. That would remain open 50 feet. Chairman: O.K. Dr. Haf: The house now is now located on the northerly side of the property about midway between the water line and the Strohson Road. Chairman: O.K. Dr. Haf: This would just conform with the equal line of the house at this point. Chairman: O.K. We thank you Sir. Dr. Hal: Thank you. Page 30 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Board of Appeals Chairman: Is there anyone else that would like to speak in favor of it. Yes Madam, how are you tonight? Ms. Sue Naughton: I'm fine, a little nervous. Chairman: No, don't be nervous. It's just like falling off a log. Mr. Sue Naughton: My name is Sue Naughton and I live across the street. Art has really gone out of his way. Two years ago I built a house, there with a lovely view of the water. If the garage was moved t(~ the 40 feet setback to the south side of the property, it would completely obstruct my view. Where he plans to place it seems reasonable to me. I have no objection to it. But there is currently a hedge at least six foot tall between his property line and the one next door. So I actually have absolutely have no objection to what he wishes to do. Thank you. Chairman: Great. Is there anyone else that would like to speak in favor. Is there anybody that would like to speak against. Yes Madam: How are you tonight. Could I just ask you to state your name. Lorraine Loche: My name is Lorraine Loche. My family has the property next door to Dr. Hal. You have my letter I believe, everyone has a copy. Because I do have it, if you need it. This isn't anything against Dr. Hal. ~Ie' s a nice neighbor :and we're kind of glad he moved into next door to us. As I tried to point out in my letter, he is certainly entitled to a garage. I have no complaints about him having a garage. But the five foot ten, the ten foot from the road and the five foot are our property line, brings the garage. It does not look like it totally blocks our window if you're looking at a piece of paper flat. But as we look out our window, we don't look this way which would bring us directly looking into Dr. Hal's house. We look this way which provides us with a vista of his back across the road and this is Naughton's house and we get a very nice view from there. If this garage is put there and it comes up as we look out, we will see a garage. We will see nothing else. We will no longer see the road or anything. It will block out the sun, the light and the air. If he conforms to the 40 foot setback, which I believe the Town requires. Yes, it will be in the way of our window to a certain degree. However, that would be towards his house or attached to his house, which are close enough to it. And we would still have the same distance, not fully no, because we still are going to have this wall in front of our picture window. To put it on the other side of his property, yes. It would be more convenient for us but it would not be as convenient for other people. It would block them. And I'm also concerned about the conformity of the neighborhood. There are very old houses in that area and they are right on the road. But they are old, old, old, houses and I don't think people care where they built them in those days. But no one else is close to the road. We ourselves are planning in the not too distant future to change our garage into a living space. We will need a space for our garage. It would be very Page 31 - Hearing Transcripts ReguJar Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Board of Appe~l~ nice if I could take the light corner on my property and put a garage up there, but I know I can't and I wouldn't even expect to ask to do that. So, as the other side of Dr. Hal's, the house is for sale. They also have an attached garage. If they decide to turn that garage into a room, they too will want to put a garage up again. Up on the road and pretty soon we'll look like we're going through a tunnel on Strohson's Road. And although yes, there's a certain amount of selfishness in not wanting this garage in front of my picture window, on the other hand, I still feel strongly about that neighborhood. I've been grown up in that neighborhood since I was five anc{ .I feel very strongly about-it, and I would like to see it improved nbt go down. Not that what he's constructing is anything but lovely, it is. It's very lovely. But I would prefer that he brought it into the 40 feet and therefore still letting us have some light and air and sunshine in our. And I would prefer that it not be five feet from my line. I would prefer the traditional 10, 40. I thank you. Chairman: Any further questions from anyone. Hearing no further questions, thank you very much, both of you for coming in, speakers. I do want to point out to the lady in the back of the room. We do have a problem with existing subdivisions and water views. There is no two ways about it. Ail right. The history of this board and Mr. Villa is absolutely correct. That he is, and I'm not speaking for him, he's here, definitely concerned about the construction of accessory building in the front yard area. The most resent one that was granted was in an area in Mattituck' off of Deep Hole Drive. Unequally enough, we had an application on Deep Hole Drive to that particular garage. This before us, it's attached to the building and it was on smaller lots where it was impossible to binge it to the house except to actually move it as tbis nice lady on the right hand side, just spoke. So that one was granted about a year or so ago. But there was no way of putting it in the rear yard. The lot was only 50 feet wide and so on and so forth. So, I really can't tell you at this point, what we're gaing to do. All Right. Secretary Linda Kowalski: That was a water front lot also. Chairman: It was a water front lot also. I'm sorry. I should have said that. Member Villa: And there is a subscript to that. They further added on to the house. They are putting it out further at a later date. Chairman: I didn't see that. Did they add on to that. Member Villa: Yeah, it came later. Chairman: 0 K, we'll, in any case I understand your frustration in the blocking of the water view and I just don't think there is anything we can do about it. I don't know what will happen at this point and I appreciate you coming in and speaking. I really do. Page 32 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Board of Appeals Ms. Sue Naughton: I appreciate my neighbor making an effort not to block my view. That's why I spoke. Chairman: That's very nice. Thank you again everybody. Thank you for your courtesy. I'll make a motion closing the hearing and reserving decision until later. Member Villa: Seconded. Chairman: Hearing no further comments I make a motion of closing the hearing 'and reserving decision until later. 9:10 p.m. Appl. No. 4334 - Estate of Clotilda Oliver. Variance based upon the August 18, 1995 Notice of Disapproval from the Building Inspector, Article XXIV, Section 100-241 for permission to re-establish nonconforming retail sales use in this M-It Zone District. Location of Property: 64355 Main Road, Greenpoint, NY; Parcel No. 1000-56-4-21. Chairman: The estate of Clotilda Oliver variance based upon the August 18, 1995 Member Villa: The building would have to be on a limited or restrictive flow kind of operation. Gail Wickham: Well, I think that in the application for a use that would modify the flow, would have to go to the Health 'Department and be addressed. There is water on the property but certainly fi, I mean, you'll notice that one of the applications is for a long amount. I don't think that wise in any event. But in terms of it dryness type of a retail operation. Member Villa: I would be concerned as to what kind of operation would go in there. That's what I'm concerned about. Gail Wickham: Well, I would think that the Health Department, should there be any change, would be notified through the site plan process. Member Villa: They might not. Chairman: 0 K Member Dinizio: In any case, we're not changing the zone. You're really asking for retail and certainly we could say no restaurants if we wanted to in our. Chairman: No restaurant, no car wash, no laundry. Gail Wickham: I think a restaurant is permitted. But I'm not sure the property is for that. Member Dinizio: Well, that's what I'm saying. Page 33 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Board of Appeals Gall Wickham: Exactly, given the size and the elevation. Member Dinizio: Right. Chairman: Well, interestingly enough, I think what we're outlining, so to speak is. You'll have to narrow it down to what retail type. Gall Wickham: You would like us to specify the range in terms of, would dry usage be appropriate. Chairman: 'A hardware store is a good example that you have here. A hardware ~tore is a perfect example. You know, I mean. That's not a great deal of sanitary. It could be but it's not necessarily. Gall Wickham: I think dry usage, if I'm using the term properly. Member Tortora: I would think it would have to be in the same character either. Gall Wickham: Without the Health Department requirement if you wanted to. Member Tortora: Unrestrictive or more restrictive. Because you're into a use variance, I don't know. Gall Wickham: I understand that and if the condition was that the use be dry unless permitted by the Health Department..' Maybe there is. I haven't done any New York studies to whether there is some sort of research that would be acceptable. But I think if they moved it that would be acceptable. Chairman: Right, we're not doing a generic study to this site but we know there are problems in the area. I mean, you know. Gall Wickham: That's local. Chairman: O K, do you want to continue or do you want us to continue to grill you. Gall Wickham: If you have more questions, I'll answer them. Chairman: We'll go on to Mr. Dinizio. Member Dinizio: Well again, I can see there is a liquor store there. Let's not go any higher than that I suppose. But if you're open to a least some conditions. You know, from our point of view. The conditions that I'm thinking of is not. Gall Wickham: I just don't want to be limited to a liquor store because that requires. Member Villa: No, certainly. An antique store, a linen store or something where people are coming in buying and going out, without Leaving anything there. And you know, but their money. But if Page 34 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Board of Appeals you launder the money, go take it somewhere else. I just want you to be aware. I think we have to think in that direction. I'd like to see it be used again. I don't like driving by that. Gail Wickham: I don't like keeping the lawn mowed. Pam Bainey: Did I mention that the taxes are three thousand a year. (inaudible) Chairman: .Lydia. Member Tortdra: The only thing is if. It sounds like you want to use it. A used variance. The application, and on the application you state for antiques and coliectibles. Gail Wickham: When I say used variances, I'm reestablishing the retail use. We're reestablishing one. We're not creating a new use to this property. Whether that (inaudible) Member Tortora: Over two years. The use, that particular use. Secretary Linda Kowalski: Well, it could be changed to another retail store. Gall Wickham: Until we reestablish it. Secretary Linda Kowalski: If they were there today, they would probably be able to change it to another retail use, by the Building Department without the Zoning Board. Gail Wickham: If I may submit, when this Mr. Wick was interested in the property, he went to the Zoning Department and asked for a certificate of determination from retail sale liquor to retail sale antiques and was granted that. Secretary Linda Kowalski: Yes, they do that. They are allowed to do that. They have the power to do that. Member Dinizio: To give a certificate of determination. Secretary Linda Kowalski: Well, they have the power to determine whether a new CO can be issued under a retail establishment catagory. It's not called a certificate of determination but it's still a CO. Gail Wickham: The parking and those type of things are the same for those type leases. Secretary Linda Kowaiski: That's right. Well it's under the same category. Parking requirements are not any greater for another retail use as it would be for liquor. They are all the same. Chairman: You're not bringing in any other people in, as expert witnesses. Page 35 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Tow~ Board of Appeals Secretary Linda Kowaiski: Expert witnesses. Chairman: Well, were just going to swear you in as to everything you said. So, ['II do that before the end of the hearing. Secretary Linda Kowaiski: Nobody can do that when it's on. Gall Wickham: That's why I presented the evidence. The inability to seli it over a period of almost, two years. No offer has been received. It wasn't contingent on this type of use. Chairman: O.K. Mr. Doyen, any questions. Member Doyen: No. Chairman: Raising hotb right bands of botb of you nice Ladies, do you solemnly swear that the information that you've given us is the truth to the best of your ability. Gall Wickham & Para Bainey: Yes Chairman: Anybody like to speak in favor of this application? Anyone else. Would you like to say something Mr. Bainey. Mr. Bainey: Myself. Para Bainey: He wants to go home and eat. I don't let' him talk. Mr. Bainey: I'm just here to keep the seat warm, that's all. Chairman: Is there anybody else that would Like to speak against the application. Can I just say one more thing/ Chairman: Sure. Member Dinizio: Gall, I just want to make this perfectly clear. You're not asking us for use variance. You are asking us for reinstate nonconforming use. Gail Barney: Nonconforming use, retail sales and I believe that's the way- the Building Inspector's noticed disapproval. Member Dinizio: Now you offered us, and I want to get this clear, that your Mother I forgot her name. Chairman: Clotilda Member Dinizio: Had mostly every intention of running a liquor store until she got sick. Gail Bainey: Yes Member Dinizio: I'm assuming, that she never really wanted to give up the establishment. That she never purposely gave it up and Page 36 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Board of Appeals subsequently passed away and let the liquor license expire but never gave up the retail use. Um assuming that that's what it is. You never close the doors and say, we don't want to do this anymore. Gall Bainey: No. Member Dinizio: It's more a matter of convenience and certainly a matter of where to put your money at a particular time. Gail Bainey:. She was unable to get to the property to operate it and she was unable to basically proceed with (inaudible) Chairman: What happened with all the liquor that was in the building. Gail Bainey: I drank it. Chairman: I thought you were going to say that. I was going to ask you that question but I didn't want to upset you. Gall Bainey: We destroyed it. It was valueless. Chairman: Just so you understand the reason I had sworn you in was because there is no representative of Abatelli Realty and that was the only reason why I did that, O K. Gail Bainey: I understand that. I was second to have'~hem here. OK Chairman: There is no problem. Just so you understand why I did that. O K Gall Bainey: I know. Chairman: I don't have any further questions. I mean, it's cut and dry to me. I was wondering, quite honestly why the building was in that situation for the last several years. That's basically my support. Any other questions from anybody before we close. Seeing no further questions I'll make a motion closing hearing and reserving decision. 9:32 p.m. Appl. No. 4333 - Genevieve Staley and Frank Palumbo, as Contract Vendee. Variance based upon the August 16, 1995 Notice of Disapproval from the Building Inspector, Article XXlll, Section 100-239.4A(1) for permission to construct a new dwelling within 100 feet of the top of the bluff or bank of the Long Island Sound. Location of property: 3200 Sound Drive , Southold, NY; Parcel No. 1000-33-1-7. Chairman: I have a copy of the survey dated August 13, 1995 indicating a proposed house closes point approximately 67 feet from Sound Drive and approximately 55 feet from the lip of the bluff with appropriate side yards. [ have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Page 37 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Board of Appeals Map indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. Who would like to be heard? Mr. Bruer, how are you tonight Sir? Mr. Rudy Bruer: Mr. Chairman, members of the board. Rudolph Bruer, on behalf of Dr. Paiumbo the applicant. This is an application to build a house on a sound front piece of property that was developed in 1966, prior to the present bluff requirements of the code. I believe the board has before it in it's file the letters from the Town Trustees and the Department of Environmental Conservation. They are claiming no jurisdiction with respect to this matter. AI~9., in the file is a report by Joseph Fischetti with respect to th~ bluff and also in the file is a letter from Roderick Van Tyle also regarding the bluff. Now the primary reason the applicant wants to build the house that show~ on the survey, is primarily because this is the best place to put the house. To put it any further closer to the bluff would be unreasonable. And to put it back ans~th~ng closer to the road would essentig~lly, if you've examined the property, put the house basically in a hole. And if it was built in a hole you would defeat the whole purpose of having sound front property. You would be unable to see the water unless you put up a very very tall building. The purpose of Mr. Fischetti's. The purpose of the t00 foot requirement from the bluff is to protect the bluff and properties along the bluff from erosion etc., etc. The report of Mr. Fischetti states that the construction of this building or any building 55 feet from the bank would have no detrimental effect on the e:dsting bank. lie refers to Mr. Van Tyle surveys, one of which is before you and/also indicates the present and 1967, 1968 bluff line showing that there are no changes in the bluff or erosion. The letter from Mr. Van Tyle also indicates that there has been essentially no change in the bank location on these lots as they exist now and they existed ha 1968 and 1967, respectfully. Also, in your file is a map by Mr. Van Ty[e showing the properties to the east and to the west of the subject property. There, an observation of the map will show that the existing houses to the east and west, going at least two houses to the east and three lots to the west are within 55 feet or less, with respect to the bluff. [{as everybody seen that map. Chairman: Yes. Mr. Rudy Bruer: O.K. I'd also like to point out that this board in appeal ~3621 dated March 17, 1987 granted the exact same variance to the property immediately to the east. I would ask the board, I have that copy of that appeal here. But I would ask the board to take notice of that, that appeal. I think that appeal and the reasoning of the board at that time, ~-ranting the variance is essentially the same than as it is now. Has anyone here seem that appeal? Chairman: Yes. It right here. Mr. Rudy Bruer: You have it. O.K. Chairman: One of the main concerns, I just wanted to mention this to you Mr. Bruer is, from my point of view is that. If we Page 38 - Hearing Tr~uscripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southo[d To~rn Board of Appeals establish, if this board, I have no idea how these people feel, O K in 1995 because I haven't spoken to them about it. We're just concerned, I'm just concerned that they be no further reduction for accessory buildings and so on and so forth in the future. Do you know what I'm saying. In other words, if a swimming pool is going to go in here, we would rather see a further reduction now knowing what's going to happen later. We ran into a situation in Orient, we ended up with four appeals on one piece of property. The board held at a specific figure and that's were we held at. We did not, we were not ab.~e from that particular point, so that's a concern. Mr. Rudy Bruer: 0 K. Dr. Palumbo is here and he can answer that question as we go along. Dr. Palumbo, what they are asking you is that. If they were to grout the application, they would like a promise or a restriction on the property that you would not come back to them in the future asking for further reductions between the house and the bluff. Am I say-Lug that correctly? Chairman: That is correct. Mr. Rudy Bruer: My client agrees to that as a condition ofthis variance. Chairman: Thank you, I'm sorry I didn't mean to disrupt you. Mr. Rudy Bruer: No, that's fine. Very good point. ~ think, one of the arguments also for the allowance by the board of this variance, is that one of your requirements in the past or present is that, it's not going to change the character of the r~eighborhood. As a matter of fact, if you denied the variance or made that the structure be placed closer to the road, when actually take the property out of the symmetry of the rest of the property. It would then be, out of character. The request would put the property if granted, would put the building in character with the property. It's also unique property. Unique property and again we're referring to maps that were created before the present zoning ordinance and there was no question at that Lime as to. I'm talking about 1966 and shortly thereafter as to where the houses could or would be placed. There was no restriction of 100 feet back from the bluff. I think I've summed it up pretty well. No more reason to take up your time anymore but any person who would buy this property would necessarily want the building there. Otherwise, he really wouldn't want this property. He could have other property on the other side of The road for the same function and at much less cost. If you have any questions I would be happy to answer them. Dr. Palumbo is here. Chairman: We'll start with Mr. Villa. Member Villa: Start at the other end for a change. Chairman: Start at the other end. Member Villa: Yeah. Page 39 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Board of Appeals Chairman: O K, we'll start with Mr. Doyen. Member Villa: I want to hear some of the other comments. Chairman: Mr. Doyen has been very good tonight. He has not grilled anybody. So, he opts to pass so we'll go on to Ms. Tortora. Member Tortora: I have one question, the DEC. t know that they have no jurisdiction here. One to the things they did suggested, they sugges.ted one of the precautions was maintaining adequate work area out of th.e wetland district boundary. They suggested an area 15 to 20 feet wide for the construction area. Do you have any objection to that? Mr. Rudy Bruer: I don't think so. I don't think that would effect the structure of the building. Do you know what they mean. Dr. Polumbo, what they are saying is with respect to the construction of the house on it, they would not want there work area to be closer than another 15 feet further to the bluff, IE 55-50 feet,in other words no, all the construction, no 40 feet. Member Tortora: Just so there is no jeopardy, a chance of erosion. Mr. Rudy Bruer: We don't see why that would be a problem. Chairman: We have in the past and we may in this application. We request that a haybales be places along the frontage of the property. Member Tortora: Is that directly a temporary thing. (inaudible) Mr. Rudy Bruer: That apparently is no problem. Chairman: 0 K, let's go on to Mr. Dinizio. We're becoming more formal as the evening goes on. Member Dinizio: I just have a question about the size of the house for the lot. And it just looks to me like you're creating that. You're creating the reason to come in here. You know, the setbacks and the bluff because the house is so large. Can you kind of explain that? Mr. Rudy Bruer: No really, because if you look at the survey you can see that, where we're putting the house is primarily on the high point of the lot and really, that's really we feel it should be. Nothing to do with the size. Member Dinizio: Well, I got that but that one little square piece that you have the 55 foot arrow to. I mean, that, if you eliminated that, you could move this house back away from the road or you could leave it right where it was and it looks to me it would be about 65 or 70 feet from the bluff. Mr. Rudy Bruer: I think that's an essential part of the house. Page 40 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Board of Appeals Member Dinizio: O K, this house looks so large for this lot that I needed to ask that question. Chairman: The house next door is about 3000 square feet bigger than. Mr. Rudy Bruer: That's right. Member Dinizio: That's all I had. Mr. Rudy Bruer: Thank you. Chairman: Mr. Villa, you're on the hot seat. Member Villa: Well, I have concerns because I know the other houses and the other things that have been granted 55 but there is still a law that says 75. Chairman: 100 Member Villa: The houses next door are going to be hard to see because this lot is so wooded and some of there lots are wooded. And actually, if you go to the east you say, your house is in character. But some of the lots to the east are much less, have much less depth then this does and the houses are very close to the road and very obvious. This wouldn't even be if it was still kept back 50 feet you could pick up 17 feet from the rear of.'that lot. And looking at the topo there, when you say it's only a high spot, is only a difference of two or three feet in that whole span of property that you'd be building on. So grading a piece of property is going to be a snap as far as putting a house anyplace you want to. Mr. Rudy Bruer: Again, it goes back to the character of the neighborhood. To put it any place else, you're going to have this thing sticking out like a sore thumb. Member Villa: I don't really agree because if you go down the road, there are houses that are less than 50 feet from the road. Mr. Rudy Bruer: Functionally bringing it also closer to the road, puts it down into a gully and there is run off, we'll be coming down to it. Member Villa: The driveway is going through the gully anyway. Mr. Rudy Bruer: That's true. Member Villa: So it really doesn't make much difference. Grading can be taken care of with a minimum I should think. You could screen it, you screen that again if you wanted to like other people have and you wouldn't even know that there is a house there. Page 41 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Board of Appeals Mr. Rudy Bruer: You know Mr. Villa, the house that we have proposed here, really is key to being where it is. Member Villa: Well, of course, everybody likes of course to get a waterview. There's no question about that and that's what people come in here all the time and I have my feeling. The rest of the board has their feeling. We'll have to see what happens. Mr. Rudy Bruer: You know, part of the process here is also the uniqueness of the property. Also the character of the neighborhood and I think'b.y putting it where we're asking it to be put, really complies with'the requirements of the variance. Chairman: Mr. Breur, what is the approximate cost of this piece of property. I don't have to know, more than a $10,000 range. Mr. Rudy Breur: I'll tell you exactly, $185,000. Chairman: O.K. Let's see what else developes and we'll be back in a jiffy. Mr. Rudy Breur: O.K., thank you. Chairman: How many want to speak in favor of this application?Sir, how are you tonight Sir. Mr. Marry Enright: Good evening, my name is Marry Enright. I am the easterly house to the proposed house, Dr. Polumbo's. I had no intention of coming here this evening. I didn't even know of the meeting. I was raking some apples and I saw the thing on the post. I have been living up there since I bought the property in 1967 and built my house in 1973. We have had no erosion problem. We've been very fortunate. We have been planting and our planting and bank is very very stable. I did my wife and myself a favor. Number one, I met Dr. Palumbo and I did my wife a favor by getting out of the house. I was concerned where the house would be. The 55 feet does not bother me. I think a setback or a variance beyond that, would take away from the character. The one issue I want to address is the necessity for the run off, away from the bank. We had briefly discussed it and that was well considered so I'm certainly in favor of the proposed building. Chairman: Thank you, Sir. Is there anybody that would like to speak in favor? Is there anybody that would like to speak against? Any closing arguments or statements. Mr. Bruer, Doctor. Mr. Rudy Bruer: I just want to state that with respect to the construction, the drainage will be focused back away from the bluff and will be directed back towards the road. I think that would be. Chairman: And the down spouts will probably be put in small drains anyway. Page 42 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Board of Appeals Mr. Rudy Breur: Right. Other than that I don't have any more to add. Chairman: Any other questions of Mr. Breur. Hearing no further comments I make a motion of closing the hearing, reserving decision until later. 9:51 p.m. Appl. No. 4335 - Helene Bulgaris and Suzanne Fondiller. Variance based upon the August 9, 1995 Notice of Disapproval from the Building Inspector, Article 111A, Section construction' of an as-built in ground swimming pool as an accessory structure in ~n area other than the required yard (instead of as an attached structure). Location of Property: 1575 Captain Kidd Drive, Mattituck, NY; Parcel No. 1000-106-05-05-17 & 18. Chairman: I have a copy of a pencilled in site plan indicating the present location of the existing pool. I have a copy of a more formal plan again practically 15 feet from the rear property line and approximately 100 feet from Rhota Road and 60 feet from Captain Kidd Drive, which is a decking area. We have an 18 by 36 foot pool. I have a copy of th9 Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. Is there somebody that would like to be heard? How are you to]light, Sir. State your name for the record if you would. Mr. Andrew Fondiller: I'm Andrew Fondiller, husband of the one of the owners, Suzanne Fondiller. .' Chairman: How do you do. Mr. Andrew Fondiller: This is Helene Bulgaris the other co-owner. Chairman: How do you do. Mr. Andrew Fondiller: We had made up a set of other sketches. I'm going to share them with you. Chairman: Surely. Mr. Andrew Fondiller: The sketches that were provided by the pool contractor were never shared with us, and we don't believe, based on what has been shared with us by the Building Department are not accurate. Chairman: O K Mr. Andrew Fondiller: I noticed they, well you indicated that it was 60 feet from the. I was afraid that that was indicating that the width of the property was only 60 feet. Based on the sketch that they had submitted as you had correctly identified, it is 60 feet from the frontage. About a year ago we considered building a pool. It's time to splurge a little and our children were old enough to handle it. Interviewed a couple of contractors. We ordered the Page 43 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Board of Appeals contract but before the contract was getting a permit, informed us that the town, the Assessor's office required that we merge the two lots into one. We did that and the permit was issued. We were never, the plans submitted by the contractor was never reviewed or shared by us. The pool contractor built the pool where we, and he had always discussed it would be placed. He never suggested that it should have been closer than that sketch that I saw a week or so ago. That sketch indicates a walkway. I'm seeing, I'm just having to judge it by slats that it's six or eight feet away. Something that we had discussed with you, we would have never abided by. In fact, the po~l is 30 feet away from the house. We have a pathway going down there that been there since 20 something years that goes about 15 feet up to the, ending right towards the pool entry. However, the pathway that curves to the left to the patio area, which abuts the deck. There is solid concrete walkway and patio destruction. We built the pool. We then spoke to some contractors about building the deck. Again, this contractor was among those who submitted a proposal and never suggested that a walkway, a material above grade walkway needed to be installed to connect the pool with the house. In this case, it's a porch. So we were completely in the dark. The permit that was issued simply says, deck slash add with pool and fence. Now, I'm a layman and maybe it behooves to find out what exactly add means. It doesn't say att which implies attach. It doesn't say addn't, addition to deck add. Anyway, perhaps I was, neglect in not knowing. But all the contractors that submitted plans for the decking, never raised the issue of a walkway connecting it and the permit has be~n in our front window all along. We put out allot of money. We built a pool. You could imagine what that costs. $2500.00 for beautiful ~tate fencing. Allot of landscaping to compl~ment the landscaping that we pride. Expanded our irrigation and that's that. The property has always been landscaped. Even though there were two lots, it's always landscaped. My sister in law grandparents loves of her life, after her granddaughters and grandchild were guardian. We could show you photographs of that property twenty five years ago, landscaped and fenced, completely fenced the entire half acre. We noticed the disapproval after we completed the structure. It came as a bolt out of the dark. The gentlemen who saw us said, that it was,it looks Helene, looks good. I just want you to tighten up the safety fences and there was a question of wanting one fence at the bottom of the pool seemed to be off an inch. The question was 48. Perhaps when the ground settling down certain grade was 47. We got notice of disapproval and subsequently to that we've had conversation with Mr. Fish and Mr. Fisher of the Building Department. They indicated to me that they felt they made a mistake and I didn't want to pursue it at all but I think the Building Department made one or two errors along the way, in the review of our project. The last meeting we summarized the hardships, if anything, perhaps you're going to ask us. What if you widen it enough for the inner walkway to satisfy the disapproval. I don't know if you've seen the property. We have extensive rock gardens. These gardens have been there for thirty years. There are bushes on the left side that are very unique. They are very special specimen's and it's very neat. We have allot of sentimental value, Page 44 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Board of Appeals allot of it and cost too. The plans submitted by the contractors, we were never shared with us. Any further costs to us would necessitate our pursuing litigation on the contractor. We really don't want to do that. We'd like to put this behind us. And that's all I have to say. Would you like to add anything Helene? Mrs. Helene Bulgaris: When the inspector had came to see the property, the very first one, we were never told. Like we had said, we were told about the fencing and he shook my hand and he said. You're ninet%r, nine and nine tenths finished. You have a very nice pool. You h~/ve no problems. So, I was very happy. You know, we thought we did everything the way it was. You know, legally. And then we received the letter and when we had another inspector because, when we had the problem we called the contractor who never in over a month and a half has returned our call since we told him about the variance problem. So that's, you know I mean, Linda knows. I've been in the office many t/roes both in the building and the variance office. Chairman: That's because he was paid for probably Mrs. Helene Bulgaris: So I was very very upset. When Mr. Fish came and he looked at it. He said, if it was up to me I'd give you the permit right now but you need a walkway not something some (inaudible) walkway. You need maybe eight or ten feet. Eight or ten feet would kill all our rock gardens. We blare to dig up cement. I said, you know if you wanted us to have it, why weren't we told the first time, the first Inspector came that it was a problem. That's what I wanted to find out and I figured if something happened in the Building Department, I don't feel that we did anything wrong. Or that we should be held responsible for that. For if we had been told from the beginning then we could have contacted. For we knew where the contractor lived and gone to his home and said, wait a minute, we have a big problem. How are we going to get to straighten this out. You build a retaining wall for us and you never told us about a walkway and we were just so upset over it. I guess maybe, the whole point is, you know an eight foot walkway would just ruin a garden yes, that my Grandmother put in many years ago, and we do have sentimental attachment to it. t mean, if you've been at the property and I have pictures to show you. I don't know. I still think it was a problem with the Building Department because they really should have told us. And maybe in the permit, like Andy said, you know add, we did think that it was just adding. We didn't know attachment. We didn't know accessory. We had never heard that word till the day that we got the letter of disapproval and I went to the Building office and they told me. Even the lady there, she will remember me because I was very upset about the whole thing. Chairman: Are there any changes that you are anticipating in the future? Any closures or anything? Mr. Andrew Fondiller: No, we have no desire to put up any sheds. Page 45 - Hearing Trmn.ccripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Board of Appeals Chairman: This is a hypothetical question. You have no intention of enclosing this in any way. Helene Bulgaris: No. Mr. Andrew Fondiller: purposes. I'm sorry, any further. We have There is a fence around the pool for safety let me say this, we have no intention of doing no desire to enclose this structure. Member Tortora: No indoor pool in other words. Helene Bulga~ls: We put so much landscaping into it and trying to keep it the way my Grandmother had it, that we love it. Our pool is out in the open. Anybody driving in any of the roads, Captain Kidd, Rhoda or even Zena. We weren't hiding anything. You can see the pool. Chairman: Yes, it's a beautiful spot they're no question about it. Well start with Mr. Doyen at Mr. Villa's request. Member Doyen: No, can I tell you, we're doing well with you tonight Sir. Member Tortora: I just want to. I don't know, this is a subject I'm not very familiar with but, you say you merged the two lots. Helene Bulgaris: We combined them. Mr. Andrew Fondiller: We've been receiving two tax bills on them. I sent a letter to the Town Board of Assessors, I think that's there name, granting them that they merge the two lots into one. That's all I did. That was what I was told to do, I did it. Days later the contractor, i'm sorry. Chairman: The lot is in both ladies names ansrway, right. Mr. Andrew Fondiller: And there names only. Chairman: Both lots, the house and the lot which is the nature of this application, O K. So in affect, they were merged anyway but you were getting two tax bills so you very simple asked them to be Incorporated into one piece, O K. Understand, I mean I know you understand. Were you asking about the legality of that? Mr. Andrew Fondiller: That is what we did in order to get the permit which was requested of us, and we did it. Chairman: O.K, we'll go on. Mr. Dinizio. Member Dinizio: So you didn't apply for the permit, Norm Riley did. Page 46 - Hearing Tran.~cripte Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Tow~ Board of Appeals Mr. Andrew Fondiller: That's correct. The contractor A. Riley and Son's took care of all the permit applications. They were never shared with us nor were anyone. Member Dinizio: So he built the pool, right, and you had to have an inspection on the pool, so you had an inspection on the pool and everything was honky dory. You found out you built the deck and you had to have an inspection on the deck, footing inspection, all that. Everything was honky dory. Right, everything was great. Helene Bulg~r4.'s: We were told that someone made a complaint about the pool. Mr. Andrew Fondiller: This is hearsay. That someone else had applied for a permit and they were denied and they said, what about that pool on Captain Kidd. Secretary Linda Kowalski: There was a precedent set. Mr. Andrew Fondiller: And it turns out, it was a completely different case. They were denied because of the grading of there property and there was a tremendous slope. Member Dinizio: So we're still at the point of where you now have a pool that's filled with water, been backfilled, a deck with footings and a deck on top. Am I correct? Helene Bulgar~s: Yes Member Dinizio: That the Building Inspector is saying ~s O.K. Helene Bulgar~s: Yeah. Member Diniz~o: And you felt great about it. Helene Bulgar~s: I even have the inscription paper. Member Dinizio: Now you have to build a fence around that, so you built a fence. Mr. Andrew Fondiller: The fence was even built and the Inspector left. Member Dinizio: At what point did you not get your CO. At what point. Chairman: When he applied for a CO. Mr. Andrew Fondiller: When we applied for a CO and the final inspection. Member Dinizio: So you went through all the inspections and you passed all the inspections and you're telling me, you went up there Page 47 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Board of Appeals and said O.K. now give me my CO here's a $25.00 check, or whatever it costs and they said no. Helene Bulgaris: I have the inspection paper where all he wrote, I mean if it was such a major problem, should that have not been on that inspection paper that he handed me. Member Dinizio: Yes, I agree. I just wanted this clear in my mind. Secretary Linda Kowalski: I just want to add one thing that's not being menti6ned here and that is. When you got the building permit, not you but the contractor. This is the sketch that he gave and he showed that the pool was attached to the house addition and that's what the add is. The add means addition. An addition means a physical attachment more than eight feet wide. The contractor did not build that so therefore the contractor could not give a CO. That's why. Member Dinizio: Yeah, but they inspected it how many times. Secretary Linda Kowalski: It was inspected for safety and pool construction, not for the zoning code. Member Dinizio: It looks like there is a good 15 feet there and it's about 30 or 40 feet here. Secretary Linda Kowalski: They should have been told"when they inspected, you're right Hetene Bulgaris: Only when I went to the Building Department they showed me a little little picture like that and [ said, that's not my house. Secretary Linda Kowalski: They should have told you when they inspected it. Helene Bulgaris: Definitely, I mean. Member Dinizio: O.K. I just wanted to get the chronology down. Secretary Linda Kowalski: It's possible there was a difference. Mr. Andrew Fondiller: It's been inspected a few times and when we said, we're ali done, come and see it. He gave a good review with me face to face and whoever came two days later. Member Dinizio: You mean, you didn't do that with him face to face it was. Mr. Andrew Fondiller: That is correct. Member Dinizio: He didn't leave your house saying that we have to deny this. [']1 send you a letter. Page 48 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Board of Appeals Helene Bulgaris: Oh no no. He shook my hands. Mr. John Boufiswas his name. Mr. Andrew Fondiller: His exact quote, we're 99 and a half percent there. We just have to correct those self enclosing fences are a little tighter and I think you're an inch short on the one end of the. Helene Bulgaris: He drove around the property. I saw him go down, you know. When he said to me that my pool was in front of the yard, I 'said, to me I didn't undersiand it. Being down here in Town Hall, I realize what he meant. You know, we got the letter two days later. Mr. Andrew Fondiller: On that subject in front of the yard please note that the pool is more than halfway from the road. Member Dinizio: That's neither hear or there. That isn't a basis for the denial. That's all I have. Chairman: O.K. Is there anybody else that would like to speak in favor or against this application? Seeing no hands, pardon me. Do you want to make a motion on this? Member Dinizio: Yeah, I'll make a motion that we grant it as built. Chairman: O.K. Member Dinizio: I guess, no lights. Chairman: No overhead lighting. Secretary Linda Kowalski: Location. Mr. Andrew Fondiller: There is no lighting at all except for internal pool light. We did not wish to infringe on our neighbors at night. Chairman: That's very considerate. Member Villa: I think you ought to clarify the decision that there was never, the appoint of the addition or the connection of the house, was never brought up during construction. Member Tortora: During the inspections. Member Villa: During the inspections, and the job was completed and what have you before it was mentioned because we have to have some justification for approving it and we don't want to set a precedent. They should be attached but this is certainly a case where it should have been brought to the attention much earlier than it is now. Member Dinizio: That's why I went through that whole, I wanted it in the record. Page 49 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Board of Appeals Member Villa: Yeah, but we should have it in our decision, I think that clarification. Secretary Linda Kowalski: Someone want to seconded that. Chairman: I'll seconded it. Appl. No. 4317 - Edwin and Donald Tonyes: (Carryover from July 12, 1995 for continuation). Property loc~tion: 55465 Main Road, Southold. HB Zone District. Chairman: This is the completion of Tonyes hearing and we'll ask either one of these gentlemen who have great patience sitting back there watching the entire evening unfold before them, if there was anything that they would like to add. Ed. Tonyes Jr: How are you tonight? Chairman: I guess I'm all right. It's been a long day. Secretary Linda Kowalski: Do you want to explain that the lateness is due to a fire drill earlier, Jerry? Chairman: As you know, we had a fire drill here. Mr. Ed Tonyes Jr: I heard. Secretary Linda Kowalski: We're running behind. We're not generally this late. Chairman: Is there something you want to say? Mr. Ed Tonyes Jr: Well. Chairman: You saw the engineer's report. You read the engineer's report. O K. Mr. Ed Tonyes Jr: You wanted someone that was familiar from the town to view the property and to see if there is a change to be done because the board was unsure of the possibilities there. Chairman: Right. Mr. Ed Tonyes Jr: And we made out the possibilities and although there will be a bit of expense to have every-thing, to meet all the codes, which I feel we'll have no problem. We have to get inspected by the building inspector again and he'll have to say, hay listen, this is what we want you to do. Do A. B. and C. at such and such time, reasonable amount of time to do it over. A winter project for LIS. Board Secretary Kowalski: We received a letter today from the Building Inspector saying just that. That it would have to meet Page 50 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Board of Appeals ~ lot of New York State codes. I'll give you a copy so you can have it and he even attached copies of the State codes. (To Board Members) It should be under your updates page of agenda that was in your boxes. We just got it today. Board Member Villa: O.K. Mr. Ed Tonyes Jr. None of this is what you gave me. Chairman: We just got it today. Mr. Ed Tony's Jr: Is thi.~ something brand new. Chair,n~n: We just got it today. Mr. Ed Tonyes Jr: Do you wailt me to sit here and l~ad thi.~, the enti~e thing here. Chairman: No, I think what we'll do Ed is. We'll let you just resolve, you know, let you basically deal with it. You know, t~lIr it over, you and your brother for about 15 minutes. We'll go on another item, and then you come back aild talk to us about it. Mr. Ed Tonyes Jr: O.K. Chairman: Ail right. Board Secretary: He had mentioned today that he -- (interrupted) Chairman: We're going to work oll some of the stuff tonight and wheil you come back in, we'll reconvene. All right. Mr. Ed. Tonyes Jr: I'll just read it. Chairl~2n: We'll be here a half hour. Hearing recessed temporarily to allow time for the Tonyes's to read the Building Inspector's memorm~dum. Hearing now recoilvened: Ch~irtnan: O. K., Ed, you're on. Mr. Ed Tonyes Jr: We both read what you handed us. Chairman: Right. Mr. Ed Tonyes Jr: As far as this ,mlnhnbited use, when you say that, O.K., does the building department know what we want this for Secretary: Yes. The same rule applies. Page 51 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Board of Appeals Ed Tonyes Jr: And when he says more than 50% of it is above ground. I just want to stipulate that too of the lower level. O.K. And the , well according to, the biggest expense we'll have to put another entrance then on the side. So, if that's what they want us to do, we'll do it. Board Member Dini~.io: I think that Ed, didn't your own engineer say that it's subst-ntislly underground. I thought you're own engineer's report said that it was underground, the basement, Joe Fischetti's report. Now he's the person you hb'ed. Mr. Ed Tony's Jr: That's right. I read in there and correct me if I'm wrong but he's saying that is a basement because it's more than 50% under the ground. That is what he's saying. Your engineer. Board Member Dinizio: He gave us a report. He was your person representing you, gave us a report, tellin~ us that that piece of underground, that is underground, and just so you understand that. So you just have to follow those rules that apply to ~hat, when it comes to the budding department. In other words, all we're doing, all we're pointing out to you that, just because we say you can have it, doesn't necessarily mean that you can have it. You know, you're going to have to double sheet rock up there. Meet certain ceiling heights, exits, entries and there are aF.~t of thin~o-s. Fire extinguishers. I don't know if your wiILng is going to have to be. They're more than us jnst ~rl~nting you the right to have those apartments in there. -' Mr. Ed. Tonyes Jr. I understand that. Board Member Dinlzio: And I guess basically, that's what this whole thing tol]ight is about. Mr. Ed Tonyes Jr. The bulldlng department is going to give me a list of things that I have to do. Board Member Villa: In the paragraph that Jim is referring to, he's talking about the 50% but I think the second part of that is the cruncher on it. It says, if it's a cell~-, a retail use is allowed with one exit. If that exit opens directly at the exterior grade. Now your floor and that basement is probably 4 or 5 feet below sidewalk level. Ed. Tonyes Jr.: You step down three steps. Board Member Villai All right. So it's three feet below sidewalk level. How are you going to get an exit out to the outside at exterior grades. Board Member Dinizio: And then they talklng about ADA requirements, ramps. Mr. Ed Tonyes Jr.: And there is a side entrance too. There is a side entrance where we could put a ramp in too. Page 52 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Board of Appeals Board Member Dinizio: I th{nk it's just to your advantage to know. Board Secretary: The building department won't give you a list. He's going to rusk you for an architect's building plan certified by an engineer. Board Member Dinizio: And Joe (Fischetti) can do that for you. Secretal~ Linda Kowalski: And you had recluested either two uses or three, ~ht on your application. Right Mr. Ed Tonyes Jr. Right. Board Member Tortora: Can we vote on it separately? Chalrrr~n: We didl~'t even get to the voting. We're just closing thi~ hcaring. I mean, we're not definitely voting on it tonight because we're backlogged. Board Member Tortora: Can we do it separately. Secretargg T.inda Kowalski: Yes. Board Member Dinizio: We can make a motion, Lydia. Board Member Tortore: So we can con~ider three apartments. No, I want to know what they th{nk. ~f your request wins for three apartments or two apartments and a retail, right. Either, or. Mr. Ed Tonyes Jr. Right. Secretary Lincla Kowalski: Or a two f~m~ly, l{ight? Mr. Ed Tonyes: With an accessory. Secretal~r [,inda Kowalski: No, you said with two uses or three uses, total, altogether. Either two f~mi~y with a business. Mr. Ed Tonyes Jr. P~ight. Secretary Linda Kowalski: Or two family. Right? Mr. Ed Ton~res Jr. Or basically a spen~a! exception for a two family with an accessory apartment. Board Member Vill~: You're looking for three apartments or two apartments and a retail. That's what you're looking for. Board Member Dinizio: All right. Mr. Ed Tonyes Jr: I have to look into the fetal! end of it. Page 53 - Hearing Tr-an.~cripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Tow~ Board of Appeals Secretary r,lnda Kowalsk/: O.K. I'm going to read your application to you. It says, the application h,~ been made to the building department roi- a two fmmily dwell'lng. And then you make reference to Article 100-91B2. Then you say, there is a letter addressed to t/le zom~n~ board dated June 8, 1995. An application was subm/tted to your office reques~n~ a change from one fmmily to a two fmmily with retmll sto~e. While the same is prefel-able, a three fmml]y dwelHn~ would also be prefel-able. O.K. So you brave p]~nm for t/tree uses, either way Mr. Ed Touyes Jr. Yeah. Secreta_.~y Lib'rim Kowalski: O.K. I must have mimunderstood you. And then 100-92B. You said 92. 91 or 92- Secretary Linda Kowalski: 92, you're on Section 100-192, go to 100-92. Chml,m,n: That's where I was. I'm still in the parW~ng plan. Multiple dwellings and town houses. Secretary Li,~da Kowaiski: O.K. In the HB zone you're allowed to have mul~ple dwelHn~ provided you have a cer~/n amount of lmnd area, and the Tonyes have two lots. Board Secretary: They are both slngie and separate. I've checked that and they are willln~ to merge those. Right. Secretary: To g~in something. Chmi!'man: O.K. Board Member Tortora: They would still be short on them, Linda. Secretary r.lnda Kowalski: They really should have three lots, bu~ that's right. You are right (for three uses). All they have is two. Board Member V~l],: They have enough legally for two. Chairman: O.K. Is there ansr~hln~ else you want to say before we close the hear/nc? Mr. Ed Tonyes Jr. So in other words, we emn't get an approval for either three family or the two fmmily with a retail store. We would have to try and go with the two family, con-ect me if I'm Page 54 - Hearing Transcripts l{eg-ular Mee~ng of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Board of Appeals Secretsr~z Linda Kowaiski: They would let you know in a decision. Mr. Ed Tonyes Jr. Oh, O K. Chairman: We don't know yet. Board Member Dinizio: We were just trying to point out to you that, just us g~an~ng you something doesn't necessarily mean that you r~n have it. Cha~vman: '~.es. Bos/'d Member Dinizio: They'~e are allot of ~q~men~ *hat y~ ~ve to ~ve. T~t's ~. I ~t y~ to ~ ~to that, ~0~ that. Mr. Ed Tonyes Jr. In other words, you could grant us that but we still have to approve. Chairman: Yes. Board Member Dinizio: We!l, we're going to have to answer that aloud. Board Member Tortora: Well, whatever we would grant you would be on condition that you comply with everything. The New York State t-z~e code. What Jim, I th{nk, is trsrlng to s~y is,.you have a tough road ahead. .. Chairman: On the front piece. Board Member Diulzio: It's none of our business but, I think it was good that we showed - show you that. You know? Mr. Ed Tonyes Jr. Right. Bo~rd Member Dini~o: And that I would feel comfortable knowing that if I made a decision that you knew ail the facts. We didn't gr~nt yOU ~n~thlng, really. Mr. Ed Tonyes: Kight. Board Member Dini~.io: You asked us for something and ali we really grant you is a that we ~d to that concept. Chairman: And the concept is physical. Board Member Dinizio: Every*hing has to be physically, a whole other step and that's the step you hear, you read about in the paper. Beard Secreta_~Sr: There's one other thing tOO. I remember when Ed first came in and applied, I mentioned to him you have two lots. Nolnmaily that's for two uses and the board might be able to ~ive you two uses. But you have to ask for it and he hasn't asked for that. Page 55 - Hearing Tr-nmcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Board of Appemts So, I'm men~on~ng to you. Do you waxlt the board to give you an alternative, if they deny the two that you've asked for aLl-early? Mr. Ed Tonyes Jr: Two uses me~nlng two family (two apartments)? Secretary T.inda Kowalski: Two family (two apartments). And that's it. Mr. Ed Tonyes Jr. By all me--~, yes. Othervzlse I won't be able to pay for the proper~ anymore. Secre~_,!7 Lin~u~ Kowalski: Beeause if you did]~'t allow them, they couldn't do it. Chni,-,m,: You don't want to ~ that way. Mr. Ed Tonyes Jr. One fnmfly iS not goln~ to cut it. Chni~nan: Kight. Ed Tonyes Jr. Two family isn't either, but it's better than one. Bo~rd Secretary: And you']~e w~lllng to give up the other lot to merge it together in order to get the two fnmily use? Ed Tonyes Jr. Yes~. Chmi,--~,: All right. Well, we're going to. Mr. Ed Tonyes Jr: We'd really l~e the three f, mily use. Chmi~'man: O.K., all right. In all fairness to you guys, I don't think we'l'e going to get to it ton~ht. Ed Tonyes Jr.: Right. Ch,i,-~n: O.K. So it's go(ng to float for a couple of weeks- so you know. Because, we haven't sufficiently digested every*h~ng at thi~ pa~'ticular point and you cs~ see the lateness of the hou~ ~dy. Do you know what I'm saying. Ed Tonyes Jr: Right. I don't blnme you. Board Member Dinizio: So, I won't be c~11~n~ you up tomorrow. Someone else m~ht. Chni~-~n: Ally you guys ~re wor~n~ tomorrow too? Ed Tonyes Jr. Yes. Chairman: And so are we. O.K. Page 56 - Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 13, 1995 Southold Town Board of Appeals Chairman: Ag-in, it's a pleasure meeting you both and we'll do the best we possibly can. We thank you fOP the engineer's report and we'll do the best we can. Ed Tonyes Jr. Thank yOU very much. The hearing was concluded at this point, pending deliberations and a determination at a later time (expected at the nex~ meeting). Prepared from tape record}n~s by Noreen Frey. - Hearing Transcripts Meeting of September 13, 1995 Town Board of Appeals ¢1~c~, ~:man: Again, it's a pleasure meeting you both and we'll do the b¢~ we possibly can. hre thnnk you for the engineer's report and c~('ll do the best we can. Ed Tonyes Jr. Tbank you verst much. The hearing was concluded at this point, pending deHberetions and a determination at a later time (expected at the next meeting). *** Prepared frem tape recordings by Noreen Frey.