Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-04/24/1997 HEARINGTOWN OF SOUTHOLD : COUNTY OF SUFFOLK 2 STATE OF NEW YORK 4 In the Matter of 5 Zoning Board of Appeals ? April 24, Main Road, 8 BEFORE: 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 APPEARANCES: ABSENT: ALSO PRESENT: 1997 Southald,, Ne~ York GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, Chairman Serge Doyen~ Board Member Lydia A. Tortora~ Board Member Maureen C~ Ostermann, Beard Member J~es Dinizio~ Jr.~. Board Member Linda Kowatski, Secretary Laury Dowd~ Town Attorney 23 24 25 Gall Roschen 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 20 21 22 23 24 25 THE CHAIR~4AN: 2 I would like to welcome everybody here for the regular bi-monthly meeting of the Southotd Town Zoning Board of Appeals. The first set of hearings we are certainly going tO open and close because of an advertising error on behalf of the newspaper. So the first hearing is Appeal No. 4464 on behalf of Kourkoumetis. Is there anybody who would like to speak on behalf of this application? (There was no response.) THE CHAIR~IAN: Seeing no hands, I make a motion to close the hearing reserving decision until later. MS~ TORTORA: Second. THE CHAIRMAN: All in favor? M~. DOYEN: Aye. MS~ OSTER~ANN: Aye. THE CHAIR~iAN: Aye. The next hearing is in behalf of Peter Walker~ Appeal No. 4466. I would like to open that hearing again. Is there anybody here that would like to speak on behalf of this application? (There was no response.} THE CHAIR~N: Seeing no hands~ I make a motion to close the hearing reserving decision until later. DOYEN: Second. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 THE CHAIRMAN: MR. DOYEN: Aye° MS. TORTORA: Aye. MS. OSTERMANN: Aye. THE CHAIRMAN: Aye. Off the record. MSo minutes. THE CHAIRMAN: MS~ KOWALSKI: THE CHAtR~N: MS. KOWALSKI: MS. TORTORA: Ail in favor? {A discussion was held off the record.) KOWALSKI: Actually it's still part of the 3 Is it part of the minutes? It's on the record. I'm sorry. This is still Kourkoumelis. Let's take a few minutes to review the proposal. DO we want to state why it cannot be achieved? TEE CHAIRMAN: What t stated in here was the fact that~ because of the substantial setbacks in relation to the code requirements and the size of the present location of the premises~ that all of the houses are set back closer to the water than they are to the road. They are established houses that have been there for 30 to 40 years. is that what you are basically stating? MSo TORTORA: I was looking at number two? THE CHAIRMAN: Yes. I am saying is that what you are-- 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 15 16 ~0 2~ MS TORTORA: NO. places on the property. 4 In other words, there are no other THE CHAIRF~N: They could go in the that would require a variance also. That's on the water. Yes. Why would it require a variance front yard~ but MS. KOWALSKI: THE CHAIRMAN: MS. TORTORA: front yard? THE CHAIRM~AN: MS. TORTORA: on the Because it's not a garage. You are allowed to have accessory structures in the front yard on the water. THE CHAIR~N: As long as it meets the-- MS. TORTORA: THE CHAIR~AN: MS. TORTORA: THE CHAIRMAN: MS~ TORTORA: others° THE CHAIRMAN: What I wrote was: older established neighborhood with homes in the i~ediate area of this house and set back closer to the soundbank/bulkhead t~an t~ey~ere to County Road 48. MS. TORTORA: How about this? I did look at alternate locations on the site. I did agree with the applicant in The setbacks. Yes, which is 50 feet probably. So we can't use that as a reason? We can't use that as a reason. I think if I recall right~ there were 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 5 his contention that there was no other practical location available due to one lot unique in configuration with 63 feet and 75 feet. Secondly~ the presence of cesspools, wells~ driveway~ and large trees in the front yard and~ of course~ in close proximity to the North Road if it was placed in the alternate location~ THE CHAIRMAN: Basically the same things. Do you want to state that? What do you want to do? MS. TORTORA: It"s up to the Board. That was my thinking~ THE CHAIRMAN: cannot be achieved by any other method except in the front yard area. The beaefit sought by the applicant for placement limited front yard Yes~ limited ~ ~_ont yard area° Any MS. KOWALSKi: DO you want to say: area? THE CHAIR~L1N: other questions about this? MS. TORTORA: Maureen~ MS. OSTERMANN: THE CHAIRMAN: do it? MS. KOW~SKI: No. THE CHAIRMAN: It's mine. anything? No. Who wants to make a motion? Did we 25 MS~ TORTORA: Yes. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 THE CHAIRMJLN: I make a motion. MR. DOYEN: Second. MS. KOWALSKi: TO approve it? THE CHAIRMAN: Yes° MS~ KOWALSKI: And the conditions. THE CHAIRMAN: Yes° 6 I have basically four conditions. Let me find them. Pool and deck area are not to be attached to the dwelling at any time. 2. Pool shall remain open and unroofed at (open to the sky). 3. Lightin9 shall be ground effect only~ lighting~ and shielded to the pool and pool times ~nd to the parcel as a whole~ How is that? MS. TORTORA: Yes. THE CHAIRI~AN: decision? MS. TORTORA: Yes. THE CHAIRMAN: Second? MRo DOYEN: Yes. THE CHAIRM~N: All in MR. DOYEN: Aye. MS~ TORTORA: Aye~ all times no overhead area at all Is that okay to incorporate into the favor? 25 MS. OSTER.MANN: Aye. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 THE CHAiR~3~: MS. KOWALSKI: THE CHAIRMAN: MS~ TORTORA: This goes with the first sheet that Linda provided. Walker~ I would recommend approval for the following reasons-- if you would like to review the reasons-- and 7 Aye~ Who seconded the motion? Serge did. Peter Walker-- I~ll hand out the draft. On also to that there be no lighting for court~ THE CHAIRF~AN: fence? MS. KOWALSKI: put incorporate the conditions outlined in the draft, after dark use on the tennis Do you want to say anything about the He meets code. it in the conditions, that's fine. -1K~ to If you would ]~'= The fence he is proposing meets the code. MS~ TORTORA: Fine~ THE CHAIRMAN: And four feet~ MS~ TORTORA: The applicant has not applied for a variance for the fence because the fencing that he is So we can THE CHA!R~N: has not applied for fence~ just add that to that condition. Okay. Let's word it saying: applicant a fence~ for a height variance for tke THE CHAIRMAN: I should put six. MS. TORTORA: We have a condition on the back here° 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 proposing meets the four foot code requirement. this resolution. THE CHAIRF~N: MS. TORTORA: THE CHAIRMAN: !'11 second it. All in favor? Aye. MRo DOYEN: Aye. MS. OSTERMANN: Ayel MS. TORTORA: MS. KOWALSKI: MS~ TORTORA: THE CHAiR.mLAN: hearing. The next hearing This is Appeal number 4467° would like t ~ ti move Aye. Subject to the two conditions on that? Subject to those two conditions. I think it is time to do the next is on behalf of Caroline Talbot. ts there anybody here that to speak on behalf of this application? (There was no responses) THE CHAIRMAN: Nothing from you, sir? MR. DOYEN: No, except we alread~ approved it~ THE CHAIRM~N: Yes. i know° Seeing no hands~ a motion closing the hearing reserving decision. I second it. Do we have copies? We have to vote on the resolution. All in favor? Aye. MS. TORTORA: THE CHAIRMAN: MS. KOWALSKI: THE CHAIR~N: make 25 MR. DOYEN: Aye. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 MS~ TORTORA: Aye. MS. OSTERMANN: MS. KOWALSKI: THE CHAIRF~N: Where MS. TORTORA: i have Aye. That was tO close the hearing. is the decision? it right here. They're in the Board boxes. There's a cover sheet. Did everybody pick up this little cover sheet that said Matthew Daly and Talbot? THE CHAtRM~N: ! didn't get it. (Ms. Tortora handed said document to the Chairman.) THE CHAIRMAN: On a motion by Mr. MR. DOYEN: So moved. THE CHAIRMAN: Seconded by Ms. Tortora. All in favor? Doyen. Mr. Doyen~ 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. DOYEN: Aye~ MS. TORTORA: Aye~ MS. OSTER~NN: Aye. THE CHAIRMAN: Aye. We're just approving some resolutions we did as we go down the tine hereo We're getting to the end. The next appeal is on behalf of Gary Sacks and Alan Schlesinger. It is Appeal number 4401. Is there anybody here who would like to speak on behalf of this application? Ms. Soretl£~ 10 1 MS. BORELLI: I want to submit this affidavit, 2 Cam~eila Bore!Ii, of Ongioni and Borelli, 403 Front Street, 3 Greenport, New York. 4 THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anything else you would like 5 to state for the reccrd Ms. Borelli? 6 MS. BORELLI: No. 7 THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anybody else that would like 8 to speak on behalf of this application? (There was no response.) 9 THE CHAIRMAN: ls there anybody who would like to 10 speak against the application'? (There was no response.) 11 THE CHAIRMAN: Hearing no further cotranents, 1 make a 12 motion closing the hearing reserving decision. 13 MS. TORTORA: Second. All in favor? 14 THE CHAIRMAN: Aye 15 MR. DOYEN: Aye. 16 MS. TORTORA: Aye. 17 MS. OSTERMANN: Aye. 18 THE CHAIRMAN: We will be dealing with that. We are 19 not going to vote on it tonight, i mean we might vote on 20 it later, but we are not going to deal with it right now. 21 22 MS. BORELLI: I can leave. THE CHAIRMAN: You can leave. Thank you. Matthew & 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Laurie Daty-- Appeal number 4468. Is there audience that would like to speak on behalf application? MS~ HORTORA: THE CHAIR~LAN: me to read this? MS. KOWALSKI: THE CHAIR~<AN: This is a repeat. Yes. This is a repeat. DO you want documentation~ resoiutions~ and other information received as of this date for this application~ MSo KOWALSKI: You make that as a motion? THE CHAIRF~N: Yes. Motion to close the hearing. MS. TORTORA: Second. THE CHAIRMAN: All in favor? MS. TORTORA: Aye. MR. DOYEN: Aye. MS. OSTERMANN: Aye. THE CHAIRMAN: Aye~ MS. KOWALSKI: Da!y is also attached to that resolution. (Discussion was held off the record.) MS~ TORTORA: I~lt make a motion on this° THE CHAIRMAN: Okay~ MSs TORTORA: is the change noted? il anybody in the of this ~es. Resolved to enter all testimony~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 THE CHAIRMAN: MS, KOWALSKI: MS. TORTORA: in favor? THE CHAiR~,~N: Aye. F~ DOYEN: Aye. MS. OSTERMANN: Aye. MSo TORTORA: Aye° Yes~ Seconded by me, To approve the same resolution. To approve it as presented herein. 12 All THE CHAIR~IAN: We are finally back to the regular program. This is Mr. Stoutenburgh who will be presenting the next application° M~ STOUTENBURGH: Peter Stoutenburgh. THE CHAIRMAN: I haven't read the legal notice yet. I~ve just given him this. We just received this from the neighbor, If you want time to look at it~ you are welcome to have some time° We kaven't looked at it either~ M~. STOUTENBURGH: I've got photographs and stuff that is available. It was outdated by a number of years when they made a lot of the copies. I also have letters from the engineer I would like to show to you° THE CHAIRMAN: Sure. We~tl take a few minutes° We just w~nt to set up with him, because he had not received that. All we are going to do is read this for about five minutes, Then we will get into the regular program and 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 13 of disapproval under Article ZXIV~ Section 100-239.4A(1)~ to locate swi~ing pool with deck areas within 100 feet of the Long Island Sound bluff or bank~ as 2879 Ruth Road Extension~ #1000-105-2-2.1. I have a copy of a survey from John Metzer~ recent date is April 21~ 1997~ and it indicates at premises known Mattituck~ New York~ parcel most a pool property in the blown to scale. I think we area in its present proposed location between.the two deck areas of the existing dwelling. I have a copy of the Suffolk County tax number indicating this and surrounding area. i have a sketch of the deck area are ready to begin, Mr. Stoutenburgh~ How are you tonight? MR. STOUTENBURGH: Good~ thank you. THE CHAIRMAN: Mr. Brady~ we will be with you in one minute. MR. yourself. THE CHAIRMAN: Let him present his case. BRADY: I want to speak to you first about recusing i was going to get to that° I will get everything will be set. We are ready to begin. This is Appeal number 4465 on behalf of Barry and Carol Asness. .This is a variance based upon the March 5, 1997, Building Inspector's action tO that right now. 14 The piece of property in question was a part Of a joint venture owned by my father-in-law some 15 years ago. At this particular time~ to my knowledge~ my father-in-law has no interest in this property. I have no interest in this property. I do not specifically need to recuse myself unless the Board thinks I should recuse my- self. Mr. Brady, if you would like to raise an issued please come up here and use the mike. ~R. BRADY: Warren Brady of Mattituck~ New York. You mentioned that Mro Sledjeski has no further concern with this property. THE CHAIRMAN: That's correct. MR. BRADY: However~ in the Suffolk County tax record Liber 7637~ Page 121-126 says that he does have the authority to stop anything. They have to get his approval before they can do ~ything° THE CHAIRM3~: Are you referring to the C&R~s on the property? MR. BRADY: Covenants and restrictions, yes. THE CHAtRMAxN': For the construction of the swimming pool. MR. BRADY: It doesn't elaborate that you can do this~ or build a dog house or anything, but it does say that any 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 construction~ before THE CHAIR~MAN: That C&R~So in the 15 anything is erected he must approve. is correct~ I remember those My question is: how com~ you didn't bring this up last application that we had for the tennis court~ down at the bottom of the hill or on the other fourth-- ~LR. BRADY: I wasn't aware of the comments. I didn't find it out until the meeting was over~ wheh the letter was lost somewhere around here~ But they finally came up with it when we were all through. I didn't have a chance. I had no knowledge of it. THE CHAIR~: I wilt yield to your request~ but I will call him on the telephone° i will take exactly a five minute recess and call him on the telephone. I will ask him if he has approved anything in general. MR. BRADY: It's not in your file~ at least the one I was allowed to examine. THE CHAIRMAN: I am going to call him on the phone to make sure that he has not approved anything~ TO my knowledge there has been nothing approved by him in a long period of time. This is my father-in-law, Stanley Sledjeski. He is presently of ill health, i want you to know that. He just got out of the hospital, but I will call him on the telephone and ask him that question. · '~o BRADY: These do exist~ these covenants and 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 restrictions. 16 In fairness~ ! am defending myself against millions of dollars in losses. If anything happens on that bluff my home will be worthless. So I ~m concerned. THE CHAIRMAN: ! just want to say there really is no reason why I couldn't conduct the hearing. Are you asking me to recuse myself at the hearing? Or are you asking me to recuse myself on the decision? MR. BRADY: Well~ that's kind of a tough question° You can indicate what you think with a nod of your head. Who~s going to hang you for it? if you really want to stay that badly~ all right. I just want a fair deal. That's allo THE CHAiR.MAN: Let me ask you a question. DO you think you had a fair deal on the tennis court? This is a separate piece of property~ which is the lower piece of this~ but it is o~%ed by a separate owner~ ~tRo BRADY: Yes. the water runoff~ this When the sun hits that~ When I presented my argument about is an asphalt field and tennis court. it melts and the water rushes down and floods my road. into a drywe!t. Maybe he didn't. That's the only complaint ! have~ They should have made sure he put it Maybe he didn't conform. at this point. The by the way~ rarely ever used the tennis court~ THE CHAIRM~N: This is not germane to this particular issue~ but when I was up to the Asness' property i did 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 inspect the tennis court~ magnificent piece gorgeous. M~. BRADY: It appeared to me to be a of construction. I mean absolutely 17 We~ve gotten used to the fencing~ It's black. the beautiful trees. We try to protect it. years° THE CHAIR~N: So you don~t notice it. We say a fond goodbye to We are environmentalists, you know. We~ve developed that property in 30 I will make the telephone call. I will take a short recess and call him on the phone. Then I will report back to you exactly what he has done about the recent C&R~s on these properties. ~o BRADY: I didn't see it in your file. THE CHAIRFkAN: Thank you. I will need a two minute recess~ ladies and gentlemen. I~tl offer that~ MS. TORTORA: Second~ THE CHAIRMAN: All in favor? MS. TORTORA: Aye~ F~ DOYEN: Aye~ MSo OS~ER~ANN~ Aye~ THE CHAIRM2~N: Aye. (Recess°) · HE CHAIRF~N: I need a motion to reconvene~ ~ DOYEN: So moved, 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. BRADY: the thing. THE CHAIRMAN: He said he has not approved anything. MR. BRADY: Then this hearing is to no avaii~ THE CHA~RF~.N: It's subject to that, sir. MR~ BRADY: Yes, subject to this. THE CHAIRmen,: Subject to that. ~ BRADY: Would you like to see a copy? THE CHA!R~N: Sure~ You can give me a copy~ but it is subject to that. ~v~R. BRADY: That's overruling everything. THE CHAIRM~N~ He told me he has no interest in the three lOtSo They are not improved at this time. He has no interest. He will waive any looking~ any interest~ any need~ anything concerning ~hose three. As you know~ there THE C~AIRMAN: Ail in favor? I%LR. DOYEN: Aye. MS. TORTORA: Aye. MS~ OSTERMANN: Aye~ THE CHAIRMAN: Aye. Mr. Brady~ i did call him on the phone° He did indicate to me that he thought the C&R~S~ covenants and restrictions~ had expired. MR. BRADY: NO~ In the year 2000 they expire. THE CHAIRMJ~N: Then he was not correct. It's the year 2000. He has to approve 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 19 four lot subdivision that is not is one lot out of this improved. MR. BRADy: he has to approve before it can go forward. that pool unless.~eh approves it~ THE CHAIRMAN: He is going to waive his rights to be involved in it. That's what he told me. MR. BRADY: He is going to waive his rights? THE CHAIR~MAN: Yes. Now my question to the Board is~ while I stand here~ do you want me to officiate at this But tell me~ according to the covenant He cannot build wants me to vote at the final determination. right with you, Mr. Brady? MR. BRADY: Will you have Mr. Sledjeski have notarized deposition to that effect? THE CHAIRMAN: I am not asking ~r. Sledjeski That's up to Mr~ As~ess~ Is that all anything. his architect~ and his builder, if hearing. I will discuss it with the Town Attorney~ if she The point is~ I just want to make a ! have no problam officiating at the hearing? MR. DOYEN: Yes. THE CHAiR~N: Lydia. MS. TORTORA: What do you think? judgment of a fellow Board m~mber. THE CHAIRMAN: clarification~ that I don't sit in 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 !2 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 they choose to do so. 20 He told me on the phone he has no interest and he will waive any rights. MR. BRADY: I don't blame him. He's not well and he~s eighty something. You cease to worry things. Thank you. THE CHAIRMAN: MS. OSTER~J~NN: THE CHAIR~iAN: I hear an objection, about petty little Maureen, do you have any objection? No objection. So at this particular juncture, unless I will officiate at the hearing and I wilt discuss it with the Town Attorney~ For the people that just came in, at one time a relative of mine by marriage owned a piece of property that's before Us. The application is a swimming pool. There were active covenants and restrictions which one of the neighbors has indicated are still in effect, of which the person in question who is my father-in-law had the right or has the right to ~pprov~ any improvements on a four lot subdivision of which this application is one of those four lots. MR. DOYEN: i have a question~ sir. THE CHAIRF~N: Go ahead~ sir. MR.-DOYEN: How old are these covenants? THE CHAIRMAN: ~ would say the latter part of the '70's or early part of the "80's. Mr. Brady has informed us they run until the year 2000. The thing I just want 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 you to be aware of~ 21 if you took at an actual H pattern~ the top of the H are two waterfront lots. They are both improved.at this time~ with rather substantial houses. One belongs to the applicant before us on the west side~ ~d the one to the east side belongs to a gentleman by the of Shannon (phonetic}. The application which is the lower app!ication~ which we had last year I believes was for the tennis court in the front yard area. That was what I was questioning Mr. Brady on~ at this time~ He indicated to me -- and I am not speaking for him-- that he was relatively happy with the decision of the Board. There is one remaining unimproved lot which belongs to I just wanted to know how old the covenants · ~LR. DOYEN: were. THE CHAIRF~kN: They normally run 20 years. ~. DOYEN: When were these covenants made? How long have they been enforced? That's all E~m asking. ~. BRADY: It's dated March, 1974. THE CHAIRMAN: Twenty-five years. ~q. BRADY: It says it's valid until the year 2000. i don~t know of a~y :law that:says ~t:'s restricted-J if yDu want .~: to maintain control over something. Thank you. MS. TORTORA: If your father-in~taw is willing to waive his rights to review or approve the site, I have no objectio~ as to you voting on this. 22 THE CHAIR~N: I will discuss it with the Town Attorney. just officiate at the hearing. I'm like any other 1 2 3 4 I'll $ person here. That's allo So we will start the hearing, Mr. $ Stoutenburgho 7 Thank you for bringing that up~ Mr. Do~en, beCauSe 8 it was of concern to Mr. Brady. 9 MR. STOUTENBURGH: I have a couple of things 10 out to the Bradys and photographs that were taken 11 They donft have a perspective of 10ss of depth, of field~ 12 and they throw off the idea of where the work is located. is There are copies for everybody's file for you to 100k at. 14 The color helps a lot because of the trees and shadows and 15 stuff. You can see on this~ this s~ake. So you can get an is exact feel for location. Also, at the request of the l? Asness: a letter from Warren Sambech, consulting engineer 18 and planner who not only viewed and stamped the plans~ but 19 inspected the site. I have copies° ~0 (Mr. Stoutenburgh handed said documents to~ 21 the Chairman.) 22 ~. BRADY: Can you tell me what Mr. Stoutenburgh said ~ to you and what he handed you? 24 MR. STOUTENBURGH: Same thing i handed you. I just ~ want to review briefly the process that I went through with I passed from above. the Asness' 23 when they were looking to put the pool in. They 1 2 s spent a lot of time working to make sure that what they were 4 doing did not affect the bank, their property~ or their $ neighbors. Those of you who have been on the site and have § looked at the plans, realize they reduced the size of the 7 pool. We made it narrow. We made it very shallow in 8 volume. If you look at the survey~ they have kept the 9 structure of the pool at the same existing setback that the lO existing dwelling and deck are at. The only thing that steps 11 within five feet of that is one small corner of deck. So 12 there is space to walk around~ They added no extra deck to lS this other than the area to walk around and maintain the 14 pool. 15 I, myself, met with the County soil conservationist and 16 spent some time with him going over the site up and down the 17 bluff. I believe you have his letter of recommendation. 18 Mr. Sambech is here if there is any question;: regarding his 19 reco~endationso 20 For the most part~ unless you've got any questions 21 or something-- 22 THE CHAIR~AN: This is a gunnite lap pool~ Is that 23 correct? 24 MR. STOUTENBURGH: Yes. ~ THE CHAIR~HA~N: HOw thick are the walls? Do you have 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 any idea? MR. STOUTENBURGH: 24 The last one we did ranged anywhere from six to eight inches. THE CHAIRMAN: ts there much weight we are talking MS~ any guesstimate~ Peters on how about with or without water? STOUTENBURGH: No. I can surely get that~ though. TORTORA: What is the size of the pool? STOUTENBURGH: Fourteen feet between the deck and the exterior wall tkat runs parallel to the Sound, and it's 45 feet in length. ~I believe its deepest point is five and a half and three and a half at the other. MS. TORTORA: How many gallons of water does it hold? MR. STOUTENBURGH: I didn"t come prepared. I can easily send that to you and have a stamp on it. MS. TORTORA: The weight would be eight times-- one gallon of water weighs eight pounds. THE CHAIrmAN: Right° You have to do a variable because of the three and a half to five and a half. M~. STOUTENBURGH: Right~ i can get that. THE CHAIR~N: You can get that for us? ~ STOUTENBURGH: Right. Yes~ THE CHAIR~IAN: if the Board were so interested in granting this application~ the restriction would read no attachment to the existing deck or existing dwelling. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 25 letter. THE CHAIRMAN: Great. start with Mr~ Doyen. MR. DOYEN: No. THE CHAIR~N: MS~ MSo TORTORA: property~ i Tortora? Yes. When I went up to inspect the did notice a couple of things. I noticed on that i have no questions. We~ll kz~. STOUTENBURGH: It's been designed that way. THE CHAIRMAN: That's been the situation all along with any pool that's been on the water. I don't care where it is. MR. STOUTENBURGH: It's been designed that way. The blueprints read-- THE CHAIRMAN: How does one take water out of a pool like this? DO you run it-- MR. STOUTENBURGH: On these things any backwashing of a filter or any of those facilities have been set on the downhill side of the poolo THE CHAIRMAN: When you say "downhill" you are talking roadwise. M~. STOUTENBURGH: Bay side and around the edge of the house. The drywell is put actually into the front yard area. That was also a concern of the soil conservationist when i met him and I had no problem getting him to put it in his 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 first-- what has been determined as where the steps are-- MR. STOUTENBURGH: Yes. MS. TORTORA: That's about a five foot step. I did see that the pool would come right to the edge of those steps. I walked it. I actually measured from the deck area wkere you had staked to the steps. It appears that the pool would come right up to the edge of that~ Right here be part (indicating). THE CHAIRMAN: Come up~ of this conversation~ Brady~ You are welcome to TORTORA: The steps are right here (indicating). MR~ STOUTENBURGH: No. The steps are way back. Tkat"s why ~ sent the photos with the stakes on it. So it's very clear. There's a good overhead shot of the front lawn. These are the stakes way back here. That's the deck~ This is only i4 feet deep. So this tine here, which every- body is confused aD~ut~ was so that we could locate the back from what is considered to be the top of the bay on the survey~ This doesn't exist. This is a setback line. That is just so that the fellow who did the survey could locate a parallel distance so that we were not putting the pool any closer to the existing deck where the house exists~ MS. TORTORA: if you look at your picture~ that's what's confusing. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 27 ~LR. STOU?ENBURGH: This picture right here with the stake. That's the other corner of the deck. MS. TORTORA: We've looked at the picture. Let's look at the survey, if you look at it from-- I~m trying to face both of you-- Gerry-- if you would~ you see what I'm saying. In one shot here~ if you look at this~ see where this is here (indicating). See where the platform is here (in- dicating), if you look at the platform heres this distance is approximately from here to here (indicating). Where the steps are~ at that first step~ the steps are not down in here. That's what threw me when I went up there~ because when I walked all 14 feet from the deck~ i came almost with the walkway. I came almost to the steps. ~ STOUTENBURGH: That's the top of the bluff. THE CHAIR~AN: I ~idn~t measure that~ but I never measure from here. ~ always measure from here (indicating)~ MS. TORTORA: That's what I measured~ from here out (indicating). This is what !measured, Pete. When I went up there~ I measured from here out. It was approximately six inches off o~ the deck where the pool begins. Is that correct? MRo STOUTENBURG~: Yes. ~S. TOR~ORA: Then I measured I~ feet out. ~Ro STOU~ENBURGH: Yes. Correct? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 TORTORA: And i came approximately to 28 this step That's the outside edge of the deck. MS. area. ~viR. STOUTENBURGH: Where were the stakes? There's a stake here and a stake there. They were there the day it was requested. THE CHAIRMAN: ~LR. STOUTENBURGH: Yes. THE CHAIR~L~N: The stake. MR. STOUTENBURGH: Yes. MS. TORTORA: That's not what That's why I~m questioning it. i saw when we were there. THE CHAIRMJAN: Why don~t you meet with Peter at the site. That way he can explain the whole thing. Because his man was there when I was there. In fact, I was up there on Easter Sunday~ Not for ~ny inspections just to see where the house was. ~S. TORTORA: That was the first thing that confused me. The second thing I wanted to know is since you are further away from the top of the bluff~ if you put the pool on the easterly side, why didn't you consider that as an alternative? Why didn't you consider locating the pool further to the easterly side where it would be further away from the bluff? ~. STOUTENBURGH: We took the existing setback and we 1 29 2 maintained the existing setback that already existed there. 8 That was their feeling aesthetically as to where the pool 4 would be most pleasant~ where it would be located on the 5 structure itself and~ as I said~ we locate~ the existing ~ setback that the deck that was there had been improved by ? whatever means-- the existing structure-- but we used it for $ the edge of our deck. I~m not saying you can't go to 9~ another location or it be shifted to some degree~ but we 10 tried not to encroach any further on top of this bank that 1~ it already had been. t had at the request of the Board 12 taken a~d given to the surveyor a blow-up of the-- asked 1~ him to put that on the survey. You should have copies. ~4 MS. TORTORA: ~ just realized that aesthetically if you ~s wanted to center it would be much more attractive. However~ ~8 I also understand that this is a sensitive area and that if 17 the pool were moved to the easterly side~ that edge of the 18 pool would be much further away from the bluff. 19 ~R. STOUTENBURGH~ ~e went through what I felt and 2o from the consultants and everybody else we talked to a 21 legitimate plan. The Board has its opportunity to suggest 22 things and they can bring it back to the owner° I can't ~s change their thoughts on it. But they surely are people ~4 who do not say~ ~i want the biggest pool and let's get a ~5 bunch of lawyers and run down here.~ That's not their 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 approach. THE CHAZR~N: 3O Adjacent to and perpendicular to the location of the backing out area of the garage, so to speak, there's a retaining wail. MR. STOUTENBURGH: At some point the whole structure will go beyond the existing setback. dealing with the five foot court. MR. BRADY: May I say something? Right now we are only Those steps you see there~ they have come gradually. Every year, every 18 months~ they add another step. Sometimes it's two years. It varies a little bit, but now you can see there's about an eight foot drop in that north property they created falsely at the time when it was developed. bluff here~ and that's where the line past my place-- ~,~ STOUTENBURGH: Wetl~ So this is the crest of the ail the erosion that follows it goes right through your house~ If you look at the map, the coastal erosion line goes right through your kouse and your neighbor's house. do this~ This had been done quite a few years I didn't ~¢nq. BRADY: How can i get that map of my house? MR. STOUTENBURGH: I don~t think you will. THE CHAirmAN: Can we resume back to the kearing? f~q. BRADY: They keep adding steps and ground cover to 1 2 3 4 5 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 I5 16 ' 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 3t line of repose there~ It is receding This pool is going tD be slipping down within bank is going to be pretty much up to disguise the steps° There"s a naturai ~RS~ BRADY: Wy name is Mei ~rady. every year. a few years. That there~ We lost 50 feet from our house due to erosion in the last few years an~ 100 feet o~ beach~ We're right next door there. the terrain° section and the rest of it is unsafe° t don~t see where there is a hugh difference in Ali of a sudden~it~s safe on one little ~LR~ BRADY: I think that is pretty close to the top of the thing. Plus there have been no tests~ We don~t know what is under that really~ What are we going to do with the fill that comes out? ~. STOUTENBURGH: That fill wilt below the home to the south or it would be removed. either be put to the south of the home that exists would be removed from the property. MR~ BR~Y: ! think that's against the iaw~ M~S. BRADY: I would tike to ask if this is a hardship case or can the pool be located south of the house? Our neighbors to the west of us have located a pool south of their house. They have the same terrain. They have the same slope as we do~ We all have the same slope. They brought in fill and they put a retaining wall. We have be relocated either It will or it 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 neighbors to we do~ They have the same slope as the Asness. the same slope going down south of our houses. 32 the west of us who have the same terrain as We all have They brought in some fill and they put a retaining wai!~ They put a pool in,on the south side of the house where there is no environmental problems, a% all, as there is north of the house~ so close to the crest. thing to us. ~. STOUTENBURGH: It's a very frightening Their neighbors~ I believe like they dod are on this line (indicating)° So they don~t have an option to put the pool-- THE CHAIRF~N: Let's conclude with this hearing. Can we just ask you to sit down here. We will continue with Mr. Stoutenburgh~ Then we will take up the rest of the testimony from you. ~ didn't want you to miss anything. MS. TORTORA: When I was up there~ I noticed there was a six to eigh~ inch gap between the steps and the groun~ where there had been erosion~ So ~ ~ a little concerned about the weight of the pool~ because any further weigkt on that is going to further push that down. So there are two questions: (1) is there an alternate location that would place this off the Sound bluff~ and if so~ where is- it? ~f it's not feasible~ why isn't it feasibl~? ~,~ STOUTENBURGH: i~m sure there is an alternate 2 3 -4 5 7 9 10 11 12 13 I~L 15 17 18 2O 21 22 23 2~ , 25 location for the pool. 33 ~nether someone wants to live on the water and have a pool in their backyard-- maybe it's not an option for the homeowner. Most of the pools that I put on people's homes on the water, if they have a location that they can put the pool~ it is on the water side. if there isn't an available location like the neighbor to the west or there is no room between-- THE CHAIRMAN: They are missing this. You really should be using the mike° Why don't you restate that again~ MR~ STOUTENBURGH: I was asked about another location on the property for the pool~ it. THE CHAIRF~IN: MR. STOUT,~NBURGH. I apologize for asking you to restate That's all right. I think that it is something I would need to look at and get back to the Board. It surely can be moved from the present location, either further to the west or to the east~ The east has got a lot more room. I also think something that might help the Board would be if you and i could get the surveys for the property, also to the east to start to show how much the distance between this fragile area and the other homes increases. We're sort of looking-through a little microscope at one spot here~ and that might help in my looking and trying to give you an alternate location and 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 qive you there~ THE CHAIRMAN: 34 an idea of how much land we are dealing with I think that if you proposed to leave it in that same location~ I'm not speaking as an attorneys but that you meet back with ~frs~ Tortora so that she gets the bearing of exactly what she wants° MR. STOUTENBURGH: Any time with the Board~ That's something-- after 20 years we~ve been doing it~ I'm not here to move stakes or change things~ MS. TORTORA: I wanted to know about an alternate location that would not be on the south side, an alternate location moving the pool to the east to get off the bluff because~ as I say~ just visually inspecting this site~ I saw erosion~ I saw erosion on the step area. I know that when you put upwards of a couple of-- ! can't even guesstimate the tonnage which you are going to provide with that~ That is going to sag. There has been documented problems of homes in this area. I know from my own firsthand knowledge. Se we don~t want to get into a coming back i0 years from now, my pooi~ C~ ! replace it?' We situation exist. situation where you are and saying~ ~'Gee~ I lost don't want to have that STOUTENBURGH: We certainly don~to TORTORA: SO~ yes~ i would like to meet with you 3 5 7 8 9 11 12 ~ 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 so we can go over the footage like to come-- THE CHAIRMAN: I~!l come, Stoutenburgh. Any questions? ~r~ Stoutenburgh. 35 and if Mrs° Ostermann would too. Thank you~ Mr. Okay, M~r. Brady. Thank you~ MR~ BRADY: On the last spot plan that was submitted, I didn't see anything~ no indication of a fence around the pool. The neighbors to the east have 12 small grandchildren. They are concerned about them being drowned in it. THE CHAIR~4AN: By State laws they are required to have a four foot fence° MR. BRADY: Th±s negates the purpose of building the pooi~ because Barry and Carol'are very nice peopte~ but they live in Manhattan. They don~t understand our problems. He said~ 'I want to tie in my pool and look at the Sound now.~ With a fence in the way~ ~ don~t think he=s going to be happy unless he just floats and has a gats he opens an~ just floats. That's it~ THE CHAI~¥~N: You know where we are now on this application, He is going to ~o back and come up with other sites, other contours~ other things~ the weight of the pool~ the overai1-- so there will be an alternate hearing. MR. BRADY: Additional hearings to review everything again~ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ~0 12 13 14 '~5 17 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 36 THE CHAT RM3tN MS. TORTCRA inspection. MR ~ BRADY inspection? MS. Right~ We are going to do another site Do you think we can join in the site TORTORA: That's up to the property owner. BRADY: I~ll ask him. TORTORA; If you can get his permission. BRADY: We socialize together. We feel terribie about this, but they don~t have the background. THE CHAI~N: Peter. MR. STOUTENBURGH: I just want to make a co~ent~ that I have a letter~ which I~tl give to you~ from Mrs, Asness that she discussed with her neighbors to the east and they have no objection to the pool. Of course, we can't get a permit for the pool without having a legal fence around it. THE CHA~R~4AN: Right. ~rs. Brady. M~S~ BRADY~ Yes. Good evening~ members of the Board~ iad~es and gentlemen. My name is Mei Savage Brady. I live with my husband~ Warren Brady~ in Mattituck~ Mattituck Hills overloeking the Long island Sound. We have been year round residents here for 31 years~ We are eyewitnesses to the conditions of nature that prevailed here on a long term basis. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 !4 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 37 The subject I ~ addressin~ is the proposed variance to construct a swimming pool and deck on the property adjoining ours on the east~ recently purchased by Barry and Carol Asness. We believe that there are a number of facts of which they may not be aware of, because of the difficulty in obtaining from sources not privy to them~ I wish to present these facts and try to point out as clearly as I can our reasons for opposing this construction. We have no objection to a pooi per se~ however~ we do strongly object to the location being proposed to construct this pool and deck~ To illustrate a point directly related to the construction of the pool on the slope such as exists south of the Asness~ house where there is ~p!e room and it is environmentally safes the Burns~ to the adjoining west of us built their pool by utilizing landfill and a retaining wall of railroad ties. The Burns~ pool is built on the s~e slope that runs parallel and at the same approximate angle as the Asness' slope° We also have the same terrain. This is a precedent right here for where a pool could be located. Let me explain why there are inherent dangers here. First~ I would like to review the history pertaining to this property and the bluff we share. I wish to point out the threats posed by surrounding forces as they affect 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 those of us living on this bluff which binds us together~ as welt as having a domino reaction to adjoining properties east and west~ Our initial observation, in i964~ of the property adjoining ours to the east was of a devestated house~ askew and cantilevered over what appeared to be a sand dune of enormous depth exposing an unobstructed view of the Long Island Sound over 150 feet down. Surrounding this ruin were magnificent evergreens of specimen quality~ rare ming trees, beech~ and a variety of other species~ domestic and cuttivated~ intermingled with overgrown vines, beach plum and bayberry. There was natural growth up to the crest~ We subsequently learned that this disaster to the house was the result of an enormous avalanche precipitated by a hurricane which hit the north shore of Long Island severely. A serious fault running along the btuf£ helped to define the avalanche. The fault is a sensitive condition agitated by action due to nature and also due to tampering by man. About two miles westward in jamesport on the Sound~ in 1968~ Levon Properties~ inc. headed by George Semerjian~ excavation and dredging was begun on what was advertised as a site for a deep water port with motels~ malis~ and marinas. This had already been approved by the Riverhead 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 Town Board and 500 acres wsre Industrial. As was suspected~ 39 downzoned, from Residential to this project turaed out to be a glorified sand and gravel operation which required two enormous jett±es to accommodate large barges for transporting the sand and gravel to Connecticut for construction purposes. While this sit~ was in Jamesport~ it was also on the boundary line of Southold Town, only two miles west of the Mattituck Inlet~ As they proceeded to cart away the hugh bluffs of Jamesport to Connecticut and floated two jetties (actually barges serving as temporary jetties) the beaches to the east began to suffer severe erosion~ The littoral drift~ which replenishes the winter ravaged shore, flows west to east on this side of the Island ~d balances out the actions was b~ing trapped on the west side of the jetties~ building the b~ach up there and starving the beaches to the east~ As the beaches erode~ the bluffs underpinnings are scoured out. When the bluffs proved to be composed primaril~ of clay~ Semerjian sold the operation to Curtis Wright Corp. Curtis Wright proceeded to build two large jetties 650 feet out into the Long Island Soun~ As we watched the con- struction and the increasin~ erosion to the Southold beaches and the breaking down of the bluffs~ we were unaware of the 1 2 3 4 5 7 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 illegal aspect to this operation until we were pro~ided with a document issued to the Army Corpo of Engineers requesting a permit to build two 650 foot jetties into the Long Island Sound. By this time everyone was made aware of the detrimental affect the jetties were having on the Southotd Town Sound Beach and bluffs~ A~groundswetl of outrage resulted in thousands of signatures from all parts of eastern Long Island on petitions requesting a hearing before the Ar~y Corps of Engineers. Letters numbering in the hundreds were sent to our representative in Washington~ D.C.~ ©t±s Pike: Representative Pike was a me~er of the House Armed Services Co~mittee~ requesting a hearing before the Corp~ Mro Pike understQod the situation as hE also owned eroding sound shore property a. short distance east of us. He had the Army Corps of Engineers schedule a hearing in February~ t971~ at the Riverhead High School. Over $00 irate citizens attanded the hearing while speaker after speaker including Professor of Ecology~ Southampton Coi!ege~ environmentalists from both forks an~ geologists denounced this invasion of destruction and ex- plained the fragile condition of these bluffs and beaches. Shortly after the hearing~ Levon Properties owned by Curtis Wright shut down~ New York State k~torney Generat 1 2 3 4. 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 Lefkowitz was petitioned to have the jetties removed since this was in the jurisdiction of the State which included the Sound waters° The measure of just how important the protection to this shore and bluffs is in the fact that a multi-million dollar powerful corporation was forced to shut down opera- tion and to remove a substantial portion of the mammot~ jetties down to a mean low water level° However, the under- water remains of this installation has continued to interrupt the natural movement of the littoral drift and erosion continues at a somewhat lesser degree. In the interim years two homes were judiciously moved back from the eroding edge of the bluff, one due to a cracked foundation~ which was ~r: Sledjeski~s~ and the other to avoid the same fate. There are two other houses also delicately perched almost on the crest which continues eastward across the Asness~ iand~ These houses are within 200 to 400 feet of the proposed poo!~ Regarding the history of the property adjoining ours~ development of the area began with the bulldozing of a road over 1,000 feet up a steep incline terminating at ~he top of the bluff. The material, including trees~ bushes~ stumps~ soil~ etc. was bulldozed over the bluff ~nd became %he basis of the landfill to extend the bluff. As the 3 4 5 6 7~ 8 9 10 13 ~4 15 17 ~,9 2O 21 23 24 42 land was cleared and !eveled~ all material was bulldozed over the bluffs contributing to the landfill. Ail the landscaping~ shrubbery~ roots and all went over the edger Incredibly, I watched the remains of the house also go over the cliff. The foundation~ cellar concrete~ footings~ three fireplaces, vandalized appliances, plumbing fixtures, and the entire remains of the house was bulldozed over the bluf~ building up the height and depth of this ledge. Tires were placed some distance down presumably in order to help retain this landfill. Then some token plantings were inserted here and there on the north slope of this landf~ll. The ledge was graded to connect with the level of the natural crest making it appear that the natural depth was about I00 feet beyond where it was truly in existence. On the basis of this extended land fill, new owners of the property~ adjoining ours to the east~ in 1979~ and the location for tonight's hearing, applied for a permit to build a house on a setback at which time contractor ignored the true crest and measured from the extremity of the newly~ created ledge siting 140 feet instead of 40 feet° Taking into consideration our knowledge of these circumstances, we had our attorney~ Steve Latham~ send a request to the building inspector to issue a stop order to 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 provide time 43 for the contractor to revise his plan and to correct the violation of the setbaCk~ However, for reasons not clear, the building was nevertheless completed on this location in violation of the Town's regulation. The heavy equipment used to bulldoze this area and' digging the foundation set up vibrations of the ground which resulted in sections of our bluff to break away as I felt the vibrations and witnessed the sections break away. As was predictable, the land fill is now seeking its natural angle of repose as established by the nature of the bluff° It is manifesting itself as it continues its inevitable slide downward~ In order to reach the lower periodically added. This significantly lower Two levels are now apparent. land fill tev~±, steps have been level gives a visible measure between the true crest and the land fills roughly about 40 feet from the true crest and the house. This house was built in violation of the Town setback regulations. it is heres on this very spot~ historicaity unstabie~ where one house was collapsed by nature's wrath~ that a pool and decking is proposed° The condition created by this precarious land fill does not constitute a correction of nature~ When we purchased our ptace~ we were not informed of 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 I5 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 the erosion due to the fault in the bluff. 44 We were told that the disaster to the east of our property was an isolated freak of nature. Had we been aware of the true state of affairs, we would have built far back of the fragile crest~ We are providing pictures to show the conditions as they are. On picture number one is the area from the top of these bluffs indicating the natural crest of the bluff which continues in line to adjoining properties to the east and west. The lower level is gradually sliding indicated by the steps seeking its natural angle of repose down'to the base of the bluff° Picture number going north is the land east side of the deck~ land fill, from the bottom of the steps fill which swings out a blt on the The abrupt drop occurs all down the What brush takes root simply travels with the fill as it slides reposes Picture number fill at the left of downward seeking the natural angle of three-- this is the edge of the land the photo° The sound is in ~h~ upper left half of :he picture. The drop begins. It's a !70 foot slide at the crest of the bluff. Picture number one shows the a~ount of the drop 2 3 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 indicated by the steps~ descent. 45 It is a treacherous ascent and Picture number four-- this indicates a very abrupt drop from the deck and land fill as it appears on the surface. See picture number three. The sharp angle con~ tinues on down to the base of the bluff. There is no substantial stabilizing material supporting the land fill except for rotting brush and branches. My summary is: 1o By its nature this is a very unstable spot to build a pool. 2. One house has already been destroyed because of bluff cotlapse~ There is tOO little space, available for a pool. There is a serious fault running along this 4. bluff. 5. 7o Beach erosion is OcCurring~ Rain erosion is occurring at the crest. Ail bluff top structures create stress to an already stressed and unstable bluff~ Wee therefore~ respectfully request that this applica- tion for a variance be denied. THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you~ Mrs~ Brady. That was ~n extremely interesting narrative. It really was well done~ really tremendously well done. 46 Is there anybody else who 3 would like to speak? Yes~ as long as we keep it brief 4 because we do have to-- s MS. LOWRY: Very brief~ My name is Ann Lowry~ I am 6 President of the North Fork Environmental Council° ? I would like to ask right off the bat that you deny 8 this application in its present location. That is a 9 spectacular location up there on the bluff. It is just 10 beautiful. I saw it yesterday for the first time and I 11 very sympathetic with the Asness for wanting to have their 12 pool there and looking at the Sound and everything perfect 13 all at once. Very few of us can even hope to ever have all 14 of that There are regulations. Setbacks are in place for J5 a very good reason. 16 I think the Bradys have spoken eloquently about the ~7 fragility of the bluffs~ the vulnerability of their 18 integrity o 19 The Zoning Board of Appeals~ as i understand itt part 20 of its mission is interpreting the law and working within 21 the law. NO law covers every contin~ency~ Therefore~ 22 there have to be exceptions and there are exceptions that 24 are necessary° There are exceptions that There are exceptions that are just okay~ awesome responsibility to make such decisions, are desirable. You have an it seems 1 2 3 5 6 ? 8 9 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 47 tO me. You have to decide when it is necessary to make such exceptions, and you get into trouble, it's also controversial-- people on both sides-- but you have to consider many aspects of the situation and, as ±n this one, precedent is one of the things which you have to be but in this present instance it doesn't seem as though there is any reason to consider granting this exception. There is some discussion of be on their property. is no hardship as I was very glad to hear. There other locations where tke pool can They don't loose anything of their wonderful vista of the Sound. It's beautiful down there and you have to address any possible risks when you make your decision and you have to decide whether any risks are worth it~ In our opinion~ we think that is not in this case. We think that if you should grant this application in this iocation~ that it would lessen your credibility and your respect as a Board that is extremely important and has a very~ very important task to So we ask you, pleased to deny this particular iocation~ Thank you. THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Is there anyone else who would like to speak? 2 have a request~ t would tike to recess this hearing to the next regularly scheduled meeting. We have a gentleman that would like to speak on 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 48 the Nynex application and he has to catch a ferry alsoo So unless there is any immediate discoursed I would like to recess this hearing to May 7th. We would like to thank everybody for coming in. Approximately 7:30, Mr. Brady~ Nay 7th~ Thank you. I hope everything I did tonight was adequate. MR~ BRADY: I~m very pleased with your performance~ Thank you° I need a motion, ladies SO moved. Ail in favor~ Aye. THE CHAIRMAN: and gentlemen. MR. DOYEN: THE CHAIRMAN: MS. TORTORA: MS. OSTER~NN: Aye. P~. DOYEN: Aye. THE CHAIRMAN~ Aye. We don~t do this as a normal course~ but we are skipping two hearings just to accommodate one speaker Nynex. I hope there is no objection, Mr. Packman. no idea who the speaker is. MR~ PACHMAN: He's not speaking on behalf of Bell Atlantic Nynex? MR. CHAIRMAN: Not to my knowledge, sir. Sir~ from I have would you kindly come up to the mike and explain 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21, 22 23 24 25 tO us who you are~ MRo SANTOYO: My name is Carlos SantOyO. i Senior Director of Management for the Long Island Animat Disease Center° I don~t come here either to endorse or to reject the project. ! come here as a representative' of the government and part of the executive order that has been provided from the President in which it says, basically~ that we have to facilitate federal land for the installation of telecommunication antennas~ As such~ I am wiliing to receive a proposals if so be it~ from Nynex or whoever it could be and for us to review ~nd to determine whether it is feasible or not feasible to install that type of antenna over Ptum~ island. With that~ i will close my argument~ THE CHAIR~N: Thank you very much. Just one second~ Do you have any questions of this gentleman? MRo PACH~AN: Not one~ THE CHA~RM~.N: There :~s one question° We will allow one~ because we have to close the hearing and then we will come back. MRo M~DIGAN: My name is Tom Madigan. I just had a question for the federal representative here~ the gentleman from Ptu~ Island° Has Nynex ever approache~ him or anyone on Plum.~ Island to consider the installation of the tower am Assistant 1 2 3 4 5 7 9 10 12 13 14 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 24 25 there? me. The only person that 5O That's my question. SANTOYO: No. Nobody from Nynex ever approached approached me first was Ruth Oliver. She just asked me~ I said ~u~t what Z said hOWe contacted me and asked me that this "What is your position on this?" and then Mrs~ Susan Madigan if I could come over and just say is our official position on Plum Island, or the federal government¢ antenna. THE vHA±RM~N: on the installation of telecommunication Thank you very much¢ sire for coming. It's a pleasure and we will now recess this hearing and complete the last two hearings prior to this. Thank you¢ again. Have a safe trip back. i need a motion recessing this 'til later. MR. DOYEN: So moved. THE CHAIR~&AN: Ail in favor? MR. DOYEN: Aye. MS. TORTORA: Aye. MS. OSTERM~NN: Aye. THE CHAIR~N: Aye. The next Appeal is number 4469 on behalf of Raymond Fedynak. I am going to dispense with the legal notice because we have been requested to adjourn this 'tit May 7th. So I will in the brevity of time here deal with that 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 ~0 ~,2 13 15 16 17 ~8 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 aspect~ So i need a mo~o. ~ MR. DOYEN: So moved. THE CHAIRMAN: All in favor? ~LR. DOYEN: Aye. MS. TORTORA: Aye~ MS, OSTER~NN: THE CHAIRMAN: Is Mr. Monahan MS, KOWALSKI: Aye, Aye. (phonetic } I need a motion at approximately 7:40 p.mo THE CHA!R~,~N: So moved. MR. DOYEN= Second, THE CHAIR~hAN: MS, TORTORA: Aye. MR~ DOYEN: Aye, MS~ OSTER~LANN: Aye. THE CHAIRM~N= Aye. All in favor? ladies and gentlemen. 51 in the audience? NO. to recess ~.~=~ to May for Mr. Suter/Bluewater Seafood, I have the cards I would like to file with the Clerk° At the Board's direction~ we-- when I say we i mean state your name for the back with Mr. Ehlers. Would you record~ Mr~ Eh!ers? MR~ EHLERS: Richard Ehiers ~his brings us back to Lawrence Suter whic~ has been recessed from the last regularly scnedu d meeting. We 1 52 2 Mr. Bagshaw~ his attorney~ Mro Bress!er, mysetf~ and Red 3 the boatman-- all met with the Planning Board twice. We 4 went there for their Monday work session, talked around s what would be possible on the site, and they directed us 8 to prepare our thoughts in a more complete form on the map,. ? We produced the maps brought it back there for their formal 8 session Monday of this week~ and got from them direction @ that they would not consider anything further but they would 10 consider it if your Board would acts because our plan is 11 to put the parking into the Resident zone and they say they 12 can't consider putting parking in a Resident zone except 13 conceptually until your Board makes a determination. So 14 we are back again tonight to ask your Board to grant the 15 variance for the sideyard which is the one variance~ and 48 also that the parking on the Bagshaw parcel can occur in 17 the Resident zone to the rear as it had been for movie 18 theater use~ 19 Finally~ that ~r~ Suter can use the spaces on the ~0 adjacent Bagskaw parcel. I have learned that someone in 21 the Planning Board~ or the Planning staff~ I~m not sure 22 which~ has questioned Section t00-19tB of your code~ That 23 talks about location and ownership~ That was also a matter 24 of variance before your Board° The Building Inspector had 28 determined that your Board needed to grant relief if we were 1 53 2 tO park on the adjacent parcel° There may be some question 3 and I would appreciate if your Board would grant, in 4 addition, the right to use it. even though it is not in the s same ownership as the principal use on the parcel° 6 in other words, there is a way to read that Section ? to say that unless Bagshaw owns the piece next to him, he 6 cannot let the piece next to his use the parking on his 9 piece° I would suggest to you that is an absurd situation. 10 If Mr~ Bagshaw owns both parcels they would be merged and !~ it would just be one parcet~ So when they talk about ~2 location and ownerships they must mean a parcel owned by 13 somebody else because it wouldn't make any sense to have 14 someone grant permission to himself to park on his own 15 parcel. 16 So if your Board in your decision could just clarify 17 that that is acceptable. I point out that the general 18 statutory authority of your Board to vary any portion of 19 the zoning ordinance~ and if your Board were to read that 20 Section to say that generally it required similar ownership, 21 even though that is contrary to common sense, your Board 22 could vary it in this particular case for Mr. Suter and if 23 that issue is properly noticed in your hearing. I think ~ Mr° Bress!er is here just to confirm that his client is 26 still in accord with the general plan and will go back to the Planning Board after your decisiono $ ~. BRESSLER: Eric Bressler for Bagshaw Realty 4 Ventured Wickham~ Wickham & Bressler, P~C.~ Main Road~ Mattituck, New York. We are back before you tonight asking y~u, to grant the relief originally requested prior to our two visits to the 8 Planning Board. One of the particular concerns of this Board was the letter that was written to you from the Planning Board. ! am kere to reassure the Board and particularly you~ Mro Chairman~ who raised that concern and I think it was a legitimate ones that if this Board were to grant relief~ that the Planning Board would revoke the site plan waiver of Mr. Bagshaw~ This issue was br~u~h~ fo~r~sq~a~e~b~re~he~P~&~nt~g,~d~a~d,,~e',~e~e 15 told the following: 17 First, that that was not a letter from the Planning 18 Board~ but that if it was a letter from the Planning Board~ it did not represent the official action of the Planning Board~ but that if it did represent the official action of the Planning Board it did not mean what it said because the Planning Board was not going to revoke the site plan waiver if you granted the relief~ but they reserve the right to reconsider and look at it if you did grant the relief. We never did find out who wrote the letter~ but we 55 were assured by the Planning Board and the Planning Board staff that the reason for the letter was that they noticed that Redes boats were on the property in a place where they didn"t think they ought to be which~ of course~ bears no relation whatsoever to what is set forth in the letter. When we raised that issue at the Planning Board we were again reassured that that letter did not represent the official stance or action of the Planning Board~ that no meeting was taken with respec~ to this and no o~flcla± action was taken with respect to this~ and that we were safe to come back to this Board~ have you grant a relief and then go back to them with conceptua~ relief in hand and ask them to look at it~ I~m sorry if that's not terribly c!ear~ but that's as clear as it got. THE CHA~RM~%N: ~ very ~ ~ ~ ~a~e±y ask this question~ but I will ask the question. Was it constructed? Are things working in a positive manner? ~ EHLERS: ~ think we have gotten a statement from them they would work it out on ~h~ site~ they would p~ably-- ~R~ BRESSLER: Yes. They were conceptually in ag~eem~nE that ~= use was a compatible use and indeed even a change of zone would probably be appropriate given 1 2 3 4 5 7 @ 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the split nature of the parcel~ 56 but it was short run. Obviously that doesn"t accommodate anybody's needs bpt~ yes~ after we got over that initial hurdle we found them to be receptive to the general notion of some sort of planning going on in the zone area. THE CHAIRMAN: Have we actually established~ Mr. Bressler~ the amount of parking spaces that are needed off site and the amount of-- when I say ~'off site~' off Bluewater site for Bluewa~er and on Mro Bagshaw"s site for both Bluewater and for Mro Hughes who was the boat operator-- the boat salesperson? ~R. BRESSLER: We thought we had~ howevers I would say that we did not get a firm commitment from the Planning Hoard that that was ultimately going to be an acceptable number to them, because they wanted to know that they had the approval from this Board in order to go forward. We drew what we think was spaces and we had a discussion no final determination by _nem~ an acceptable number of about that, but there was as 24 a total accumulative amount was to be 39~ hear of anything of that nature? THE CHAIRMAN: The reason why I ask that question is, you know~ the plan before this plan was for 26 spaces, regular spaces and two handicapped. I then heard that Did you ever 1 57 2 MR. BRESSLER: No. The only thing we heard in terms 3 of spaces greater than the number we had planned was a 4 gross or raw addin~ of space requirement wkich, of course, 5 none of us are in agreemen~ with. We think they're 6 compatible uses. Although you can have overlapping day a~d ? night uses~ we did not plan for a gross number of spaces 6 which we reflected all the uses and at no time did we put 9 that number forward. lo THE CHAIRMAN: There was some conception to the fact I1 that these spaces can be shared~ I~m not trying to grill ~2 you. 13 ~. BRESSLER: No. We thought it was difficult~ after 14 attending one of these work sessions, sometimes to be able I5 to articulate exactly what the outcome of the session was. 16 Howeverf I think it is fair to say that there was a 17 feeling that conceptually that would be satisfactory. 18 I don~t think that the Board wanted to nail itself down. 19 Obviously they took no further action° They didn't want 20 to say it's 26~ it's 25~ it's 29~ but ~ thought that 21 general notion would be found acceptable to the Board and 22 that's the feeling we left with. We asked three times 23 each: Can we now go back to the Zoning Board and tell 2g them that we are on the right track with you and ask them 25 to do something without looking foolish? They said~ ~Yes~. By 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 13 ~4 '15 18 19 20 2'~ 22 23 24 25 all means o ~' THE CHAIR~AN: 58 Wells let me just ask this question and then i~ll complete. If we were to grant a square footage figure to be used as a percentage of the rear yard~ which is the residential area~ and that was not enough~ they were requiring more~ I just wanted to say that don't be concerned because we could address that at a future hearing° That was one of the concerns that I had. I certainly have the concern of where it was to be located~ but I think that we can can go from there~ MR~ BRESSLER: your question, we float that~ so tO speak~ and we I t~lnk that is did try to get as them to more in was happening there~ THE CHAIrmAN: fair enough. To answer far as we could with from you. Mrs. Tortora has done an excellent job in eliciting some further ' = ~ · nzorma~on concerning that, but ! just wanted to see because I didn't attend either one of those work sessions~ So of what actually went on. MR. EHLERS: I agree with what you on the square footage concept. I just wanted your interpretation Eric said. i caution. They are of the belief get some reading so that this Board would not be the dark than less in the dark as to exactly what but we got as far as we got~ I just wanted to get it from the record 1 2 3 5 7 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 59 that you will allow parking in the Residential zone~ if you do~ Then they are going to set that parking in the Residential zone. They are not looking to you to say 30 spaces~ 20 spaces, 50 spaces° I will still have to convince them of how many spaces~ We presented a plan but without' your approval to put the spaces in~ we are dead in the water~ THE CHAI~N: Sure~ Mro Doyen. MR~ DOYEN: No questions. THE CHAIR~Z~: Ms. Tortora~ MS. TORTORA: I did talk to the Planning Board and tried to determine the number of spaces to get some idea. There are a couple of things I wanted to ask. The quanset hut (phonetic), the movie theater~ Perhaps i should be addressing Mr. Bressler on bhis movie theater~ MR~ BRESSLER: The movie theater. MS. TORTORA: Yes° There does seem to be an agreement on the number of spaces required for the movie theater-- 2~. MR. BRESSLER: objection to bhat. committed to it, but they with that number. MS~ On your plan you have 20. We show 20 and we heard nO great However~ I can't represent to you they di~n"t seem to have any trouble TORTORA: I'm trying to see where the areas of 6O consensus are~ I see an area of consensus for that daytime~ because this is going to be combined daytime and night time. Hughs (phonetic) was 13 originally on the plan. You had six for the front~ They're not going to go along with that. So he needs six somewhere e!se~ whether it's on site or in the residential piece. MR o BRESSLER: Really what ! would like to say about that issue~ that is not done for. As i pointed out to the Planning Board~ there are two pre-existing non-conforming uses on that property~ While they didn't like the re- configuration of the spaces from east/west to north/south~ at no time were we willing to concede. ! thought I made it quite clear that we were not willing to concede. We are not willing to concede the loss of those spaces notwith- standing what they might say~ We have our ~ses and we have not subjected ourselves to the ~urisdiction of the Planning Board with respect to full site plan review~ to basically abandon those spaces~ and what we said was we will come back and we Will review them. So ~ just want to make that clear~ an~ there is an 22 23 24 25 area of disagreement there. ~S. TORTORA: the last kearing~ I said~ ~Who~s One of the things we discussed durinc~ I believe you were rl~hu on target~ when on first?~ Yo~ said~ "You're on _~s~ as the owner of the residential property.~' You know, I have no problems conceptually having all three of these uses use 4 that property providing~ howevers that your client~ as $ owner of that, Mr. Bagshaw~ commit to that in some sort of $ agreement so they don't end up with a situation in five y months from now or six months from now where there is 8 insufficient parking and he isn't signed off on it. 9 think you can understand that. ~o BRESSLER: Wells we are going to address Redes issue through obviously a contractual arrangement and since 12 we were compelled against our wishes to terminate our relationship with Bluewater~ we are going to have to re- instate one that is mutually agreeable to both sides~ MS. TORTORA: That's what I am saying. MR~ BRESSLER: However~ I will tell you now~ we will not subject the property to anything in the nature of an easement in perpetuity~ So~ while t think your concern in the long term is a valid one~ I think that's a more or less 2o remote occurrence, in other words, what I am saying is we are not going to grant him the right forever and ever to use our property and times change and uses change~ but since we have a history of permitting this pursuant to 24 either a lease or a licensing a=~ang~menu~ we would propose 25 relns=atmng that. It will be either a lease or a ticense~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 !0 1! 12 13 14 15 16 17 !8 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 but it will be something that will convey r=~hts water~ 62 to Blue- THE CHAIRY~N: M_R. BRESSLER: MS. TORTORA: Temporary rights~ Yes. would prefer a lease agreement with Red opposed to a license. Quanset hut-- what hasn't been leased? ~4R. BRESSLER: decided on what going to take~ and with Mr. Suter~ even if it"s temporary~ but as are we doing with that since that Let me address your issue. We haven't form the relationship with Bluewater is We have determined that Red ~ '~ entitled to a lease. We have not yet determined whether there is going to be a lease or a license with Btuewater given the overlapping nature of the relationships° ! am of the preliminary opinion that given the lease of the property to Reds that probably a license arrangement is the appropriate legal vehicle° In any event, i don~t think that that creates an issue for your Board~ since there will be a right to use those spaces that will be committed. think the nuance of the relationship is something that we have got to consider from our end in terms of the use of the property~ from your end it will be transparent. MS. TORTORA: From our end we have to be sure~ before 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 we grant Biuewater~ that you are willing to commit certain spaces on that residential property; that your client~ as owner~ will grant him permission for x~ y~ z spaces~ MR. BRESSLER: That is exactly what a license is. That"s what we intend to do. I don't think we need to into the legal details, THE CHAIRMAN: That has to be in place. MR~ BRESSLER: Of course~ otherwise he kas no right to park there. THE CHAIRMAN: i know that you are really co-counsels here, you and ~r. Ehlers~ b~t the reason is why would we ever entertain this area of 191 without having Bluewater in need of this particular parking? We woul~n"t deal with it. F~. BRESSLER: THE CHAIRF~IN: ~R~ BRESSLER: Of course. That's why it has got to be in place. ~t was in place before we were compelled to take it out of place. ~ot ~ THE CHAIRMAN: MR~ BRESSLER: About the quanset hut-- MS. TORTORA: Yes~ If i can, We didn't compel you to do that, NO. You did not. You absolutely did I would like to save your client the need of coming back to this Board for approval for 20 spaces on there~ if we can wrap it up in 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 this hearing procedure, iet~s do it~ MR~ BRESSLER: ~ would like too Board was not willing to com~it. MSo TORTORA: We are willing to look 64 However, the Planning at this right now, because there is an agreement that for the movie theater quanset huts between yourself and the Planning Board~ that 20 spaces are required. MR. BRESSLER: Wait. Let me stop you there. At no time did we concede to the Planning Board that 20 spaces are required for that MS. TORTORA: MRo BRESSLER: quanset hut. It is on your plan though. No. This is not a site plant This is an application for the site plan waiver° What we are willing to do for the Planning Board in conjunction with the application for a site plan waiver is to provide that parking~ At no time were we or are we willing to concede that 20 spaces are~ in fact, required ors in fact, that we are required to get site plan approval for that parcel~ Red asked in the first instance and obtained a waiver of site plan based upon his promise to do certain things to the property° Just so you understand the procedural posture we are in~ we are in that same procedural posture before the Planning Board and we are willing to do that in conjunction 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 17 18 19 21 22 23 24 25 65 with a site plan waiver° That's where we are. Now~ I think to your Board agaln that is transparent~ We will give you what you need to see, if it's fairly asked. We will reinstate Biuewater~s right to use those spaces, but at no time are we taking a position that we are sub- mitting a site plan to them or conceding that that property needs any more spaces than it already has given its pre- existing non-conforming use to the us'es on the property for the last 20 years. THE CHAIRi~N: within our purview. MR. BRESSLER: Again~ it is not our forte. It is not Nee i just wanted to make that clear unless there be a misunderstanding. that is transparent to your Board~ THE CHAIRk~N: Except what i've said~ that is if However~ I do it does bring up the issue of there are additional spaces needed when this building goes on line-- when I say "goes on line~" an active tenant is found for this building-- then you may have to come back and ask for more space. MR. BRESSLER: That is cerrect~ We may~ in fact, have to do that and in conjunction with the zoning change we may very well go in and ask for an approved site plan and put an end to t~is. THE CHAIRMAN: Right. Sure. Good. 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 Ms~ Ostermanno MS. OSTER~3.NN: THE CHAiRF~N: to speak in THE CHAIRMAN: a motion to close later. 66 NO questions~ is there anybody else who would like favor or against this application? (?here was no response.) Hearing no further questions, I made the hearing reserving decision until 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 MS. TORTORA: Second° THE CHAIRMAN: Have a lovely evening. Ail in favor? ~. DOYEN~ Aye. MS. TORTORA: Aye. MS. OSTERF~NN: Aye. T~E CHAIR~N: Aye~ We will take a three minute recess. (Recess~) wrong one-- 4~45. MS. KOWALSKI: THE CHAIRMJ~N: ~R. DOYEN: Aye. MS. TOR?ORA: Aye. Lydia is making that motion° i w~x second ito -~ A~ in favor? THE CHAIRF~AN: I need a motion, ladies and gentlemen~ to open the Bell-Atlantic/Nynex hearing, all three areas-- 4429SE and 4429SE and 4430.~ apologize. I'm on the 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 ,15 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 67 I also would like to say hello to Mrs. Ostermann I never met before~ but it's nice to meet you~ MS. OSTER.MANN: Thank you° MRo PACHMAN: It's nice spending once a week~.once a night, once a month here~ We're getting better° good to see you people again. There are a couple of items that ! would like to re~pon~ to. Mro Santoyo~ who did speak tonight with reference to the Plum Island site~ just so the record is straight for the next time and one more time~ we have testified that the site of the Plum Island is not an acceptable site from an engineering point of view~ ~ must also state~ so those who have any current or recent recollection when the Planning Department did recommend Plum Island ferry site as a potential site~ we did contact Plum Island° in fact~ Mr. Wayneriter (phonetic)~ who is u_~e real estate agent in this matter, did speak to Mr. Santoyo in the hallway and refreshed his recollection that there was contact with reference to the ferry site~ and that ~S. OSTERMANN: Aye. THE CHAIR~V~.N: Aye° We are ready to proceed, Mr. Pachman~ MR. PACHMAN: Howard Pachman~ 366 Veterans Memorial Highway] Com~ack, New York 11725. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 he asked us to once again send him a written proposal although that is not an acceptable site. a yes or no or any answer to that site~ 68 We haven't gotten but it's not engineering feasible. That was a site that was recommended as one of the so called alternate sites we had discussed in our first meeting. Since my las~ appearance here~ I see that Ms. Tortora had requested at the las~ meetings since we had gotten the minutes~ a recommendation from the Planning Board for a study of the current zoning of this particular site and the adjacent zoning, i also received, to my surprise and chagrin, a statement from the Planning Department that they were going to be lead agency and wanted to a potential full environmental consideration of this particular ~app!ication. We wrote to them a letter extensively iindicating how they had misread our application and had based their determination on wrong criteria and hopefully they would make an intelligent decision on that. i was advised tonight that both those items are still up in the air and have not been decided by them. For the record~ publicly for the third or fourth time~ we have ~reduced the tower height from t00 feet to $4 feet. THE CHAiR~N: Now it's 84~ not 82. MR. PACHMAN: 84 feet. That's what we said all the time. If I misspoke on the record~ Eighty-four feet° ~9 I wish to correct that. 1 4 THE CHAIR~AN: What's the location of the tower? S MRo PACH~N: The location of the tower as a result 6 of our last amendment was !00 feet back more than it was 7 before, I believe 165 and 100 feet is 265 feet. Every- 8 thing would be move back proportionately. I was advised~ 8 and I read the minutes again~ that that amendment was 10 accepted. 11 THE CHAIRMAN: That is approximately in the center 12 of the property, 15 ~. PACHM~AN: That is in the center, if you look at 14 that proposed site plan~ which was merely for pictora! 15 purposes~ was so that if in some future date under the 18 current zoning plan as it exists today a subdivision 17 application would be made~ that this would fall within 18 one of the proposed two acre zone sites on that subdivision 19 map~ That is the reason again~ at Ms. Tortora's request~ 20 Not at her request. I don't want to say that-- try to 21 allay the concerns that she had which we thought at the 22 time were misplaced. 2~ THE CHAI~V~AN: The next question i have is~ you are 24 talking about the entire i0 acre site~ You are utilizing what percentage of that site? 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 70 M~R~ PACHMJtN: No. We are not utilizing the whole site. We are utilizing a site, 20 by 40. Matt will give you those dimensions. I don't have them in front of me. THE CHAIRMAN: Just give us something with that location so ! know exactly where we're talking~ sometimes' It doesn't have to be tonight. Send it to us. Bring it out. ~. PACH~N: I think you have ito THE CHAIR~Z~RN: I know. You never really wrote that in there. MS. TORTORA: We don~t have it in there. In fact, I went through the transcript of the hearing. I went back and forth. We don~t have any actual amendment. MR. PACRMAN: I was told I could make the amendment orally. THE CHAIRMAN: You never reduced them to writing. MR~ PACHM~AN: i can't reduce something to writing · f it's oral~ ~t~s inconsistent. THE CHAIR~kAN: ~t's not inconsistent, t~m not talking in the way of words. I am talking about the way of dropping a pen~ MR. PACHMAN: I don:t have to drop a pen. i put it publicly on the record orally. That is a concession orally on my part. I think counsel will concede to that, 1 2 3 4. 5 $ 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 if I make that oral adequate. The site ~ml=slon to that~ that that is 71 is 24850 Seuth Main Road, Orient. Our site plan that we originally and an access square feet. portion that we direction-- THE CHAIR~N: MR. PACHM~AN: the current status of that point will be 84 gave you shows 1~800 square feet of 2,500 square feet~ for a total of 4~200 If you would take that site plan and that lease, and extend that in a northerly Southerly. Southerly direction-- excuse me-- and feet and do everything on a proportion basis, that is our application and the tower at feet in height plus the accessory structure. That doesn't change. THE CHAIRMAN: At the last hearing~ you kept on dropping the word that someone's discriminating against someone-- and I don~t remember what that was-- and you promised to give us some sort of a brief or something. MR. PACH}~N: I~ve already given counsel a brief on the issue-~ not of discrimination-- on the issue of what your rote~ in my opinion~ as a Board of Zoning Appeals when one applies for a special permit or a special exception or a conditional permit~ under any one of those three terms which are all used lntercnang~ably~ and Matthew at the end 1 2 3 4 5 8 7 8 9 !0 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 72 of the night will try to orally state that for the audience so that they will have that and that brief will be given to you tonight. My issue of discrimination, I will orally state that issue a§ain~ is that we are being treated differentiy tha~ our application in i992 at the Cutchogue site~ differently than you treated AT~ d/b/a Cellular One at the Elijah Lane site¢ and AT&T Cellular One at the site which appears to be as a result of a lease entered into with AT&? Cellular One at the site behind the police station next to the DPW Quarters where an existing tower was removed and a tower was erected at the cost of AT&T and to be ultimately turned over to the Town, and the consideration of that was they would also place'on their existing tower that they were going to rebuild those antennae array of the po!ice department which would then be reconstructed and rebuilt on that new tower. In that application no special permit or application or conditional use permit was requested from this Board~ by the Town of Southotd, who is also subject to the zoning regulations of this Town in that they are using that site which is in the same 80¢000 square feet zone as the parcel of property that we are ±n~ and secondly, that they are using that site both in a proprietory interest 1 2 3 4 5 $ 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 !5 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 and in ~n governmental interest 73 and in that instance you had only required the Town-- not you-- I don~t mean this Board-- had only required the building permit be issued and a building permit was issued and that was built contrary to your zoning regulations. I read at length this section~ again~ which I will read to you° Once again i have been advised that not only is Cellular One on our site, but apparently so is Nextel (phonetic)~ There is not only one user~ I don't think they were required to get THE CHAIR~N: We stated all this at the second hearing, that we told you that but two users° any kind of permit. great length in these were business parcels and/or a Town parcel. ~R. PACHk~N: ~ro Chairman, I respect what you are saying but under your zoning code there is no distinction for a special use permit under Section t3i of the-Town~ code which I will read it again~ not to burden this record but maybe to have this reporter once again put it in. Under Section 130(b)6-- I wish to refresh the recollection of the Board and the audience-- public utiiity~ the rights of way as well as structures and other instaila- t~ons necessary to serve areas within the Town subject conditions of the Board of Appeals may be iraposed in order to protect or promote the health, safety~ appearance~ and 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 74 general welfare of the co~unity and character of the neighborhood in which the proposed structure is to be con- ducted and that is a use, conditionally permitted in the zone that we are in. No distinction. Any zone, commercial~ light industr~ residential° No distinction in the ordinance° You have no right to make the distinction. MSo TORTORA: Can i say something? MR~ PACH~N: But I am not going to belabor this~ because I think it's in the record and I know you have other hearings. THE CHAIRMAN: I have other things I have to discuss. Ms. Tortora has a question. MS. TORTORA: ! just want-- before we get too far on this-- study to Planning Board, two page brief study is not a monumentous thing. MR. PACHi~N: MSo TORTORA: MR. PACHMAN: MS. TORTORA: They haven't done it yet~ ma'am. I know they haven't done it. They seem to be overworked~ ' It is not a monumental thing to ask MRo PACHMAN: It was never done in any other applica- tion where cellular towers were used~ it's being done in this case. We're being discriminated against~ The record ~0 12 14 15 16 ~7 1@ 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 75 should so reveal and I so state. MS. TORTORA: This parcel is not the same as parcels~ not because of the zoning but because, as you agree at the last hearing, this parcel is vacant lando ~LR. PACHMAN: No distinction. I said it before. repeat it again. MS~ TORTORA: i know that in other towns they have two or three principal uses. As you well know~ that is not the case in our town. I know that you disagree with Respectfully. But that is the way that the laws in the Town of Southold have been interpreted for umpteen that. MR. PACH~_N~ MS~ TORTORA: years. MR~ PACH~N: MS~ TORTORA: the other 1711 the meeting and I going to amend it r~q. PACH?~N: stood what I said~ though't I was told to do so. I am not verbally.~ No. Then whoever wrote that misunder- I will correct the record again. I am That doesn't make it right. It may not~ but that is the way we apply the laws in the town and we did apply them evenhandedly in that matter. That's number one. As far as the space, the reason I am confused is because at the last hearing, you said~ "I will go after 1 3 5 7 8 9 10 ~2 14 15 ~7 2O 2~ ~2 23 24 25 amending it verbally. Planning Board and have said 84 Board one more times 84 feet. MS. TORTORA: the spaces. ~ PACHMAN: location. MS~ TORTORA: the setbacks. THE CHAIRMAN: 76 I have written a letter to the feet. I state before this We are talking about the placement and One hundred feet back from the original And the land area you will be using and Mr. Pachman~ while you are looking for that, I just want to address some other issues if it is all right with Ms~ ?ortora. MS. TORTORA: Yes~ THE CHAIRMAN: i am soul searching at this point~ only because it's necessary for me to do so~ If you remember~ told you that the purpose for this hearing was to inform you of did phone~ transmission problems at those four locations~ One was at the beginning of the causeway. One was at the end of the causeway. One was at the Candy Man~s front yard~ and the other one was in Mr. Pelluso's driveway~ which is approximately equal distance down Pla%t Road. I had no some field survey work I had done personaily~ and ! That's with a Bell Nynex telephone~ cellular and I did it from four locations. I had no problem with that. 77 However, what I did begin to feel, is the s~me cerning this particular piece of property, particular use on this piece of property. feeling that I have felt all the way along con- and this Not from a 2 3 4 5 6 flowery point of view, but one of my pluses for being appointed to this Board~ in February of 1980, was the fact 8 that I was a licensed real estate broker~ I was a high @ school teacher, and all of these things. However, I have 10 continued with that license since 1975, and I began to look at what these towers smd what the Lilco power lines do to parcels of property within this great town. I did a little study on my own. i came up with 14 approximately 26 parcels, within the plat road areas that could be affected by this tower. I also have a reduction schedule in reference to land value. Unfortunately~ i 17 haven't gotten a chance to actually prove it, but Z will be 18 submitting that to you~ I think that my expertise as a real estate broker, which I don~t practice at the present 20 time~ but I s~ill hold the broker's iicense~ over the past 25 years will certainly prove to you that the visual impact 22 of this particular project does affect people's property values regardless of what your individual real estate person said° 25 MR. PACHMAN: I appreciate you sharing that with me, 1 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 I2 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 78 Mr. Chairman. I would very much appreciate seeing your final work product and I won't comment on it until I see it. THE CHAIRMAN: That's the elusive map. MR. PACHMAN: NOo I gave you one. THE CHAIRMAN: I know. MR. PACHM~AN: I gave you one which was similar to this. I said that since the site as it presently is configured in the site plan that we gave you would appear to fall on the line, between a proposed subdivision between lots 1 and 2 arbitrarily given on this particular~i~e~ and if we moved that 100 feet in a southerly direction, that would place this particular site well within one building lot under the current zoning regulations right now° I gave you that and I said it's only for information purposes and nothing more than that. So if I have to state it again~ I will state it for the record. THE CHAiR!tAN: the property. MR. PACHMAN: THE CHAIRM~AN: east and west line. MR. PACHM~N~ But it is approximately dead center on No. It is not dead center. I am talking dead center between the I don't believe that to be the case. I 25 think it's one-third. 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 THE CHAIR~N: between-- MR. PACHMAN: No. That's south. 79 I'm talking about I'm saying to you that if I go to here (indicating)~ my property line goes to here and I'm going over here (indicating). THE CHAIRMAN: (indicating). MR. PACHMAN: (indicating), No. I'm talking about this way It doesn't change between east and west. We're not changing it east to west. southi~ THE CHAIRMAN: MR. P~CHM~N: THE CHAIRMAN: dead center east MR. PACHMAN: We're going north or I~m talking east to west. I apologize. No. We're not moving it east to west. That's what I said. It's approximately or WeSt. On either side, either location. The former location for the proposed-- the amended location. Is that clear? THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anything else you would like to state? MR. PACHMAN: Yes. will sit down temporarily. raised two questions of Mr. questions which I had Mr. Gazo review again, mitred to me another affidavit~ dated April There are two things and then i Mr. Dinizio is not here. He Gazo. There was one very long and he sub- 24~ 1997~ which 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 says that most of the questions he is of the opinion 8O he already answered, but there were two questions not One that he did answer because they were raised for the first time. of them was, what is the miliwatts of the standard held cellular phone designed for? He placed in his affidavit it's designed to 600 miliwatts. The second question he asked was~ what was the gain for the receiving and transmission specifications of the antenna. He states that Bell Atlantic's design is lldb gain antennaes for receiving transmissions. Be once again states, in light of the testimony we had from Mr. Santoyo tonight, ~'I have stated before in my testimony that the proposed site is necessary to enable the company to send adequate service and no alternate site in the area is available in the Orient area.~' During my previous public hearings certain questions were asked by the Board members concerning a number of calls complaining about the issue of drop calls. He reiterates that it is Bell Atlantic Nynex's proprietary information and he directs you to the Federal Te!ecommunic- tions Act of 1996, Section 702. (The witness handed a document to the Chairman.) THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. PACHMAN: Lastly, the issue of Mr. Dinizio's 81 questions, questions raised by other members of the Board. We had a second radio frequency engineer go out from Bell Atlantic Nynex and had him rework the site° I have an extensive affidavit here wherein he reaffirms that this is a search area~ He reaffirms that contrary to certain remarks made in the media that there is some Rind of un- written conspiracy going with reference to our ~pplication, that we're trying to serve the south fork, that we do not serve the south fork with this site, that we are going to serve the island of Shelter Island. THE CHAIR~N~ Those were my statements, by the way. MR. PACHMAN: Well~ they were also in the paper, if they were your statements° I said to you that it appears to me. Then I am trying to correct your state- THE CHAIRN~.N: MR. PACH[4~N: ments. THE CHAIRMAN: MR. PACHMAN: Okay. That the majority portions of Shelter Island are taken care of by the Greenport site. There is some slight overlay that would filter over into one very small portion of Shelter Island, because the signal is going in three directions. It doesn't go through a narrow causeway. 1 82 2 He also reiterates this is a necessary search here 8 for our use. He reevaluated the Plum Island site-- not 4 the ferry site-- and is of the opinion that that site would 5 not serve the needs for our engineering and the service we 6 need. There is no question that not only are we trying ? to serve the people in the residences of Orient, but. we are 8 required to serve those people traveling on Route 25 east 9 or west-- no secret about that-- and this affidavit should 10 once again reinforce the position taken from an engineering !1 point of view as to our needs. 12 Tonight at 5:30~ before I came to this meeting, I rode 15 out to Orient and made three telephone calls. I made one 14 in my car, with a car antenna, using my phone hookup to my 15 car antennas called my wife, and told her, "It looks like 16 I'll be home later than I thought." I got static on the 17 call. I was talking to my wife. I got someone else cross- ~8 talking on the phone. I then got out of the car and used 19 a hand held phone in this position calling opposite 20 zimmers (phonetic). i got home by getting Rome through ~1 Connecticut. I then made another call at the firehouse 22 with the same phone hand held, got the same statics and 28 got the same problem. As I proceeded in the westerly 24 direction, as I went over the causeway using my regular car phone, I was able to make another phone call clearly. 1 3 5 6 7 9 10 12 ~3 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24, 25 As we said before, these 83 are intermitten continuous interrupted drop calls and that is the reason why we are obliged under the FCC rules and regulations under our charter and our license to provide service for all calls and in "that particular area. That is why we are reluctant for you to go out on your own and experiment, because it's a haphazard situation. I can call on a Sunday morning, in the middle of November or December or January, with the phone call here and probably get pristine service~ If I was using that same call, depending upon where i was in the terrain during the summer months, I would get interference and various situations. So that experiment ad hoc, doesn't work, doesn't cut the mustard. THE CHAIRMAN: I just want to say this, Mro Pachman. There isn't anybody who wouldn't want to have the most pristine service. By special contract~ I teach EMS and I work in the Orient Fire Department at times. If there was a need to have the medivac, I would want the most pristine service and that is the reason why I went out there, to order a helicopter if there was a need to have one. I understand your situation. I understand that you need it. We are just sayingt or I am not assuming that people are saying that this which they are not in favor of. I am not saying, I am location is one speaking for them, (5 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 84 but over the last two and a half hearings, the amount of paperwork we received from them, this is their concern. MR. PACHMAN: I have read each one of the letters that has been sent to me as part of my being apprised of what's gone on. I appreciate that. I understand their concerns. ! would like to reserve my comments by way of rebuttal, after I hear ~what else these people have to say. I think Matt would ~ike to give you a summary of the legal arguments that we're talking about. THE CH~I[R[~N: I just wanted to say this report you have just gi?en us clearly, for the last time~ states that there is no possiblity of putting an antenna on Plum Island and zeroing lin the antenna that is in Greenport to a specificl point of distance. MR. PACH~Z~N: Doesn't work that way. THE CHAIRMAN: In 'the Orient area. MR. PAC~N: One other thing. As a result of our last meetingi, I received a call from the mayor of Greenport, who told me they are taking down an existing tower, erecting another tower, and they want to put up cell phones on that particular site. We had them look at that particular site again° That's redundant as far as we are concerned be~huse we already have a site in Greenport and that will not serve our use. 1 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24. 25 THE CHAIRMAN: MM. PACHMAN: THE CHAIRMAN: MR. PACHMAN: Matt. THE CHAIRMuAN: MS. TORTORA: That original tower was That's not the issue. I'm just saying. We can overshoot it if it's too high. 85 over 300 feet. One minute. This is in regards to your affidavit. I just wanted to read part of the affidavit here that I have. MR. PACH~N: MS. TORTORA: submitted. MK. PACHi~N: MS.[ KOWALSKI: MS. TORTORA: MR. PACHMAN: MS. TORTORA: Which one? Page 3 of the affidavit which you just Which one? I gave you twoD I have the other one. This by Philip-- Charlell (phonetic). Yes, page 3~ last paragraph: Although it's true that a small area of the northeast portion of the Town of Shelter Island will be "covered by~the~Orient site':, the overwhelming majority of Shelter Island is already covered by the Bell Atlantic site of Greenport. MR. PACHMAN: MS. TORTORA: in the Village That's what I just said. That's what you said before the-- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ~2 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. PACHMAN: MS. TORTORA: 86 I just want to read from your affidavit which MR. PACHM~N: Charlell-- MS. TORTORA: the record. ~. PACHMAN: says: A small portion. I didn't submit an affidavit-- Mr. Okay. I just wanted to read that into I will repeat what I said. The majority of Shelter Island-- and that's what he said in his affidavit-- is covered by the Greenport site. There is a very small sliver of the Town of Shelter Island which will be covered by this particular site when and if it's erected. No doubt about that. Thank you. THE CHAIR~N: Thank you. Matthew. MR. HOWARD PACHMAN: This is the brief that was served on your Town Attorney about an hour and a half ago. MS. DOWD: 7:30. MR. HOWARD PACHMAN: MR. [~TTHEW PACHMAN: Board. You have heard a 7:30. Good evening, members of the lot of testimony, obviously, over the last two and a half hearings with respect to this application. My role here tonight is in an attempt just to use this opportunity to refocus the Board's attention on what we believe are the pertinent legal issues which 1 2 3 4 5 7 9 10 11 !2 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 87 must guide the Board's determination`. Obviously~ as discussed by Howard Pachman, this puolic hearing was originally called on January 15th of this year to permit Bell Atlantic Nynex Mobil to establish that we could meet the requirements of Town code Section 13!(b)6. this application is for a special permit, for utility structure pursuant to that code section. AS the memorandum of law shows and has been given to your Town Attorney, the courts of this state including the Court of Appeals, the highest court, have clearly recognized that cell phone companies provide a critical service and they have a critical service coverage need. Secondly~ that these public utility companies are mandated by law to provide this cellular service~ and~ thirdly, that the courts have recognized that cell sites, such as these, are necessary to to eliminate service deficiency, so required may be adequately provided. Obviously, a public determined~ and the courts have determined, that the authority of the municipal body like this Zoning Board of Appeals to prohibit or regulate the location and operation of these public utility sites over a regular commercial use Board for a special permit. is not the same as a power that's coming before this fill gaps in the grid and that the service as Also, the cases have 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 2O 21 22 23 24 25 88 The general rules which have been developed in those cases with respect to special permit not relating to public utilities, have been modified and relaxed to fit the unique features of the public utility's uses and to permit expansion of essential services as necessary. The courts have repeatedly emphasized the essential nature of these public utility services by cell phone companies. Lastly, this is a special permit use, a conditionally permitted use, a use which is permitted subject to the applicant showing that it meets the conditions. We are respectfully submitting that the company fully meets and complies with all of the standards for issues permitted under the Village's code and thus is entitled to that permit. Thank you. ~$~ DOWD: t a~k Mr~ P~chm~ if h~U~0uld,'~ig~ ~sf~?few minutes of his time. MR. MATTHEW PACH[¢~N: Sure. MS. DOWD: I understand that the application includes a request for a variance. MR. MATTHEW PACH~3_N: That is correct. MSi DOWD: I have not heard your address the issue on the special exception. What is your position o~ the variance? MR. ?~TTHEW PACHMAN: Our position is that once you 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 grant the special permit, that you cannot grant it in wh'ich in essence gives something with one hand and takes it away with the other. In other words, you can't grant the special exception but only at the height of 35 feet, where the testimony is clear that that does not solve the 89 a way service efficiency. Thus, although we have made the applica- tion for the variance to the 84 foot heights it is part and parcel of the special permit application~ and thus granting a special permit but not granting it to the 84 feet would be the same as denying a special permit and the same as denying the public utility, Bell Atlantic Nynex Mobil, the right to fix the service deficiency as it is mandated to do. Regardless of that, under any circumstances, by looking at the balancing test as provided for in the New York State Town Law, the testimony shows that the 84 feet is the minimum necessary and thus under this rationale analysis of the facts and of the record we believe mandates that the variance be granted-- the balancing test as referred to in the New York State Town Law for use for area variance. MS. DOWD: Another issue is you have indicated that you are moving the placement of the site from where you had initially proposed it. When you had initially proposed it, 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 9O you had provided us with the lease. Do you have any right to use the site that you now propose? MR. MATTHEW PACH~N: Yes¢ we do. MR. HOWARD PACHMAN: We got permission and once the site is granted we will submit of that. MS. DOWD: One other point is a concept that this tower is¢ if I to you written confirmation that you have proposed recall, you said tonight it would be located on one of the parcels that would be created sometime if it ever was subdivided in the future. DO you or your client have any right to control anything outside the site, the 20 you have leased? MR. MATTHEW PACH!~N: by 40 foot site That plan was that you indicated submitted just Tortora. We first hearing. That plan was just submitted simply as a con~ep~l~ p!an,' that'if ~and.when this-~site is g~aated, th,at if the owner at a later time wanted to develop that property and if one of the two acre site was to be devoted to this site when an application at ~ later time by the application for this site on this square footage as was discussed at the last hearing and it was discussed at the response to a question or concerns by Ms. extensively went into an analysis on the last public hearing about the fact that we are fully permitted to make the 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 t0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 91 owner was made for the subdivision, that it would fit within one of the two acre sites. Again~ that was a conceptual plan to show that if the owner at a later time wanted to subdivide, that person or that entity could do so and have this site fit in one of the proposed subdivisions. But that has nothing to do with this application, i would respectfully refer to you the minutes of the last Zoning Board of Appeals hearing when we discussed that matter extensively. MS. DOWD: It is my understanding you don't have the power to commit the owner of would use this parcel-- this MR. HOWARD PACHMAN: We division at this time. MR. MATTHEW PACHMAN: the 10 acre site to how he imaginary parcel. are not asking for the sub- We are not asking nor do we need to ask for the subdivision. If the owner, at a later time, chooses to come in for the subdivision then the owner will do so and the appropriate Board will consider it at that time. It is not necessary for this application now to talk about how the owner might develop the rest of the property in the future. MS. DOWD: I also wanted to mention, because i did read in the transcript of the last hearing, you referred to this tower as being on a 10 acre site~ but at this time it 5 9 10 12 14 15 3 4 is my understanding you do not have control over acres. Is that correct? MR. HOWARD PACH~N: No question about it. leases only to the number we 92 10 of those We have gave you, but we have the authorization to move it back 100 feet. THE CHAIR~N: So it is your opinion, Mr. Pachman, that if this Board was unhappy with the 84 feet~ and we asked you to reduce the footage, that would preclude you from operating this tower. MR. MATTHEW PACHMAW: That is correct. Absolutely. Absolutely, Mr. Chairman. THE CHAIR~N: What we will do is ask if there is anyone of the dais who has any questions of Mr. Pachman. MR. DOYEN: No. 17 18 19 20 21 23 24 25 THE CHAIRMAN: audience~ Is there Yes, ma'am. MS. HOPKINS: I guess I will leave it open to the anybody who would like to speak? My name is Ann Hopkins and I live at 380 Plat Road, in Orient. i very much appreciate Mr. Goehringer's comments about realizing there are 26 parcels of land that would be affected~ because mine is certainly one of them. I also am holding here my cellular phone, which I am not opposed to cellular phones. I have one. Mine works very nicely from my property because AT&T is my 1 2 3 4 5 7 9 10 /11 !2 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 93 carrier., One of the things that I am really concerned about is I have heard no mention of the question of co-location which other townships require a company to exhaust all possible other towers as a possibility before they will permit a new tower to be erected. I am very concerned about the precedent that would be set by allowing a tower on this particular residential agricultural property. I would see that tower from my front door, from my bedroom. I have just made a substantial financial commitment to a major renovation of my house which was probably built in 1820 and is I have seen part of this historic town. The major changes in the 19 years that I have lived here are nothing like the intrusion that would be caused by this tower. I am not resisting the idea of the tower, but I don't think that Southold is ready yet to give in to one co~mmercial venture and one landowner who seems not to perhaps have the best interest of the hamlet in mind in leasing this property without having time enough to catch up. I have a friend who is head of a Zoning Board of Appeals in a New Jersey town, and her major occupation now is an application from Bell Atlantic Nynex and she and her neighboring towns are way ahead of us, because Nynex is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25. 94 sort of moving up the coast it seems and the town adjoining hers has just been issued some stringent regulations governing the placement of these towers and things like co-location, moving the tower back would, of course, be worse for me rather than better. It would be more in my view. So I am urging the Zoning Board of Appeals to defer to the Town Board and the Planning Department and recognize that we must have in place regulations to accommodate all of the companies that are going to want to have towers and not to set this very unfortunate precedent. Mr. Pachman seems ~o think that this application is no different from the others. Of course in is t~tally different because this is a residential area. It is a small hamlet. It is different from the rest of ~outhold. Thank you. live in So I hope that the application will be denied. MS. MADIGAN: My name is Susan Madigan. I Orient, New York 11957. First of all, I would like to thank you very much for letting Mr. Santoyo spea.~ out of order, because he would have missed his ferry if we waited until now. Again, I want to reiterate this statement, that I feel that really no alternate sites have ioeen ex- plored by this current application. I do think that Mr. ~antoyo certainly is willing to read and receive an 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 1I 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 21 22 23 24 25 95 application from the Nynex people and I urge them to do so. I also have copies right to you, of historic maps by Oren Leham (phonetic) here, and I w~uld like to give them or Orient and a Declaration signed Co~missioner of New York State Parks in 1976, designating Orient as one of the national registered historic places and I have copies for you all with maps. On the maps dated 1873 and 1858 you can see that the proposed site is surrounded by 18th and 19th century houses. Charlotte Hansen, who is here tonight, who is Vice- President on the Board of Directors of the historicsl site, will elaborate on this later tonight. The other issues, which Ann Hopkins already talked about, is a coalition of towers. To minimize the tower proliferation, most communities require and applicant to exhaust all possible avenues for sharing space in existing towers. Applicants cannot be denied or deny space on the towers unless mechanical, structural, or regulatory factors prevent sharing. Communities which have adopted these regulations include Palm Beach County, Florida Kentucky, Jefferson County~ Colorado, County, County, Oregon among others. fighting these towers. blocked Pl~n~ to install a tower near a public Many communities are New Jersey recently field 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 ~0 12 13 14 ~5 16 18 19 2O 2~ 22 23 24 25 citing health risks 96 associated with electromagnetic fields, EMF, which fall into two basic categories, ionized radiation and non-ionized radiation, both severe detriments to the community. Since 1979 more than 1,000 studies have been con- ducted on EMFs exposure, some having linked proximity to non-ionizing EMW sources to higher incidents of cancer in children. No study has been conclusive but the fear exists. Other things to take into health consideration are falling debris or tower collapse. The New York Planning Federation has issued a model type communication tower regulations for m~nicipalities. I have attached a copy for you. Finally, I would also like to refute the testimony of the Nynex real estate consultant, i think it was two hearings before. I also have been a real estate broker for nhe last 25 years, both in Manhattan and now in the north fork. I own a home in Orient. The examples that were used by the consultant are not comparabte:.tolthe~site in question and Orient. The existing tower on Elijah's Lane in Mattituck-- I only have a newspaper clipping of Elija Lane-- is behind an industrial building and the houses around it a~e small new subdivisions. The houses surrounding the proposed site in Orient-- and again I would 1 2 3 4 5 $ 7 8 9 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 like to refer you to the map I have here which will 97 indicate the site of these houses-- the houses are historical and unique. I have pictures here. I don't know how to show them to the Board.. These are on the north side of the highway. These are facing the tower. This particular a photograp, h of my opinion~ the house would be right in front of that tower. the house with the proposed tower financial loss of these houses on existing adjoining properties would be substantial. THE CHAIR~r~N: MS. ToRToRA: MS. ~.~_DIGAN: we leave it here? THE CHAIRMAN: MS. [~tDIGAN: Here I have and~ in all the Can we see that? Can we take a look at that? Yes. These arej facing the tower. Can We kind of need it. You can have it. That is my pleasure. (Mrs. Madigan handed a diagram to the Chairman.) MS. ~Z~DIGAN: In my opinion, I don't think it's a comparable-- the comparison given at the last time-- I don't think it's compared to the proposed site in Orient at all-- the properties in the area-- you came up with 26. I didn't even get that far, but on the map again-- and I have three maps attached to this report here-- which will indicate the houses on that picture and other historical 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ~7 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 98 houses all the way out to the point. In closing, I would very much urge the Board to deny this application. I feel there is sufficient reason to do so and you are within your right to deny on all the reasons given above. Furthermore, there is ample and valid precedent in similar and identical situations throughout the country to justify your actions. Thank you very much. THE CHAIR~N: Yes, ma'am.: I just want to say, we are going to conclude this in about 15 minutes because we want to then open the last hearing which is Lilco. ~. HOWARD PACHMAN: minutes. THE CHAIR~N: four minutes. MS. HANSEN: resident of Orient. I representative of the I would like to reserve five You would like to reserve five minutes-- My name is Charlotte Hansen. I am a live at 900 Birds Eye Lane. I am a Historical Society. I will be reading a letter that was composed to address this particular issue. To the members of the Zoning Board of Appeals-- and I read it on behalf of the Direttor of the Society-- and I a~ Vice-President of that Society-- because I am unable to attend tonight's meeting, I ~ubmit these comments to you as a reminder of the histor7 oflthe area under discussion 1 $ 5 6 7 8 9 ~3 15 ~7 ~9 2O 23 2~ 25 99 and for consideration of the intrusions such as the proposed module will have on a cultural landscape. It is important to realize that historians and preservationists are interested in not only with preserving buildings, but are equally concerned with maintaining historial integrity of the surrounding areas as well. Like many areas of Southold town~ Orient has a long and rich history. However, the uniqueness of this community derives not only merely from its age, setting, and architecture but from the visible connection of the present to the past. The original configuration of roads and boundary lines estaolished in the !7th and 18th centuries remain largely unchanged. You can see from the maps. Eighteen and 19 century houses are still used as homes and many are occupied by the descendants of the first settlers or the first generation of the same family. Agricultural and fishing remain integral and essential to the local culture and economy~ and co~.unity organizations have survived. This continuity with its history and its manifestation in the architect, in the landscape and in the very spirit of this community as a whole creates a profound identity and a sense of place that is rooted in its hisnorical past. In celebrating this sense of place and in recognition of its remarkable historic integrity, the citizens 1 2 3 5 7 8 10 12 13 14 17 22. 25 2~ of Orient began in 100 the early '70's the task of applying to the National Registry of Historic Places. In 1976~ the Registry approved a nomination in the entire village whmch was designated as National Historic District. There are, of course, ma~y houses outside the official designated Historic District~ that their historical significance and contribution to Orient's landscape and identity is in no way diminished. I think it is important, as we heard in the earlier hearings as was pointed out by Mr. Pachman, that, of course, this poll is outside of the Historic:District. There are many, many houses around that area which are even older than the houses that are within the Historic District. This pro- posed monopole would cast a large shadow over all of Orient, and although outside the designated Historic DistricL~ it would have a devastating impact on the cultural landscape of Orient changing THE CHAIRMAN: MS. HANSEN: Historical Society~ outrage. MS. TORTORA: you can answer it. forever a very spgcial place. Thank you. I submit that as ~ representative of the and as a citizen ii can only express my Village Historical District to the pr · k Mrs. Hanson, I lusi~ have a question if How close is the }uter perimeter of the }posed site of the 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1! 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 i01 monopote?' MS. HANSEN: The maps that Susan Madigan has given to you will indicate that Teger Road is the boundary~ the rarest eastern boundary of the Historic District~ I cannot tell you in yards, but on that map there is a specific red dot which is where Mr. Price's house is and I believe the pole is shortly behind him. THE CHAIRMAN: We'll have one more speaker. Then we are going to have to wrap this up. Mr. Price. MR. PRICE: Gordon Price of Orient, New York. I live on Main Road, approximately 100 feet from the proposed-- no, 200 feet from the proposed towerl I just wanned to clarify some of the photographs that were taken, if I may. THE CHAIRMAN: Sure. MR. PRICE: This is the monopole as proposed-- of course, it's just a sketch-- relative to my house, but the road, if I uncovered this, nhe road that this is representing, this is right under the road that is proposed. When you say, "road," you are referring THE CHAIRMAN: to access to it? MR. PRICE: The approximateldirt road that's there° within 200 yards of this tower, or they are access road. to the tower is on ~n~ same These houses are all le~,s say maybe 250~ and all either 19th or 18th century houses. They are 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 102 out of these historical districts, per se, but Plat Road is one block west of us. Taber Road (phonetic) which is the end of the historical district, is two blocks from us. This house as well as all of these houses are on the 1859 Chase map which is in the Orient Village book, and also on the 1873 map which I gave to clarify that, indeed~ these are historical houses. THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. MR. PRICE: Thank you. THE CHAIRMAN: This gentleman has one statement to make. MR~ SMITH: Walter Smith. pole me~al. MR. HOWARD PACHYUXN: Yes° I have one question~ Is the MR. SMITH: is sticking up in the air~ So it has to be grounded. Is it going to be grounded? If the pole it is going to be hit by lightning. Will it be grounded? And if it is to be grounded~ what will the grounding be? MR. HOWARD PACHMAN: The building code of the Town of Southold which uses New York State Building Codes, we are required to comply with all the requirements of the building codes and we do comply. MR. SMITH: I think you are missing my point. My point is, is it going to be competent groundings copper grounding? My point is that copper grounding is very toxic 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ~0 13 ~5 16 17 20 21 22 2~ 25 103 to marine organisms and some of the studies we have done, it takes about four weeks from shoreline houses to get into the bay. In other words, the drift of material. So if you are going to put copper grids down to take care of any electric to get unique. coming other areas. If you are discharge, and the acid soil of our area is going into our aquifer and our aquifer is very, very It's circumscribed in Orient. There's nothing from Connecticut. There's nothing coming from the going to contaminate that with copper, In our last study, we gridders living in the bay copper hits any one of ecosystem. ! think we it's going to get in the way. found there are 140 different area like that. So if the them, it could disturb the good have to look very carefully at what we are putting in the ground that would go into the gmound- water and then into the bay~ and that's something that I think should be very carefully considered. MR. MILLIS: My name is Walter Millis. resident of Orient although I don't live of this stuff. How come, if i could ask if Nynex Bell/Atlantic can adequately cover Shelter Island from an antenna hung from the tower in Greenpor~, why can't they adequately cover the five miles between Greenport and Orient with another antenna hung from the same tower? Thank you° i am a anywhere near any the Board this, t 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 !4 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 THE CHAIRMAN: I can't MR. MIL_~_S. it's just 104 answer that question. to consider. That's all. Why do they need the tower? That's what I'm saying. THE CHAIR~N: Howard, I think you're on again. MR. HOWARD PACHMAN: Mr. Chairman~ members of the Board and citizens concerned and otherwise and Orient Point and the Hamlet of Orient, I, once again, have stated that Bell/Atlantic Nynex, my client, is a friendly company. It is a company which is trying its best to perform its services as required under the laws of the State of New York, the Public Service Commission, under the laws of the federal government, the Federal Co~anications Comnission~ Telecommunications Act, and zoning laws of the Town of Southold. I have said with seriousness and with sincerity, although at times I do believe that what I have said has not been taken as sincere, that we are a friendly neighbor. We are not trying to affect the landscape, the sense of community~ the sense of history that all these people are concerned about. For the last time~ I make the following offer, if we can go on the firehouse site, which is now being held hostage by the Orient Civic Associationf and we are permitted to erect a tower at that site which would take down the existing tower that's there, we are willing 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 '~7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 to put up a tower which is 105 in the appearance of a bell tower of this kind (indicating) or substantially similar to that, or we could put up a structure which would be in the form of a silo which would comport with the community and which would take away the concern and, if I may use an expression-- agida that the community seems to have with respect to the particular tower that we want to put up~ I would show this to the community residents so they can see it, and suggest that-- I don~t have another color copy. i have some black and whites. That's the silo. It's a silo which would be in the back of the firehouse. You wouldn't be able to see the firehouse tower. You would not be able to see our tower. You would not be able to see the of the fire department. The fire department would get income from this situation~ but I am trying to show that we are sincere and we are trying to work with the community. We met with Ms. Madigan and we met with Ms. Hopkins earlier on. As i told this Board~ we are willing to go co- location and we originally had a 100 foot tower so that the co-location would be permissible. This site would increase the cost of the tower, at this site, by approximately $100~000. Again, we are not going into this very lightly~ very cavalierly~ but with a sense of community and we hope that in our attempt %o extend our hand, we would get tha5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 !6 17 18 20 2I 22 23 24 25 106 Thank is. heres Mr. Price. Mr. Price is an architect. MR. HOWARD PACHMAN: I didn't know that. That site happens to be an actual site where a church exists and this is a super-imposition of the proposed tower next to that particular location and that's the location where a tower is being erected. MR. PRICE: Which is the tower? MX. HOWARD PACHMkAN: You don~t know which the tower MR. PRICE: That's the Bell ~owe_.r similar Kind of hand extending from this community. you very much. MS. TORTORA: Mr. Pachman, I did see the picture of the Bell tower. Have you showed these pictures to the Orient firehouse? MR. MATTHEW PACHMAN: We have not shown them because in my last letter to them~ which was revealed in the last situation for the second timed I was told they will not communicate with us or discuss this matter without getting the so called "permission of the community~" and that's in the record. MR. PRICE: I'm Gordon Price. First of-.all, Ms. Pachman~ can you tell me which one of these ~s your tower? THE CHAIR?~AN: We gave you the color one. Come up 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 t07 MR. HOWARD PACHMAN: This is the silo. MR. PRICE: The second thing is that there is a $100,000 increase for Nynex of a $1,100,000 tower, I believe. If the present tower is erected here, and Mr. Goehringer has mentioned there are 26 sites that would be affected by this tower, conservatively if we take two-- or let's say two and a half million dollars for the total property of these 26 parcels, our loss personally-- my loss personally would be approximately 20 to 30%-- out of my good old pocket would be 35 or 40 grandf not to mention the other 25 properties. So if you want to talk abou5 $100,000 for a multimillion dollar corporation, that's one thing~ but we are individuals who have struggled mightily for the bucks we have earned and we just don't want to see something like this happen to wreck us financially. THE CHAIRMAN: I think what is happening here is that Mr. Pachman is offering an olive branch of the Bell tower. The question is where can this go if there is an interest in this? MR. PRICE: Well, i am~ not a spokesman for the Orient Associationf but if this kind of thing is proposed as a possible placater, I think it could be considered. This is my own personal opinion, but you also have a whole bunch of other people that might disagree with me. 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MRo HOWARD PACHMAN: Thank MR~ PRICE: Thank youo you very much. I08 THE CHAIRMAN: public. MS. Why don~t we pass that along to the Show everyone. This is news to us, by the way. HOPKINS: My name is Ann Hopkins. Now I speak not as one of these 26 homeowners, but as a long time since its found in 1984, officer of the Orient Association. I currently am recording secretary but have been vice- president and it has been a misinterpretation that the fire- house is being held hostage to the Orient Association. There has been no formal vote. over a previous tower. This is am not speaking for the Association meeting, either of its Board or all We had a previous issue a different situation. I because we have had no the members~ and so I think that should not just be repeated. ! think it should be discussed as it if were starting from scratch. The Orient Association is a civic assocLation representing all the residents and homeowners in Orient, and it will perfectly lend itself to the mattlers being discussed. THE CHAIRMAN: Can you in some way, Let me ask you a question, MS. Hopkins. before we physically close this hearing-- we are closing it as per verbatim tonight-- verbatim testimony-- can you propose this to someone, being 1 2 3 5 $ 7 8 9 10 11 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 in your official in some way. MS. HOPKINS: right here. THE CHAIRMAN: capacity, 109 so that maybe we can foster it The president Susan Madigan. of the Association is I'm sorry, Susan. I Yes . Orient Association go intermediary if there If you are happy with this Bell tower. still do not see the need for a tower in Orient. THE CHAIR~¢~N: I'm not happy with any toiwer because I theI Hamlet of I couldn't agree with yo~ more, but they have expressed there's a need. MS. MADIGAN: That's their opinion. is a possibility? MS. MADIGAN: THE CHAIRI~N: MS. F~DIGAN: department. In other words, can the to the fire department and act as an didn't realize you were here. MS. MADIGAN: I do have correspondence here from the fire department addressed to me~ if you would like me to read it into the record. We have the Fire Commissioner here. THE CHAIR/MAN: I am not asking you to se~tl~ it Ail I am asking you to do is to circulate it and see if there is a possibility for an alternate location ~t the fire 1 THE CHAiR~¢~N: MS. M~ADIGAN: 110 I understand. You've been going around with a phone. I've been going around with a phone. I see no need for it $ and in the location of the tower in Greenport we were told 6 by their technicians that there is no way of hanging another 7 thing. I am not convinced of that. 8 THE CHAIRMAN: I just ask the question tonight. That , 9 was my specific question of rigging bo~h towers from the 10 Plum Island site to the Greenport site. I have to be 11 honest with you. I did not think that idea up. Mr. 12 Dinizio was on a class trip with his children and he wanted 13 me tO ask that question. I mean, where do we go from here? 14 The minute we close the hearing and the file is sealed, 15 that's when we start deliberating. If there is a possibility 16 of doing something at this point, please let us know by May 17 7th. 18 MR. PRICE: What if Bell Nynex offers some kind of 19 photographic tower, Bell tower, or whatever that would be 20 appropriate, for instance, behind the Morton (phonetic) 21 building on the fire department property? 22 THE CHAIR!~N: They will put it on any piece of the 23 fire department's property. 24 MR. PRICE: Show us what they might consider an 25 appropraite camouflage tower for that particular location. 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 1! ~3 14 15 ~6 17 18 2O 2~ 22 23 24 ~5 !11 If they did that~ perhaps it could convince the Orient Association and the fellow residents that it might work. Foliage. Whatever. have a~real problem. THE CHAIR~N: Right. Something that they understand that we Before anybody ~eaves, I've got to have one of those colored pictures back. MS. MADIGAN: I was given one. MR. PRICE: My point being if Nynex coqmd show us photographically what they would do to that !specific site, it might make a difference in swaying them, ithem being the Orient Association, into saying they might a~prove it. THE CHAIRMAN: MS. M~ADIGAN: Ms. Madigan. First of all, I want to slay I adamently oppose any kind of tower. I do have correspbndence here. I will just read one paragraph. Apparently they were con- tacted by Mr'. and the Orient fire d~partment will abide by any decision made by the Orient Ass¢ciation. The Board of Fire Commissioners is also available if you have any questions concerning this. MR. HOWARD PACH~VSIN: Can you identify t~e Fire Commissioner to me, please? (A gentleman in the audience raised his hand.) MR. HOWARD PACH~LAN: Thank you. 112 1 MS. MADIGAN: I am in no position right now to make 2 any kind of decision or for me to talk with Bob Hicks 3 (phonetic) who's on the Board of Fire Commissioners. 4 MS. TORTORA: Can you speak for the whole Association, 5 when you say the Association is adamently opposed to some- 6 thing like this? 7 MS. MADIGAN: No. No. 8 THE CHAIRMAN: She said she was. 9 MS. MADIGAN: I was. At our prior meetings, Mien we 10 came here, I was a representative of the Association to 11 oppose the current application, the present application on 12 the Phillips (phonetic) site. 13 MS. TORTORA: I am referring to the Bell tower concept 14 which is also new to us. We have just seen it for the 15 first time this evening. l 6 MS. MADIGAN: I am perfectly willing to talk to the 17 fire department and have a meeting at the Orient Association. 18 THE CHAIPdvIAN: Alice wants to ask a question. 19 MS. HESSIE: My name is Alice Hessie. You said this 20 rower was super-imposed on here. How tall is this tower? 21 MR. HOWARD PACHMAN: It could be adjusted to the 22 height we need. We wanted 84 feet. 23 MS. HESSIE: You would go for 84 feet? 24 MR. HOWARD PACHMAN: That's right. 'l 2 3 5 7 8 9 10 13 .~z~ 15 ~9 20 2~ 23 2~ 25 MS. HESSIE: It would be taller than this-- MR. HOWARD PACHMAN: No. I don't think so. 113 Right now the existing tower on the firehouse I believe is 65 feet. We submitted the letter. I think it's 65 feet. MR. HICKS: I have an idea, but I don't believe it's 65. MR. feet. MR. MR. HOWARD PACHMAN: We had it measured, 60 or 65 HICKS: It seems quite HOWARD PACHMAN: We couldn't go out there with a tape measure. That's part of the record. misspoke. It's 62.8 feet. The church steeple is 96.2 We handed that into the Board and we tried. I'm sorry. Once again~ I The LILCO pole is 46.8 feet. feet, and the windmill is 75.2 feet. We will still be using an 84 foot tower. Once again, this tower has the capacity and capability of providing for a co-location. If another carrier were to come in and say they wanted to use the Orient area, we would build a co-location so that it would not be prolifera- tion of towers. MS. HESSIE: I didn't listen as fast as you spoke. I thought you said that the tower you were proposing was 60 something feet and they needed 80. MR. HOWARD PACHMAN: NOd 84 feet. 1 2 3 4 5 $ 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 MS. ~ESSIE: Okay. MR. HOWARD PAC~V~N: 114 I want to end this thing. I am not withdrawing my application that is presently pending be£ore_ hhis Board. I am saying I want this application submitted. I am having to run against a proposed moratorium which is going to be heard on May 13th. I will supply, if I can gee some~person I can be addressed to, and I will prepare within the next week or 10 days, if that's when I'm going to get the serious consideration, a firehouse building or the Morton building and we will super-impose a similar tower which would also show thaL the existing tower doesn't exist and we may be able to do that with a silo. I can't go out and just spend money. You tell me which one you want. Do you want a silo or the Bell tower? THE CHAIRMAN: The point is that-- I had!at least one discussion with you on the phone, Mr. Pachman.~ I will refer to that discussion and that is, of cousse, that you want this hearing closed. MR. HOWARD PACHMAN: Yes, sir. THE CHAIRMAN: So I will give you that determination within four minutes. I do have to allow Ms. Oliver (phonetic). You want to speak? MS. OLIVER: No. I think Alice asked the same question 25 I was going to ask. 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 '~2 13 14 ~5 16 17 15 2O 21 22 23 24 25 115 THE CHAIRMAN: I think we are about at a wrap on this thing. I had all intentions and I still have all intentions f closing this hearing verbatim testimony and then closing on May 7th. However, if I get some correspondence-- ell, I still have to gSve you my real estate determination ! ~nl' reference to reduction of percentages andlyou will then have to have time to react to that or whatever you would like to do. MR. HOWARD PACHMAN: can, Mr. Chairman. I will turn it around as fast as THE CHAIRMAN: I an sure you will pick it apart ~ith great zest. However, I do want to say to you that if ~omething does develop'by May 7th, we would certainly ~ppreciate it. MR. PACHMAN: Mr. Wainwriter (phonetic who is the ~eal estate agent for Bell Atlantic Nynex, zs the person ,ho will be contacting the Fire Commissioner or the Fire Co~r, issioner will contact him. He is the agent. I ~m not the real estate agent. MS. TORTORA: You don't want to leave i~ open until .he 7th, Mr. Pachman, to see how this transpires? MR. HOWARD PACHMAN: No. I want this aplplication sub- mltted. If I get some realistic negotiations, favorable results and ii can get I can have Matthew Pachman, Mr. some 3 5 7 8 9 ~0 ~2 13 15 ~9 20 22 23 2~ 25 Wainwriter, the Fire Commissioner, up the lease in no time .flat. THE CHAIRMAN: tower on that site, what's going on. MR. HOWARD PACHMAN: THE CHAIR~N: At the firehouse. 116 and their attorney wrap If you do a rendering for a new proposed we c~rtainly would like to be aware of You mean at the firehouse? MR. HOWARD PACHMAN: Well~ I am doing that with trepidation. I hope I a~ allowed to go on there and take pictures. THE CHAIRMAN: Ms. Dowd, do you have anything you would like to add? MS. DOWD: No. THE CHAIRMAN: Hearing no further comments, I make a motion closing this hearing to verbatim testimony only. I'm sorry. Mr. Smith. MR. SMITH: I would just like to make a point. I was one of them that pled against the tower at the fire- house. My reason was very simple. The literature is very fouled up. When it comes to radiation from the tower, or any type of electromagnetic field or something of that nature, the proposition was turned down when the fire depart- ment was going to put an aerial up because they thought we were playing Russian RouLette with our children because we 2 $ 5 7 9 10 12 13 14 15 '17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 have no a problem. a problem, knowledge There but my feeling was, 117 at all. The Swedish acknowledge there is is an American group that says it isn't and I testified, that we should not have the tower and we should not play Russian Roulette with our children. That's why it was turned down a number of years ago, because we thought it was a hazard to the children in school. The school was very close to that tower. THE CHAIRMAN: MS. MADIGAN: Thank you. ! have another letter from the Fire Department which I would like to read into the record. It's dated February 20, 1997. It's addressed to Mr. Matthew Pachman. Dear Mr. Pachman, The Board of Fire Commissioners wishes to thank you for your letter of February 12, 1997, regarding the Bell Atlantic Nynxe mobile cellular tower. The Board has responded to this request by deference to the Orient Association which represents homeowners in the community~ the letter was sent to the Association on The copy of December 23, 1996, the attached. I just wanted to make sure THE CHAIRMAN: Okay. MR. HOWARD PACHMAN: Those of that. are in the record. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 118 THE CHAIR~N: I offer that as a resolution closing it to verbatim. We will close it officially on May 7th. We are closing the written portion on May 7th. We are closing the verbal portion tonight. MR. HOWARD PACHMAN: Just in passing, the Board is going to discuss this matter by way of decision, we would like to be put on notice so that we can be present during the public discussions of the vote. THE CHAIRMAN: Sure. It will undoubtedly be at a special meeting subsequent to May 7th. MR. HOWARD PACHMAN: At that time, we would like to be present. THE CHAIRMAN: Sure. MR. HOWARD PACHMAN: We would like a record of the discussions. 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 THE CHAIRMAN: Sure. MR. HOWARD PACHMAN: record. THE CHAIRMAN: Sure. will be %here, too. MR. HOWARD PACHMAN: time. THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. It's a public meeting. I understand. We would like a I am sure that everybody else Again, I offer that as a resolution. Thank you very much for your MS. TORTORA: I second that. 5 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 15 16, 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 119 THE CHAIRMAN: All in favor? MS. TORTORA: Aye. MR. DOYIN: Aye. MS. OST] THE CHA[ I would had with the to come out :RiVu%NN: Aye. RMAN: Aye. Thank you very much everyone. like to reopen LILCO~ because of problems we advertising. Mr. Fitzgerald was kind enough here, and Mr. Hickey is here kindly. I did have a nice ~zscusslon with Mr. Hogue on the phone today. He did infor~ me that the second phase through the Depart- ment of Environmental Conservation looked at the property the other day. Would you like 'to elaborate on that? MR. MAU~ICE FITZGERALD: Not right now. I think ! will wait for theiDepartment of Environmental Conservation report to come inn !We were out there. I gave it to Linda Monday afternoon, t~e first half of the Department of Environmental Conservationireport from the fuel spill people. The second people who w~re out there were the waste management people. They witnesses the excavations. eight feet d~ep by two feet and long. We made four excavations about six or eight feet No surprises. Mr. Hickey was there supervising the whole thing for us. MS. TORTORA: The first half of the report. MR. FITZGERALD: The first half of the report came from 1 2 3 4 5 $ 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 20 21 22 23 24 25 120 environmental engineer, we gave to Mr. Dinizio MS. to be honest with you. the last time-- TORTORA: It was triethylene~ The report MR. FITZGERALD: I would really want an environmental person to address issue for you. MS. TORTORA: that into perspective, gave us the findings. the federal standards, Yes. I'm really talking out of line. that So once your study's-- can somebody put because you gave us the report. You Unfortunately the state standards, were there for us and we are not experts e~nero So we need to have a comparison of what levels you exceeded state standards. THE CHAIRMAN: What norms there are. the fuel spill people. MS. TORTORA: I have a letter. MR. FITZGERALD: That's just one letter. They analyzed the data we sent to them and said they had no concern. MS. TORTORA: Just clarify one thing before we go any further. It says: I reviewed the April, 1997 investigative report to the referred site, and in so reviewing the report completed the investigation conc'erning petroleum contamina- tion at this time. I didn't know there was petroleum contamination. MR. FITZGERALD: It's trace of material. I'm not the 7 8 9 10 12 121 MS. TORTORA: In what areas did the site exceed state or federal standards? Because that was not in the report. So when the Department of Environmental Conservation referred to investigations concerning petroleum contamination that's not good enough because it doesn't define the extent of the contamination in MR. FITZGERALD: I elements. THE CHAIRMAN: Department of Environmental letter? quantitive measures for us. think they just found trace Are you going to ask him to have the Conservation-- you want a 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 MS. TORTORA: No. MR. FITZGERALD: I think we can sit down with the environmental people and the Board and just walk you through the report, after we get the other half from the solid waste people. THE CHAIRN~N: That's the reason why. The purpose of it was tb close it to verbatim and to allow any other discourse by writing to continue. That's what I still intend to do tonight. On May 7th we will close it assuming we have the main portion of that. MR. FITZGERALD: Here's the green card. THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Mr. Hickey, how are you 25 doing "tonight? 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 122 came up, which did four test MR. HICKEY: Okay. Can I speak? THE CHAIRMAN: Yes. MR. HICKEY: My name is James Hickey. I would like to commend Mr. Fitzgerald, his work. Everything I requested they performed. However, some other problems could be very big problems. Like he said, we holes. There could have been more if I requested it, but we saw enough. It brought up quite a bit of concrete, asphalt, rebar three quarter inch, reinforcement bar, re- inforcement wire in the last hole, plastic, and also tar balls which I questioned the Department of Environmental Conservation representative and he believed that was from asphalt. The big problem now is Mr. Fitzgerald was told this by Alex Musti-- MR. FITZGERALD: I don't remember his last name. MR. HICKEY: It's Alex. I remember. He said some- thing several weeks ago, that this site is going to have to have pilings. Well~ there is quite a bit of groundwater percolation at that site. The Department of Environmental Conservation representative told Mr. Fitzgerald right next to me, and myself, that the site would require a liner. I don't know what kind. Clay. Whatever. Rubber. Plastic. 25 ~-'r~ I correct, Mr. Fitzgerald? 1 2 3 4 5 7 $ 9 10 11 12 13 I4 15 16 17 19 20 21 22 23 24 123 He was talking about the possibility MR. FITZGERALD: of a liner. MR. HICKEY: No. He said it would need a liner. He said it would have to be pitched towards the road and he said you would have to put a few catchbasins out on the road. He said one of the catchbasins could be singular provided you put a conduit underneath Route 25 to dump the water into the natural recharge basin on the north side. THE CHAIRMAN: The New York State recharge basin. MR. HICKEY: Yes. Well, mother nature's recharge basin. THE CHAIRMAN: It believe that is State property. ~. HICKEY: Yes. It is. Well, I think that's going to add up to quite an expense. Now, you are familiar with liners. When you dig out all this stuff, what do you do with it? THE CHAIRMAN: It depends on what there is. MR. HICKEY: Like I said, concrete, asphal%. On the last hole part of the gutter than used to be down by Frank Collins' house was there. Practically almost the length Correct, Mr. Fitzgerald? Well, not quite the length but close of this table there. MR. FITZGERALD: to it. 25 MR. HICKEY: close to it. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 THE CHAIRMAN: Is LILCO willing to reason? MR. FITZGERALD: 124 Let me ask a question of Mr~ Fitzgerald. do whatever they have to do within in says and we are willing to comply with it, reason. THE CHAIRM~AN: MS. TORTORA: Health, the Suffolk County Department of Health? MR. FITZGERALD: No. MS. TORTORA: To see if they had any involvement the site. We will wait to see what the report if it's within Let's see what the report says. You already contacted the Department of with MR. FITZGERALD: The environmental people were doing as a-- what's the right word? Caution? No. As a normal way of deal- that THE CHAIRMAN: ing with-- MR. FITZGERALD: A normal way of looking at the property. Yes. THE CHAIR~VLAN: I think what Lydia ms referring to is that oil spill area which is over in Farmingville. I have to be honest, I don't like to drop names on the record, but the gentleman's name is Frank Randall (phonetic). THE CHAIR~N: It's right at the foot of the Suffolk County Community College, the original Selden campus. It's 1 2 3 4 5 $ 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 !9 20 21 22 23 24 25 on the corner of Horseblock Road. other road is. MR. FITZGERALD: 125 I don't know what the You're talking about the Department of Health Services over there? THE CHAIRMAN: MN. FITZGERALD: oil spill there. THE CHAIRMAN: They evaluate all existing tanks that so forth. Did you deal with them ~,~. FITZGERALD: In the past particular-- THE CHAIRMAN: I think what Ms. Yes. i think you were saying there was an No. They deal with that whole aspect. are in the ground and at all? I have. Not on this Tortora is asking is Or a waiver that there is no-- A clean bill of health, Jerry. Lydia, there is no way you are going to bill of health. THE CHA~R~N: MS. ?ORTORA: THE CHAIR}MN: would you give them a call and just clear it with them. MR. FITZGERALD: If your people already haven't done it, yes. MS. TORTORA: What we need is something from the Department of Health and the Department of Environmental Conservation saying that this location is safe for your proposed use. That's really kind of what we need. A clean 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 ~9 2O 21 22 23 24 25 get there and do exactly what was just done. MS. TORTORA: That's what I mean. 126 a clean bill of health, unless they physically go out THE CHAIRMAN: They are not going to do that. Who's going do it? things. to spend that money? Who's going to direct them to There's got to be a direction from people to do What people do is they issue waivers, and that is we waive the right because we don't know of anything in the area. i mean that's good enough for me. MR. FITZGERALD: If you look at %hat Department of Environmental Conservation, letter from the look at that last paragraph. They're always going to leave themselves the back door open. THE CHAIRM~N: That's the problem. There's always a disclaimer in case there's something else. I mean, it's nice to say it's from a utopian point of view, but I don't think we're going to get it. I don't. I'm not trying to discredit you. MS[ TORTORA: Maybe you can come up.with the mechanism that welcan-- what are we going through this for if we're ,I not golcg to be assured this site is, in fact, safe? TH~ CHAIRMAN: There has to be a certain degree of credibility on this corporation's part. I am not saying logistically that we have to all rely on 100% of what your 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 127 organization said~ but you are spending "x" amount of dollars to buy a piece of commercial property in Mattituck. At is that do-- that that. MR. the same time, you are not telling me that if the liner required and you have to put conduits under the road~ you will evaluate that, and if that's what you have to if the state requires you to do that, you then take before your people and they then say, yes, we will do site I ~r~ not saying a vast amount of wood or other trees, what I mean is I don't think there are houses that have been FITZGERALD: They could say yea or nay. THE CHAIRMAN: They could say yea or nay, but in a like this, where we know there is construction debris, dumped there We found all and insulation and so forth. We found metal. the rest of the stuff. I'm not trying to build the site up or take the site down. i assure you. We know that it's not necessarily the cleanest site in the world. In fact~ it may be one of the poorest sites in Mattituck so to speak. MR. FITZGERALD: I think we've got another one behind us. THE CHAIRMAN: I think we have to rely on a certain amount of credibility on your part, that if you've come to a point and you say that, yes, we are still going to go for 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 11 !2 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 it, that's what we want you to say. If go for it, we want you to tell us why. 128 you're not going to [,~. FITZGERALD: I think we will wait for the Depart- ment of Environmental Conservation report to come out and the waste management people with you folks. THE CHAIR[~AN: and we will review all the data I think the only other way to do it is to have an independent organization-- MR. HICKEY: THE CHAIRMAN: Like Tyere's Independent. Tyere costs and that's where the problem is, but I'm saying that in general, what you would have to do would rebate the town for going out to an independent firm to do an independent evaluation. Those are redundant situations if you have already done that. I understand what you are saying, but maybe you can just have your individual stuff looked at and evaluated. MR. FITZGERALD: That's what we had done when we sub- mitted the report to the Department of Environmental Conservations and that's what we were doing the other day when they were out 'there digging. THE CHAIRMAN: Mr. Hickey. MR. HICKEY: Well, I wasn't technically invited over there. I just happened to see them. I didn't pay much attention until I saw the Department of Environmental 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 15 20 21 22 23 24 25 129 Conservation and Tyere. Then I walked over. THE CHAIRMAN: Who hired Tyere? MR. FITZGERALD: We have Tyere on an open contract~ They just provided backdp. They Will they do the report? They just did the digging. just dug. MS. TORTORA: MR. FITZGERALD: No. The Department Conservation is going to do the report. MR. HICKEY: It was the Department of Environmental Conservation that stated there is groundwater percolation in that area. THE CHAIRMAN: MR. FITZGERALD: I want to correct Mr. of Environmental Yes. Let's stop something here for a second. Hickey and I can stand corrected self. I am not the engineer on the job. The reference to the groundwater was not a type of percolation. When you say percolation, I hear it coming up. Groundwater was not surfacing. What the Department of Environmental Conservation was intending, they were trying to prevent rain water from washing over the debris that is down there. We kicked around a lot of different things out there. Mr. Hickey may- be picked up the pieces of it. Maybe he picked up all of it. The principle is we have to keep the groundwater, the rain water on our own property. How do we do that? Suggest 5 $ 7 $ 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 130 drywells. Where do the drywells dispense to? Groundwater. MS. TORTORA: The Department of Environmental Conserva- primarily concerned with not so much construction They're concerned with organics~ petroleum traces~ tion is debris. and percolating in the groundwater. ~. FITZGERALD: They're talking of possibly finding more of the debris in the back of the lot than in the front. There's the possiblity of half a liner sloping towards the front, the cleaner portion, and letting it go down that way. We've got to see what they come up with. THE CHAIR[tAN: Were you disconcerned about their evaluation? MR. FITZGERALD: They didn't give an evaluation. THE CHAIRMAN: Just the whole process, the liner aspect. MR. FITZGERALD: I'm the agent, who filed the application. Bob Hogue is the engineer. We have environmental people. The digging that day out there we didn't find any surprises. NO surprises. You're talking about metal. What did we pic~ up? One piece of metal. MR. HICKEY: There was rebar in the last lhole. MR. FITZGERALD: How much rebar? ~ MR. HICKEY: It was just showing at the Width of the scoop. We didn't go any further than that. 2 3 4 5 0 7 9 10 '~1 ~2 13 14 15 '[7 2O 21 22 23 24 25 131 MR. FITZGERALD: I've been in this end of the LILCO business since 1975. Ail I've got out there is my credibility. If I blow a hole in that, I'm not worth any- thing after that. l~m not smart enough to be a good liar. MR. FITZGERALD: The biggest thing we dug up was concrete~ a slab of conrete. THE CHAIRM~N: I don~t know if we should close it to verbatim or wait for the report. We thank you for coming out here, Mr. Fitzgerald. MR. FITZGERALD: I'll get my people to look at it further. MR. HICKEY: For 30 years I have been used to testifying oath. I wish you would put that into this room once in a while. THE CHAIRMAN: I do most of the time when it gets into a situation of if you can believe a person or not believe a person. In most cases the information concerning this hearing, no one had attempted to disguise anything. So there was really no reason. I have to be honest with you~ Mr. Hickey. When you're dealing with ladies and gentlemen, there's never a need to do that because the person had no real reason to lie to anybody. So I understand what you are saying. I have been criticized for it in some respects, but when a new Chairperson sits, we!ll see how they deal with it~ 1 2 3 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 '/4 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 132 So I've got to tell the truth. That's all. MR. HICKEY: The fact does come out that the Department of Environmental Conservation representative said there was percolation at the site and it would have to have a liner in there. MR. FITZGERALD: That's a possibility. THE CHAIRMAN: We need an indication when they may get this done. MR. FITZGERALD: Probably the early part of next week. THE CHAIRMAN: We~lt slate it for May 7th. MR. FITZGERALD: Maybe we'll do a work session before. We could go over the details of the report. Do you want to do that? THE CHAIRMAN: Yes. If there is a public meetings we would invite you down, if we were to do that. So don't worry about that. MR. HICKEY: THE CHAIRi%~N: MS. TORTORA: MS. KOWALSK!: THE CHAIRMAN: much. That wraps May 7th. MS. TORTORA: I just wanted to get that in the record. I understand. There are five copies. Yes. Have a good evening. Thank you very it up. We will recess this hearing to I second. 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 THE CHAIRMAN: Ail in favor? MS. TORTORA: Aye. MS. OSTER~NN: Aye. MR. DOYEN: Aye. THE CHAIRMAN: Aye. Meeting adjourned) 133 9 ~0 Certified to be a true and accurate transcript. 11 12 13 GAIL RoSC~EN, Official Reporter 14 15 16 17 18 20 21 22 23 24 25 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 !0 11 12 13 14 15 17 !8 19 2O 21 INDEX APPEAL Barry and Carol Asness Bell-Atlantic/NYNEX Matthew and Laurie Daly Raymond Fedynak Tomis and Kathy Kourkoumelis LILCO Gary Sacks and Alan Schlesinger L. Suter d/b/a Bluewater Seafood Caroline Talbot Peter Walker 134 Pag~ 13-48 48-50, 66-119 11-12 50-51 2 119-133 9-10 51-66 8-9 2-3, 7-8 24 25