Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-05/07/1997 HEARING TI~ANSCRIPT OF PUBLIC HEARINGS May 7, 1997 SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS (Prepared by Lucy Farrell from rape recordings) 6:45 P.M. - Appl. No. 4472 RICHARD BOARDMAN CHAIRMAN: This is an action based upon three Actions of Disapproval: (a) Dated March 12. 1997 ro construct an alteration and additions which Disapproval states "...Under Article XXIV, Section 100-244B proposed constrnction will have insufficient side yard setbacks...10 ft. minimum and a combination of 25 ft. side yard setbacks are required; (b) Amendment dated March 31, 1997 to construct an alteration, addition and accessory garage stated ...Under Article tIIA, Section 100-30A.3 of the Bulk and Parking Schedule, proposed deck addition will exceed maximum coverage of 20%. New construction will exceed lot coverage by 223 sq. ft. relating to approximately 22.25~ lot coverage; and (c) Amendment Supplemental Notice of Disapproval dated April 14, 1997 to construct an alteration, addition and accessory garage which states: "...Under Article IIIA, 100-30A.3 of the Bulk and Parking Schedule, proposed deck addition will exceed maximum lot coverage of 202. New construction will exceed lot coverage by 223 sq. ft. relating to approximately 22.25% lot coverage and see Amendment Supplemental Notice of Disapproval dated April 14, 1997, and a survey by Roderiek C. VanTuyl P.C., dated September 12, 1978 indicating the size of the property and the present location of the house and the shed that's on the property and copy of plans indicating the proposed, additions to include the garage and a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. Mr. Boardman would you like to strand and use the mike and give us your presentation ? MR. BOARDMAN: My intent as you stated is to build a garage and add and additioi~ to my house. In so doing in Orient Village where the lot sizes are small, I immediately run into issues of property boundaries, side, lot distances and the total coverage of the lot by the dwelling in total. As I understand it there are some questions about dimensions on the survey and on my plot plan. Surveys are always interesting, widths of Page 2 - tlearing Tp'a~fscripts May 7, 1997 Board of Appeals roads and property lines more or tess plus or minus always causes some concerns of issues. There are several variances on the survey from what I actually measure on the property and I can answer specific questions if you have them. CHAIRMAN: To the best of your knowledge the information that is embodied within the Public Notice is approximately correct? MR. BOARDMAN: Yes. CHAIRMAN: OK. MR. BOARDMAN: I've verified the measurements. CHAIRMAN: You were kind enough on the inspection, both you and your wife showing us the need for the reduction from 10 feet to 7 feet proposed I'll refer to it in standing in front of the house on the right-hand side of the house. Based upon looking at both areas interiorly both downstairs and upstairs, I, we understand, the two of us that were there at that inspection understand the need for that particular portion of the application. I as the person that has been sitting on this Board for some 17 years, do understand the need for a garage so there's no contest on that one either. I understand the exterior ballooning sought of speak of the extension of the bedroom and the porch which is going to be replaced by a family room and a deck area and I don't have a particular problem with any of your proposed additions and on that note I'll ask Mr. Dinizio. MEMBER DINIZtO: No, I don't have any questions. CHAIRMAN: (Member) Mrs. Ostermann? MEMBER OSTERMANN: No, the question was answered. CHAIRMAN: (Member) Mrs. Tortora?? MEMBER TORTORA: The only question I had was on the survey it shows 9 -1/2, 9- 6 off the side road. MR. BOARDMAN: In that, I confess it's of some concern to me. I guess my question back to you is, is this survey the legal document of the property? MEMBER TORTORA: What you submitted is not a survey. The 10 feet that you submitted is not a survey and it doesn't have a survey - Page 3 - Hearing Tra,~scripts May 7, 1997 Board of Appeals MR. BOARDMAN: It simply measures 10 feet from the edge of the house to a fence which aeeording to this is fenced at property line again, plus or millus and the 9-1/2 feet is described as plus or minus. I guess my concern down the road not only that I'm 6 inches involved here and we say it's l0 feet and someone comes along later and says it 9-1/2, banks and mortgages and things get into play. MEMBER TORTORA: Your estimated cost is $30,000 so you're going to eventually when you get back to the Building Department you would probably have ~o have some kind of architectural rendering or something and that would require a architect sea] and they would go off of I imagine. MR. BOARDMAN: I just want to avoid problems down the road. MEMBER TORTORA: Yes, that's why I'm raising the question To you. If you're go off a fence line, it's iffy. CHAIRMAN: To answer your question about a legal document. If this was the original copy, yes, we would construe it to be a legal document. It's probably a third copy, so it gives us perimeters and that's basically - MR. BOARDMAN: The same is ~rue from the front. It says 19 feet plus or minus to the house. I went out this morning and found that that's from the edge of the sidewalk. I measured from the curb. The definition of where is the edge of the road [ - MEMBER TORTORA: That has to do with how wide the right-of-way is. It would have to do with, I guess, how wide the right-of-way is and that would also be indicated in the survey. No, it's a question as you say, I'm sure you don't want to run into problems, you know, five years down the road where you Find out that you a - MR. BOARDMAN: The question then is should we call the ~0 feet 9-1/2 feet? CHAIRMAN: Yes, I think you should amend it. MEMBER TORTORA: Tile survey is probably in my view you know the most accurate thing that has been submitted here, unless you're going to have it resurveyed or as I say, since it is over $30,000 in estimated costs you're going to end up with an architect seal and they'll go through that 9 yard too. MR. BOARDMAN: I'll take whatever steps are necessary. Page 4 - Hearing Tra~scripts May 7, 1997 Board of Appeals MEMBER TORTORA: Wouldn't you say 9-1/27 CHAIRMAN: Yes, just modify it by this point here, by saying it's 9-1/2 feet. MEMBER TORTORA: It's 6 inches,, but that would mean that if your inside wall is 2 feet 8 inches. MR. BOARDMAN: No, I'm adding 3 feet outside. MEMBER TORTORA: Total 3 feet. OK, so it would be 6 feet 6 inches. MR. BOARDMAN: Right. Alright, I'll make that change. CHAIRMAN: Good. Well, just by the mere fact that you say you're doing it, we'll incorporate that. Mr. Doyen? MEMBER DOYEN: No questions. CHAIRMAN: Anybody in the audience like to speak in favor in favor of this application? Anybody like to speak against the application? Seeing no hands I'll make a motion closing the hearing reserving decision until later. MEMBER DINIZIO: Second. CHAIRMAN: All in favor? MEMBERS: Aye. Page 5 - Hearing Tra~scripts May 7, 1997 Board of Appeals 7:03 P.M. - AppI. No. 4471 - LAWRE~qCE and LINDA WARREN. CHAIRMAN: This is a varianee application based upon the March 10, 1997 Action of Disapproval by the Building Inspector, whereby applicant applied for a permit to eonstruet a fence 6 ft. in height in the front yard, and the application was disapproved on the following grounds: "...When located in front yard of residential zones, a fence shall not exeeed four feet in height. Article XXIII, 100-231..." Location of Property: 24380 Main Road, Cutehogue, NY; Parcel ID 1000-109-3-2.41. I have a eopy of a survey from Young & Young dated April 17, 1986 indicating the approximate plaeement of the house, penned in and highlighted on the survey running parallel to Main Road, Route 25, is the area that has brought these applicants to our Board tonight and that is the nature of of a 6 foot fence. I have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. Would you like to say something for the record, either one of you? MR. WARREN: My name is Lawrence Warren and my request that you indicated is very simple. We would like to be permitted ~o put up a 8 foot fenee rather than a 4 foot fence. The problem is that cars travelling along Route 25 throw bags of garbage on our property. We think it would be pretty easy to throw them over a 4 foot fence. MR. CHAIRMAN: I had the luxury of speaking to your wife when she filed the application and she did indicate to me that she actually moved the fence line in a little bit. She said she wanted ~o nestle it just a little bit behind the cedars that were there. MR. WARREN: Well, our intentions is there is an area of grass adjacent To the Main Road. 12 foot back from the curb is where the trees start and that's where we would propose to put the fence. CHAIRMAN: In front of the trees? MR. WARREN: In front of the trees. The trees continue on baek to almost the house. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Doyen? MEMBER DOYEN: No. CHAIRMAN: Mrs. Tortora: Page 6 - Hearing Tr&~gcripts May 7, 1997 Board of Appeals MEMBER TORTORA: No. We also had the privilege of going down and visiting the property and seeing the situation and I don't reatly have any questions. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mrs. Ostermann. MEMBER OSTERMANN: No, no questions. I also was on site inspection. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Dinizio? MEMBER DINIZIO: You say in front of the trees. It's written on my survey that they'll go behind the trees. CHAIRMAN: Yes, that's why I asked for the clarification. MRS. WARREN: The trees indicated were Black Pine Trees. In fact, about two weeks ago we found out that they were all infected with some disease and that they weren't going to come back. Now, being that there's a woods there, I hadn't walked out to inspect them in quite a while, so we had a tree service come and he recommended that they need to be taken down. That's where the confusion comes. MEMBER DINIZIO: How far back from your property lines is the fence going to go? MR. WARREN: Well, tl~e survey indicates the property goes to the Main Road. I measured from the curb on the Main Road to where we propose to put the fence, it measures 12 feet back. We could put it further back if you wanted us to but, that certainly would seem sufficient room. You know, if any snow removal or that turn around with, it shouldn't have any effect on there at all. There is a shoulder, there's a highway and then there's a shoulder then a curve and that goes back 12 to the curb. CHAIRMAN: It doesn't show the width of the Main Road here. MEMBER DINIZIO: We're going to have to find that out though. CHAIRMAN: It's 66 feet in that area. More than likely that curve is part of Route 25. MEMBER DINIZIO: Yes, I would say probably 5 or 6 feet more. CHAIRMAN: Yes, the way you normally do that is you take the center, I'm not asking you to do this alone, you take the center of the road and you come in 25 feet. That would show Page 7 - Hearing Tran~scripts May 7, 1997 Board of Appeals you the 50 feet that we normally would assume the Main Road to be, but, in this particular case it's 16 feet more than that. So, you'd have to come in another 8 then and that should be approximately where your property would start. MR. WARREN: OK, so it's 25 plus 16 - CHAIRMAN: Plus 8. A total of 33 from the. center of the road. My question is, we'll close the hearing tonight, but if you find that you're going to move it farther landward give us a call, so that we know exactly - MR. WARREN: OK. Just so I'm sure that I understand you, it has to be at least 33 feet back from the center of the road? CHAIRMAN: Right. MR. WARREN: I expect it would be more than that. CHAIRMAN: That is correct. We certainly don't want it put on main state property and that's the reason, on state property, excuse me, it's all main road. So, why don't you take a measurement for us and again I ask you to do it with a couple of people there because if a car comes e¥'en though it's a 40 mile an hour zone~ you know, that's my suggestion and then if you choose to change that position let us know because you're measuring from a curb which is part of the highway. MEMBER TORTORA: The width of the road may be 50 feet right now, if you're 12 back you may be inside. That 12 feet may be on your property but what he's suggesting is lets make sure. MR. WARREN: OK, so, we need to be more than 33 feet from the center of the road. MEMBER TORTORA: From the center of the road and it is that 12 feet that you've indicated from the curb is your fond. If not, then you're going to have to come back. MR. WARREN: Then you would extend it further back. CHAIRMAN: Yes. Just let us know and we will not make a decision until the 19th anyway of May. We'll close the hearing pending hearing from you with the information you're going to MR. WARREN: OK. Is that just a phone call? Page 8 - tIearing Trein~scripts May 7, 1997 Board of Appeals CHAIRMAN:: Yes, just a phone call. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: Just call me at the office. I'm Linda. CHAIRMAN: Or you can fax it To us, either which way. MRS. WARREN: You'll notify us by mail as ro your decision? CHAIRMAN: Yes, so you can call us sometime subsequent to the May 19th meeting. Is there anybody else would like to speak in favor of this application? Anybody like ~o speak against the application? Hearing no further commenT, I make a motion closing the hearing pending the receipt of the information from the applicants and make a decision sometime later. Can I have a second? MEMBER DINIZIO: Second. CHAIRMAN: All in favor? MEMBERS: Aye. 7:13 P.M. - Appl. No. 4470 - WILBUR OSLER CHAIRMAN: This is a variance application based on the March 10, 1997 Action of Disapproval by the Building Inspector, whereby applicant applied for a permit To cons~ruc~ additions to existing dwelling, and the application was disapproved on the following grounds: "...Under Article XXIV, Section 100-244B proposed construction will not have sufficient side yard setback. A fifteen-ft, side setback is required. Existing deck addition adjacent to proposed dweiting addition does not have any building permit or CO on record. Building Department will issue order to remedy. Location of Property: 8070 Peconic Bay Boulevard, Laurel, NY; Parcel ID 1000-126-11-17. This parcel consists of approximately 32,000+- sq.ft, with 99.58 ft. road frontage. Zone: R-40 Residential. I have a copy of a survey, it's a site plan basically from Donald G. Feller, Architect, dated February 24, 1997, updated on May 5, 1997, indicating the approximate additions that are requested and I have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. MR. FEILER: I'm here on behalf of the Oslers. Mr. Osler couldn't make it. They have just a small problem with this house. It's a small house. It's an old house, probably over 90 years old, small rooms and this dining room is just no place to go. I had supplied the architectural plans with four ways to Page 9 - Hearing T~anscripts May 7, 1997 Board of Appeals go into the kitchen, into the stairs, into the hall or out toward the east which we're asking for 2 foot side yard variance and it is just to be one story on a 1-1/2 story house with the barely minimal impart there visually and it is swayed 45 degree angles like a large walkin bay but still not a full size 9 foot 10 by 6 foot and if there's any questions you have I'd be happy to answer them. CHAIRMAN: You said that's only one story? MR. FEILER: It's just one story, yes. CHAIRMAN: OK. What's the maximum height on that do you think, Don? MR.~FEILER: On the residence? CHAIRMAN: No, on this 10 feet, on the addition? I noticed the ceilings in that house were pretty high. Mt{. FEILER: An 8 foot 10 ceiling, so that is about 10 feet off the ground. Going to put a shallow pitch roof, staying under the one story section of the house, one story roof section. CHAIRMAN: We'll start with Mr. Dinizio, any questions? MEMBER DIN1ZIO: No. CHAIRMAN: Mrs. Ostermann? MEMBER OSTERMANN: No questions. CHAIRMAN: Mrs. Tortora? MEMBER TORTORA: The only question I had was the question on the Notice of Disapproval. It says the shower addition doesn't have a CO and since it's the same, I don't know whether it does or doesn't but, the notice does say that the Building Department will issue an order to remedy which means that you might be bark here for you know a variance for that as well. Have you dealt with that with the Building Department? MR. FEtLER: They didn't seem to think that was necessary. To include that if we proceed with Building Permits Application with Architectural Plans, that would be included as if it was not there with the existing construction so that it conforms constructive. Page 10 - Iiearing Ti.~llscripts May 7, 1997 Board of Appeals MEMBER TORTORA: I just didn't want to see you back here two months from now. CHAIRMAN: It's going to be like a conforming issue. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: It was my understanding that this is all part of the same variance anyway. MEMBER TORTORA: Oh, it is. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: Yes, the same setback, 13 feet. MEMBER TORTORA: For both? BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: Yes, for both. CHAIRMAN: It's basically going to be an automatic remedy if the Board so incline to grant it. It's like an automatic remedy, the remedy is being rectified. As you said, so long as the construction is not substandard, right? MR. FEILER: Yes, and it is not. CHAIRMAN: Right. Member (Mr.) Doyen? MEMBER DOYEN: No. CHAIRMAN: Is there anybody in the audience would like to speak in favor of this applicatio~? Anybody like to speak against the application? Hearing no further comment I'll make a motion dosing the hearing reserving decision. Ail in favor? MEMBERS: Ayes. Page 11 - Hearing Transcripts May 7, 1997 Board of Appeals 7:20 P.M. - Appl. No. 4473 - SYLVIA M. DALEY CHAIRMAN: This is a request by the owner to establish Accessory Bed and Breakfast use in conjunction with her residence, as authorized by Special Exception for the rental of three rooms for temporary, transient lodging with breakfast, limited To a maximum of six casual and transient roomers in accordance with conditioIls (a), (b), (c) and (d) as per Section 100-31B (14). Location of Proper~y: 8985 Main Road, East Marion, NY; Parcel ID 1000-31-3-17. [ have a copy of a survey from Roderick Van Tuyl P.C. indicating this extremely stately house dated June I5, 1994 and I have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. How are you tonight? What would you like To tell US. MS. DALEY: Very well thank you. CHAIRMAN: Your house speaks for itself. MS. DALEY: That's what I First like to see and then if you have any questions. CHAIRMAN: I noticed that with my telephone call to you after we inspected the house that you did g~ve us a parking plan adjacent to your circular drivewsy. MS. DALEY: Bob Bohn Construction has done quite a few things on the property and t csIled him - CHAIRMAN: Good. We'll start with Mr. Doyen, do you have any questions? MEMBER DOYEN: No. CHAIRMAN: Mrs. Tortora? MEMBER TORTORA: No. CHAIRMAN: Mrs. Ostermann? MEMBER OSTERMANN: No questions. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Dinizio? MEMBER DINIZIO: No, the parking is just going to be within that circle? Page 12 - Hearing Transcripts May 7, 1997 Board of Appeals CHAIRMAN: Well, actually outside of the circle. MS. DALEY: Outside. MEMBER DINIZIO: Outside. CHAIRMAN: I do want to thank you for a really great tour of the house. It's probably one of the best tours that we've ever had of a Bed and Breakfast. While you're standing there is there anybody in the audience that would like to speak in favor of this application? Is there anybody would like to speak against the application? Seeing no hands I'll make a motion closing the hearing reserving decision until later. Somebody second it. MEMBER DOYEN: Second. CHAIRMAN: All in favor? MEMBERS: Aye. RECEIVED AND FILED BY THE SOUTHOLD TOWN CLERK TRANSCRIPT OF PUBLIC HEARINGS May 7, 1997 SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS (Prepared by Lucy Farrell from tape recordings) 6:45 P.M. - Appl. No. 4472 - RICHARD BOARDMAN PROJECT. CHAIRMAN: This is an action based upon three Actions of Disapproval: (a) Dated March 12, 1997 to construct an alteration and additions which Disapproval states "...Under Article XXIV, Section 100-244B proposed construction will have insufficient side yard setbacks...10 ff. minimum and a combination of 25 ft. side yard setbacks are required; (b) Amendment dated March 31, 1997 to construct an alteration, addition and accessory garage stated "...Under Article IliA, Section 100~30A.3 of the Bulk and Parking Schedule, proposed deck addition will exceed maximum coverage of 20%.' New construction will exceed lot coverage by 223 sq. ff. relating to approximately 22.25% lot coverage; and (c) Amendment Supplemental Notice of Disapproval dated Apdl 14, 1997 to construct an alteration, addition and accessory garage which states: "...Under Article IliA, 100-30A.3 of the Bulk and Parking Schedule, proposed deck addition will exceed maximum lot coverage of 20%. New construction will exceed lot coverage by 223 sq. ft. relating to approximately 22.25% lot coverage and see Amendment Supplemental Notice of Disapproval dated April 14, 1997, and a survey by Roderick C. VanTuyl P.C.¢ dated September 12, 1978 indicating the size of the property and the present location of the house and the shed that's on the property and copy of plans indicating the proposed additions to include the garage and a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. Mr. Boardman, would you like to stand and use the mike and give us your presentation? MR. BOARDMAN: My intent as you stated is to build a garage and add and addition to my house. In so doing in Orient Village where the lot sizes are small, I immediately run into issues of property boundaries, side, lot distances and the total coverage of the lot by the dwelling in total. As I understand it there are some questions about dimensions on the survey and on my plot plan. Surveys are always interesting, widths of roads and property lines more or less plus or minus always causes some concerns of issues. There are several variances on the survey from what I actually measure on the property and I can answer specific questions if you have them. CHAIRMAN: To the best of your knowledge the information that is embodied Page 2- May7, 1997 Hearings Held -, ' - J $8;Jthold Town Board of Appeals within the Public Notice is approximately correct? MR. BOARDMAN: Yes. CHAIRMAN: OK. MR. BOARDMAN: I've verified the measurements. CHAIRMAN: You were kind enough on the inspection, both you and your wife showing us the need for the reduction from 10 feet to 7 feet proposed I'll refer to it in standing in front of the house on the right-hand side of the house. Based upon looking at both areas interior both downstairs and upstairs, I, we understand, the two of us that were there at that inspection understand the need for that particular portion of the application. I as the person that has been sitting on this Board for some 17 years, do understand the need for a garage so there's no contest on that one either. I understand the exterior ballooning sought of speak of the extension of the bedroom and the porch which is going to be replaced by a family room and a deck area and I don't have a particular problem with any of your proposed additions and on that note I'll ask Mr. Dinizio. MEMBER DINIZIO: No, I don't have any questions. CHAIRMAN: (Member) Mrs. Ostermann? MEMBER OSTERMANN: No, the question was answered. CHAIRMAN: (Member) Mrs. Tortora?? MEMBER TORTORA: The only question I had was on the survey it shows 9 - 1/2, 9- 6 off the side road. MR. BQARDMAN: In that, I confess it's of some concern to me. I guess my question back to you is, is this survey the legal document of the property? MEMBER TORTORA: What you submitted is not a survey. The 10 feet that you submitted is not a survey and it doesn't have a survey - MR. BOARDMAN: It simply measures 10 feet from the edge of the house to a fence which according to this is fenced at property line again, plus or minus and the 9-1/2 feet is described as plus or minus. I guess my concern down the road not only that I'm 6 inches involved here and we say it's 10 feet and someone comes along later and says it 9-1/2, banks and mortgages and things get into play. MEMBER TORTORA: Your estimated cost is $30,000 so you're going to eventually when you get back to the Building Department you would probably Page 3 - MayT, 1997 / Headngs Held .... S~uthold Town Board of Appeals have to have some kind of architectural rendering or something and that would require a architect seal and they would go off of I imagine. MR. BOARDMAN: I just want to avoid problems down the road. MEMBER TORTORA: Yes, that's why I'm raising the question to you. If you're go off a fence line, it's iffy. CHAIRMAN: To answer your question about a legal document. If this was the original copy, yes, we would construe it to be a Jegal document. It's probabJy a third copy, so it gives us perimeters and that's basically - MR: BOARDMAN: The same is true from the front. It says 19 feet plus or minus to the house. I went out this morning and found that that's from the edge of the sidewalk. ~ measured from the curb. The definition of where is the edge of the road I - MEMBER TORTORA: That has to do with how wide the rightbof-way is. It would have to do with, I guess, how wide the right-of-way is and that would also be indicated in the survey. No, it's a question as you say, I'm sure you don't want to run into problems, you know, five years down the road where you find out that you a - MR. BOARDMAN: The question then is should we ca~l the 10 feet 9-1/2 feet? CHAIRMAN: Yes, I think you shoul~ amend it. MEMBER TORTORA: The survey is probably in my view you know the most accurate thing that has been submitted here, unless you're going to have it resurveyed or as I say, since it is over $30,000 in estimated costs you're going to end up with an architect seat and they'll go through that 9 yard too. MR. BOARDMAN: I'll take whatever steps are necessary. MEMBER TORTORA: Wouldn't you say 9-1/27 CHAIRMAN: Yes, just modify it by this point here, by saying it's 9-1/2 feet. MEMBER TORTORA: It's 6 inches, but that would mean that if your inside wall is 2 feet 8 inches. MR. BOARDMAN: No, I'm adding 3 feet outside. MEMBER TORTORA: Total 3 feet. OK, so it would be 6 feet 6 inches. MR. BOARDMAN: Right. Alright, I'll make that change. Page 4 - May 7, 1997 Headngs Held ' - S~,Uthold Town Board of Appeals CHAIRMAN: Good. Well, just by the mere fact that you say you're doing it, we'll incorporate that. Mr. Doyen? MEMBER DOYEN: No questions. CHAIRMAN: Anybody in the audience like to speak in favor in favor of this application? Anybody like to speak against the application? Seeing no hands I'll make a motion closing the hearing reserving decision until later. MEMBER DINIZIO: Second, CHAIRMAN: All in favor?. MEMBERS: Aye. Page 5 - MayT, 1997 " Hearings Held ' S(~uthold Town Board of Appeals 7:03 P.M. - AppL No. 4471 - LAWRENCE and LINDA WARREN. CHAIRMAN: This is a variance application based upon the March 10, 1997 Action of Disapproval by the Building Inspector, whereby applicant applied for a permit to construct a fence 6 ft. in height in the front yard, and the application was disapproved on the following grounds: "...When located in front yard of residential zones, a fence shall not exceed four feet in height. Article XXIII, 100- 231..." Location of Property: 24380 Main Road, Cutchogue, NY; Parcel ID 1000-109-3-2.41. I have a copy of a survey from Young & Young dated April 17, 1986 indicating the approximate placement of the house, penned in and highlighted on the survey running parallel to Main Road, Route 25, is the area that has brought these applicants to our Board tonight and that is the nature of of a 6 foot fence. I have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. Would you like to say something for the record, either one of you? MR. WARREN: My name is Lawrence Warren and my request that you indicated is very simple. We would like to be permitted to put up a 6 foot fence rather than a 4 foot fence. The problem is that cars travelling along Route 25 throw bags of garbage on our property. We think it would be pretty easy to throw them over a 4 foot fence. MR. CHAIRMAN: I had the luxury of speaking to your wife when she filed the application and she did indicate to me that she actually moved the fence line in a little bit. She said she wanted to nestle it just a little bit behind the cedars that were there. MR. WARREN: Well, our intentions is there is an area of grass adjacent to the Main Road. 12 foot back from the curb is where the trees start and that's where we would propose to put the fence. CHAIRMAN: In front of the trees? MR. WARREN: In front of the trees. The trees continue on back to almost the house. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Doyen? MEMBER DOYEN: No. CHAIRMAN: Mrs. Tortora: MEMBER TORTORA: No. We also had the privilege of going down and visiting the property and seeing the situation and I don't really have any questions. Page 6 - May 7, 1997 Headngs Held Sguthold Town Board of Appeals MR. CHAIRMAN: Mrs. Ostermann. MEMBER OSTERMANN: No, no questions. I also was on site inspection. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Dinizio? MEMBER DINIZIO: You say in front of the trees. It's written on my survey that they'll go behind the trees. CHAIRMAN: Yes, that's why I asked for the clarification. MRS. WARREN: The trees indicated were Black Pine Trees. In fact, about two weeks ago we found out that they were all infected with some disease and that they weren't going to come back. Now, being that there's a woods there, I hadn't walked out to inspect them in quite a while, so we had a tree service come and he recommended that they need to be taken down. That's where the confusion comes. MEMBER DINIZIO: How far back from your property lines is the fence going to go? MR. WARREN: Well, the survey indicates the property goes to the Main Road. I measured from the curb on the Main Road to where we propose to put the fence, it measures 12 feet back. We could put it further back if you wanted us to but, that certainly would seem sufficient room. You know, if any snow removal or that turn around with, it shouldn't have any effect on there at ail. There is a shoulder, there's a highway and then there's a shoulder then a curve and that goes back 12 to the curb. CHAIRMAN: It doesn't show the width of the Main Road here. MEMBER DINIZIO: We're going to have to find that out though. CHAIRMAN: It's 66 feet in that area. More than likely that curve is part of Route 25. MEMBER DINIZIO: Yes, I would say probably 5 or6 feet more. CHAIRMAN: Yes, the way you normally do that is you take the center, I'm not asking you to do this alone, you take the center of the road and you come in 25 feet. That would show you the 50 feet that we normally would assume the Main Road to be, but, in this particular case it's 16 feet more than that. So, you'd have to come in another 8 then and that should be approximately where your property would start. Page 7- May7, 1997 Hearings Held S~uthold Town Board of Appeals MR. WARREN: OK, so it's 25 plus 16 - CHAIRMAN: Plus 8. A total of 33 from the center of the road. My question is, we'll close the headng tonight, but if you find that you're going to move it farther landward give us a call, so that we know exactly - MR. WARREN: OK. Just so Pm sure that I understand you, it has to be at least 33 feet back from the center of the road? CHAIRMAN: Right. MR. WARREN: I expect it would be more than that. CHAIRMAN: That is correct. We certainly don't want it put on main state property and that's the reason, on state property, excuse me, it's all main road. So, why don't you take a measurement for us and again I ask you to do it with a couple of people there because if a car comes even though it's a 40 mile an hour zone, you know, that's my suggestion and then if you choose to change that position let us know because you're measuring from a curb which is part of the highway. MEMBER TORTORA: The width of the road may be 50 feet dght now, if you're 12 back you may be inside. That 12 feet may be on your property but what he's suggesting is lets make sure. MR. WARREN: OK, so, we need to be more than 33 feet from the center of the road. MEMBER TORTORA: From the center of the road and it is that 12 feet that you've indicated from the curb is your fond. If not, then you're going to have to come back. MR. WARREN: Then you would extend it further back. CHAIRMAN: Yes. Just let us know and we will not make a decision until the 19th anyway of May. We'll close the hearing pending hearing from you with the information you're going to give. MR. WARREN: OK. Is that just a phone call? CHAIRMAN:: Yes, just a phone call. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKk Just call me at the office. I'm Linda, CHAIRMAN: Or you can fax it to us, either which way. Page 8 - May 7, 1997 ~ '" Hearings Held " S~uthold Town Board of Appeals MRS. WARREN: You'll notify us by mail as to your decision? CHAIRMAN: Yes, so you can call us sometime subsequent to the May 19th meeting. Is there anybody else would like to speak Jn favor of this application? Anybody like to speak against the application? Headng no further comment, I make a motion closing the hearing pending the receipt of the information from the applicants and make a decision sometime later. Can I have a second? MEMBER DINIZIO: Second. CHAIRMAN: All in favor? MEMBERS: Aye. 7:13 P.M. - Appl. No. 4470 - WILBUR OSLER CHAIRMAN: This is a variance application based on the March 10, 1997 Action of Disapproval by the Building Inspector, whereby applicant applied for a permit to construct additions to existing dwelling, and the application was disapproved on the following grounds: "...Under Article XXIV, Section 100-244B proposed construction will not have sufficient side yard setback. A fiffeen-ft, side setback is required. Existing deck addition adjacent to proposed dwelling addition does not have any building permit or CO on record. Building Department will issue order to remedy. Location of Property: 8070 Peconic Bay Boulevard, Laurel, NY; Parcel ID 1000-126-1%17. This parcel consists of approximately 32,000+- sq.ft, with 99.58 ft. road frontage. Zone: R-40 Residential. I have a copy of a survey, it's a site plan basically from Donald G. Feller, Architect, dated February 24, 1997, updated on May 5, 1997, indicating the approximate additions that are requested and I have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. MR, FELLER: I'm here on behalf of the Osiers. Mr. Osier couldn't make it. They have just a small problem with this house. It's a small house. It's an old house, probably over 90 years old, small rooms and this dining room is just no place to go. I had supplied the architectural plans with four ways to go into the kitcheni into the stairs, into the hall or out toward the east which we're asking for 2 foot side yard variance and it is just to be one story on a 1-1/2 story house with the barely minimal impact there visually and it is swayed 45 degree angles like a large walkin bay but still not a full size 9 foot 10 by 6 foot and if there's any questions you have I'd be happy to answer them. CHAIRMAN: You said that's only one story? MR. FELLER: It's just one story, yes. CHAIRMAN: OK. What's the maximum height on that do you think, Don? Page 9 - May 7, 1997 ~ '~ Hearings Held - S0uthold Town Board of Appeals MR. FELLER: On the residence? CHAIRMAN: No, on this 10 feet, on the addition? I noticed the ceilings in that house were pretty high. MR. FELLER: An 8 foot 10 ceiling, so that is about 10 feet off the ground. Going to put a shallow pitch roof, staying under the one stoW section of the house, one story roof section. CHAIRMAN: We'll start with Mr. Dinizio, any questions? MEMBER DINIZIO: No. CHAIRMAN: Mrs. ©stermann? MEMBER OSTERMANN: No questions. CHAIRMAN: Mrs. Tortora? MEMBER TORTORA: The only question I had was the question on the Notice of Disapproval. It says the shower addition doesn't have a CO and since it's the same, I don't know whether it does or doesn't but, the notice does say that the Building Department will issue an order to remedy which means that you might be back here for you know a variance for that as well. Have you dealt with that with the Building Department? MR. FELLER: They didn't seem to think that was necessary. To include that if we proceed with Building Permits Application with Architectural Plans, that would be included as if it was not there with the existing construction so that it conforms constructive. MEMBER TORTORA: I just didn't want to see you back here two months from now. CHAIRMAN: It's going to be like a conforming issue. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: It was my understanding that this is all part of the same vadance anyway. MEMBER TORTORA: Oh, it is. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: Yes, the same setback, 13 feet. MEMBER TORTORA: For both? Page 10- May 7, 1997 Headngs Held S,~uthold Town Board of Appeals BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: Yes, for both. CHAIRMAN: It's basically going to be an automatic remedy if the Board so incline to grant it. It's like an automatic remedy, the remedy is being rectified. As you said, so long as the construction is not substandard, dght? MR. FELLER: Yes, and it is not. CHAIRMAN: Right. Member(Mr.)Doyen? MEMBER DOYEN: No. CHAIRMAN: Is there anybody in the audience would like to speak in favor of this application? Anybody like to speak against the application? Hearing no further comment I'll make a motion closing the headng reserving decision. All in favor?. MEMBERS: Ayes. Page 11 - May 7, 1997 Hearings Held - g~uthold Town Board of Appeals 7:20 P.M. - Appl. No. 4473 - SYLVIA M. DALEY CHAIRMAN: This is a request by the owner to establish Accessory Bed and Breakfast use in conjunction with her residence, as authorized by Special Exception for the rental of three rooms for temporary, transient lodging with breakfast, limited to a maximum of six casual and transient roomers in accordance with conditions (a), (b), (c) and (d) as per Section 100-31B (14). Location of Property: 8985 Main Road, East Marion, NY; Parcel ID 1000~31~3- 17. I have a copy of a survey from Roderfck Van Tuyl P.O. indicating this extremely stately house dated June 15, 1994 and I have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. How are you tonight? What would you like to tell us. MS. DALEY: Very well thank you. CHAIRMAN: Your house speaks for itself. · ~ MS. DALEY: That's what I first like to see and then if you have any questions. CHAIRMAN: I noticed that with my telephone call to you after we inspected the house that you did give us a parking plan adjacent to your circular driveway. MS. DALEY: Bob Bohn Construction has done quite a few things on the property and I called him - CHAIRMAN: Good. We'll star[with Mr. Doyen, do you have any questions? MEMBER DOYEN: No. CHAIRMAN: Mrs. Tortora? MEMBER TORTORA: No. CHAIRMAN: Mrs. Ostermann? MEMBER OSTERMANN: No questions. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Dinizio? MEMBER DINIZIO: No, the parking is just going to be within that circle? CHAIRMAN: Well, actually outside ofthe circle. MS. DALEY: Outside. Page 12 - May 7, 1997 Hearings Held S~uthold Town Board of Appeals MEMBER DINIZIO: Outside. CHAIRMAN: I do want to thank you for a really great tour of the house. It's probably one of the best tours that we've ever had of a Bed and Breakfast. While you're standing there is there anybody in the audience that would like to speak in favor of this application? Is there anybody would like to speak against the application? Seeing no hands I'll make a motion closing the headng reserving decision until later. Somebody second it. MEMBER DOYEN: Second. CHAIRMAN: All in favor?, MEMBERS: Aye. Page 13- May7, 1997 Hearings Held S~uthold Town Board of Appeals 7:25 P~M. - Appl. No. 4472 - SUZANNE CAMERON SCHUTZ - CHAIRMAN: This is a variance request based upon the March 14, 1997 Action of Disapproval by the Building Inspector, whereby an application for a permit was made to construct an inground swimming pool, and disapproved on the following grounds: "...The proposed pool is in the side yard. In an R-120 Zone, Accessory buildings and structures or other accessory uses shall be located in the required rear yard. Article III, 100-33, or in the case of a waterfront parcel, accessory buildings or structures may be located in the front yard provided that such buildings and structures meet the front yard setback requirements as set forth by this code, Article 100-33C. In this case 60 ft...this Jot is approximateJy 101,930 sq. ft...." Location of Property: Middle Farms, Fishers Island, NY; Parcel ID 1000-8-1-2. I have a copy of a survey from Chandler, Palmer & King indicating the existing two story frame residence and the placement of the pool as it is proposed and a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. Mr. Lark, how are you tonight, Sir?. MR. LARK: I believe the application before you is fairly self-explanatory. What I was trying to point out in the application is really kind of clarified by the surveys and the site plan and if you've seen the property a common sense approach is that this in reality is the rear yard of the premises in spite of the Building Inspector's determination and I say this when you view the relation of the existing deck, the stone retaining wall and the topography of the property with the house and Middle Farms Pond leaves the conclusion that this is the outdoor living area of this particular parcel. The DEC in the Southold Town Trustees hadno problem with locating the swimming pool in this area. It meets with their requirements. You have copies of their approvals in the file and lastly, the application in my opinion fulfills the requirements of Town Law 267-B3 for area variance request which is this technical side yard request, so, if the Board has any questions I'd be happy to answer them. CHAIRMAN: Just on the merits of the case we are familiar with the area. We have not been site specific on this particular one. Mr. Doyen is giving us the information. However, we would like to if we could when we are on our August tour of Fishers Island to stop back and see the completed project, if it's not an imposition, would you just mention that to the applicant. We'll have Mr. Doyen call them or whatever. I mean we certainly wouldn't drop in on them. MR. LARK: Right. I explained that to them because the DEC when it's all done is going to come back with all of the Trustees so there's no problem with that. CHAIRMAN: Good. We'll start with Mr. Doyen. Mr. Doyen, what would you like to tell us about the site? MEMBER DOYEN: It's a very complete application and I concur with their Page 14-May 7, 1997 f ~ Hearings Held Sbuthold Town Board of Appeals request. This is the most logical place to put a pool in. Actually, if you look at the configuration of this lot and the water you can have, you can call anything a side yard, front yard, anyway you want it. The water comes up on two sides, a very odd configuration. CHAIRMAN: Yes, it certainly is. OK, Mrs. Tortora? MEMBER TORTORA: No, I don't have any questions. CHAIRMAN: Mrs. OSTERMANN? MEMBER OSTERMANN: No questions. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Dinizio? MEMBER DINIZIO: No questions. CHAIRMAN: OK. This pool is going to remain open? They'll be no enclosures around it or anything of that nature? MR. LARK: No. CHAIRMAN: No. Thank you very much. Is there anybody else in the audience that would like to speak in favor of this application? Anybody like to speak against the application? Seeing no hands I'll make a motion closing the headng reserving decision unti~ later. All in favor? MEMBERS: Aye, Page 15 -May7, 199'J Hearings Held Southold Town Board of Appeals Chairman Goehringer recused himself and left the meeting room during the next hearing. 8:34 P.M. -Appl. No. 4465 - BARRY & CAROL ASNESS Carryover hearing. This is a request to locate a swimming pool within 100 feet from the top of the bluff adjacent to the Long Island Sound. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM JAMES D1NIZIO: This is a cont'muation of a heating from April 24th. Is there anyone who wishes to speak? MR. STOUTENBURG: My name is Peter Stoutenburg and I'd be glad to answer any questions, that anybody might have on the Board regarding the new surveys that we turned in and the new plans. We had gone back after the last meeting and addressed the recommendation about adjusting the location of the pool. We tried to shape it as far as we could back away from the bluff that stakes the area. Had the engineer stamped the plans as well as the surveyor make the adjustments and we had to do something about that. I have extra copies if anybody hasn't. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: I understand at the last meeting, there was some mention of the weight of water. MR. STOUTENBURG: Right. I spoke to the pool people and 1 haven't gotten anything in writing back from them because they weren't quite sure why I was asking this because if you put dirt in the pool, the water goes out and the dirt gets heavier. So, aetually we're lightening the bluff up, which I haven't thought about either. But this is a copy of the figures that I have worked up and they're going to send me an official engineer's report on that and, I don't have any stamp from them. And they had a couple of questions and kept saying yes, yes, but that weight is something they gave me and they just have to calculate the weight of that soil which is actually sand fertile top soil which is lighter. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: You're talking about soil existing on the property now? MR. STOUTENBURG: Right. You can move it to put the water in there. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: So you're saying removing that, placing it with the pool, right, something that is not as forceful on the soil. How deep is this pool? MR. STOUTENBURG: The pool is only 5q/2 feet at its deep end, and the deep end is the furthest from the pool. Well that's right up at the 86 foot right here. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: This is the weight of water? Does anybody have any questions of Mr. Stoutenburg? Page 16 - May 7, 1997 Heatings Held Southold Town Board of Appeals MR. BRADY: Yes, the outcome of your analysis and figures. What's the difference of weight? MR. STOUTENBURG: Between the two? MR. BRADY: Yes. Do you notice the gravity of the mixture that's there? MR. STOUTENBURG: No, I mentioned to the Board that I had spoken to the pool people that we were concerned about the additional weight that was going in there, and I don't have anything back from them other than and exactly what they had given me, and they were not sure why we were asking this because they felt that we were taking out the solid mass and they were putting back in its place. MR. BRADY: In other words, it's denser than water? MR. STOUTENBURG: Right. The sand contents in that area is denser than that and 1 do not have anything from them like I have from the surveyor or from the engineer that is stamped at present. I've requested after the last meeting. They got back to me and they gave me these figures. It will be coming but they still weren't quite sure why I was asking because again they said, if you put the two together you're going to end up lightening the load on the property. MR. BRADY: How about what type of pool? How will the pool be made? Made of what, vinyl, or? MR. STOUTENBURG: No, this is a gunite free enforced pool. MR. BRADY: I see. What will be the wall thickness on that pool? MR. STOUTENBURG: This considers the amount of tonnage concrete, the number of yards of concrete. MR. BRADY: As well as with the water, and it's still lighter? MR. STROUTENBURG: Yes. MR. BRADY: OK. 1 understand that I bought a copy of that last survey with scratch marks on it, which indicated that the pool was re-shifted to the east and further back south. Are you removing some of that deck there, you moved that pool Closer to the house? CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: Sir, Sir. I think, you know, maybe we should ask the questions first. We need to get this on the record in some form, OK. Page 17 -May 7, 1957 Hearings Held Southold Town Board of Appeais MR. BRADY: I see, we don't have a court stenographer tonight, do we? BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: But you've got to go through the Chair, though. Every question goes through the Chair. CHA/RMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: You two having a conversation here is not good for us. So maybe I'll ask the Board Members if they have may questions and then you can stand up and ask the Board questions and we can address them to Mr. Stoutenburg in some fashion if that would be OK. So, I'll start with Serge. MEMBER DOYEN: No, CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: OK. Lydia? MEMBER TORTORA: I just want to go over what actually has transpired. After our last meeting, we talked about alternative sites and we met with you and the Asnesses at which time you indicated that you would move the pool back by removing three foot walkway so that you would move it back south so that you'd be stepping offthe existing wooden deck literally into the pool although the two are not attached, that you would be moving back from the Coastal Erosion Hazard line from what was proposed at 43 feet to 55 feet on the west side m~d on the east side from 75 feet to 87 feet. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: That's on top of the bank. MEMBER TORTORA: Excuse me, from the top of the bank. MR. STOUTENBURG: Yes. They gave us both of those figures. MEMBER TORTORA: Right, and I don't have the exact dimensions on how- far you would be moving it east. I don't know that that is significant because you're not required to have a side yard variance and (). MR. STOUTENBURG: Right. It is being moved over to as far as we thought we could do- MEMBER TORTORA: From the retai~ing wall. MR. STOUTENBURG: From the retaining wall a stair going down to the garage area. There is no walk around deck on any of the four sides now. That's all been removed, There's only a 12 inch coping which is dressing at the edge of the pool. That's actually been even put underneath the deck, to move it a little bit closer, and it's only around the outer three sides. There's a barrier between the lawn and the pool surface itsel£ The 5- 1/2 foot deep end is not a diving pool. It's a lap pool. The 5q/2 foot end is on the east side and it's only 4-4-1/2 feet on the west side. Page 18 - May 7, 19v ] Hearings Held Southold Town Board of Appeals MEMBER TORTORA; OK, the other thing I wanted to mention is that when Mrs. Austin and I were at this site, I did spend a little time looking at other alternative sites on this property of large parcels, and I looked at what could be considered the rear yard if you consider Long Island Sound the front yard, and I would like to note, that the house is situated at the top of a bluff, and south of that which would be the rear yard did not appear to me to be a very feasible location since it is very steep in sloping, and it would require a great deal of excavation into that bank area in order to put a pool because I did look at other areas also. So I just wanted to put that into the record. That's it Jim. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: I concur with Lydia on the front side, back, whatever that is next to Stanley Sledjeski. That definitely would be a - MEMBER TORTORA: More damage. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: Damage, yes, I mean environmental wise I tlxink it would be a problem. Maureen? MEMBER OSTERMANN: Would there be fencing around the pool? MR. STROUTENBURG: Yes, there definitely would be fencing around the pool and depending on where we end up with the fencing, we can't get a permit from the Building Department without having that indicated, there's two options on fencing, one of which is sought of the perimeter of the yard, and the other is a little bit more immediate around the pool itself since now we're reducing the deck area. The spac'mg actually part of the rail of the deck if it was rebuilt it would be considered part of the fence too. So there will definitely be fencing and nothing has changed as Par as the filter system and the drywell go back flushing the system, and why not, this is all going to be on the south side of the house. The yard which is on the south side, if you notice the maple trees which are having a hard time, have all been pooled, which means that there's a lot of soil on that front yard, so it's not a stable area either. If you go up next to those maple trees there's a pretty big pit and cement blocks around them. We're just trying to keep them alive and backfill that area. CHAI1LMAN PRO TEM D1NIZIO~ All right, anybody else? Anybody in the audience like to speak for the applicant? Sir, could you state your name please. Are you for or - MR. BRADY: I'm against the application. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: Oh, OK. MR. COOPER: You had said someone for a - CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: Yes, I stated for and then you - Page 19 -May7, 195~/ '" Hearings Held Southold Town Board of Appeals MR. COOPER: I just made this long trip from next door to me. Good evening, my name is Doug Cooper. I live in Mattituck in Long Island Sound, about 500 feet west of Mr. & Mrs. Asness. I'm 49 years old and have lived and farmed there all of my life except for a brief time when I was away at school. I've studied engineering and soil conservation, erosion and insect control. I have intimate knowledge of the beach and bluffs west of Mattituck Inlet. I've been told that the concern of the proposed swimming pool is due to concerns of its et~ct on the cliffy boon in that area. I ask you all to take a moment and ask yourselves this question. What is the major cause of going into the bluffs along the sound? Fll tell you what the major cause is. It is not people walking on the cliffs, or dogs or deer. It is not the clearing of native vegetation and subsequent planting of grass and shrubs, nor is it the construction of structures even those closest to the edge of the bluffs. These all have an insignificant affect when compared to the main cause, which is erosion at the base of the bluffs due to the high tides and storm tides. It is impossible to have stable cliffs as long as the water eats away at the base. The base of the bltfft's, are protected from the wave action. They will over time reaching natural mmual repose, become vegetated and have little erosion. An example of this can be seen along Sound Beach Drive in Mattituck. Where there is a section of protected cliffs that are stable, vegetated, that houses right at the top of the edge, right at the top of the edge, it is important that one realize that the weight of normal structures placed at the top of the sound bluff is miniscule when compared to the weight of the earth and the bluffs. And thus, have no effect on its stability. The Asness' pool, the ~veight of that pool, if it was above ground, would only amount to about an inch of the fill, of the top soil in that area, sand, water was there, spread over their back yard. This compared to the elevation of perhaps 100 feet is miniscule. The weight has no effect. I would like to continue to discuss the causes of storm and tidal erosion along the west Mattituck beach bluffs. The predominant current flow along the shores from the west to the east, this flow washes sand along the beach in that same direction, from the west to the east. (changed tape) too much sand build up in fact, that there is now a stable beach protecting the houses along Sound Beach Drive. Back in the sixties, early sixties, a company I believe was called, Levbond, installed long jetties out into the sound in Jamesport as part of a plan to m/ne sand. The venture failed and they were sued by property owners to their east because the jetties were causing severe erosion to this property. They were ordered to pay damages and remove the jetties. The jetties were partially removed but much of them still remained below the water and sand at that location. It is these jetties that are now causing the major erosion along our beach and bluffs on west Matfituck beach. They stopped the lateral flow of the sand along the beach from the west to the east. The result is that the level of the beach is lowered allowing the water to eat away at the bluffs between Jamesport and Mattituck. In my opinion, Mr, & Mrs. Brady would achieve a lot more if they would work with their neighbors to (1)install a series of small jetties from the base of the bluffs to the low water mark, similar to what is seen along the bay. This would help stabilize the beach without stopping the lateral drift of sand to the east and; (2) proceed to some sought of action aimed at the fully removable of the jetties in Page 20 - May 7, 1 Hearings Held Southold Town Board of Appeals Jamesport. That would result in a release of a huge amount of sand that could replenish our beaches, and thus, protect our bluffs. Thank you. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM D1NIZIO: Thank you Mr. Cooper. Is there anybody else would like to speak for the applicant? OK, anybody against? MRS. BRADY: Good evening Members of the Board, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Mei Savage Brady. I have scrutinized the survey and it is apparent that there is no acknowledgment of the natural crest of the bluff, which runs continually from property to property, and is connected to ours. This crest indicates the fault line, which is the cause of the lower level of land, which is unstable and sliding down as I witnessed it. This fault line was cited by Mr. Goldman a Geologist from California, who was called in by Southampton College to study erosion problems here in 1969. He met with us who were concerned with the increasing problem created by the Levbond property's jetties. This study included the bluff area. The crest of the bluffis cited by geologist as the front point from which, to measure the setbacks. I have brought in sketches, which well not to scale, will give you an idea of this section of the view of what's occurring here. It is common knowledge, that these bluffs are highly vulnerable to rain and storm erosion because of the soft composition of the mass clay and sand. This proposal for an experimentation and digging a pool on top of the highest bluffs of the North Fork, in considering the disasters which have occurred here does not warrant the risk to the bluffs including the neighboring crest which are joined to each other. Thank you. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: Thank you ma'am. Anybody else? MR. BRADy: My name is Warren Brady. I live on top of the Mattituck hills. Have been living there for 31 years since March 1966, and I've observed all of these things that everyone is talking about, and I thought that was a very good suggestion that Mr. Cooper said about the Bradys getting together and build some jetties down below. The house to the west of us built a jetty and it's now 15-25 feet away from the bluff, washed right behind it, it's useless. MR. COOPER: That was a bulkhead Mr. Brady. MR. BRADY: Yes, it was a bulkhead. Yeah, you're right, thank you for correcting me. MR. COOPER: gald Sir, I don't mean big jetties. I just mean small 0. MR. BRADY: I see. Well maybe we could bring in tons of tremendous boulders and put them in at the toe so that we can't get out - CHA1RMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: OK, well, we can discuss that later on. MR. COOPER: Thank you. Page 21 - May 7, 199 / Hearings Held Southold Town Board of Appeals MR. BRADY: Let's see, where were we? I would like to find from Mr. Stoutenburg, how much of these decks that are on each side of the house are going to be to cut back to the south? I mean, how much are they going to be reduced? Right now they're about 31 to 33 feet from the fault line, and its sinking where the steps are. Now-, how much of that Mr. Stoutenburg would have to answer that of course. It's difficult to get plans here that can be reproduced on your copies so they come out mostly black and illegible, The plan that was just supplied to, you see some scratch marks but you can't read any dimensions. So anyway I need an answer to that from Mr. Stoutenburg and how many feet east of the center of the house will the pool be moved? Now would you like me to ask all the questions at tlfis time to Mr. Stoutenburg? CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: Yes, so that he cm~ have a chance to stand up and answer them if he so chooses. MR. BRADY: My first question is a, on the new plan, will some of the exist'rog deck be removed in a north and south direction? CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: OK, I think we can answer that. According to this plan no. MR. BRADY: Then we're not going to be any further back from the fault line then. We're only going to save 3 feet? Right now, I measured today, because the ground may move in a couple of days, but I measured today between 33 and 31 feet to the fault line from the northern extremity of these decks. Now that's how much room we have to put the pool in without removing those decks. I thought they were going to remove some of the decks to move it further north closer to the house. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: Not according to this plan. All he did was stfift the pool to the east. MR. BRADY: I see, there's been no reduction? CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: Well he moves it in some but I mean - MEMBER TORTORA: He moved it himself. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM D1NIZIO: Three feet, two feet. MR. BRADY: Three feet, two feet? CHA1RMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: Apparently it looks like the pool is the same size only up against the deck now. No part of the deck that I can see has been removed. Page 22 - May 7, 199/ * Heatings Held Southold Town Board of Appeals MR. BRADY: Well of course they have a 14 foot 6 inches of deck projecting out fi~om the northern most extremity of the house fight now. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: Right, but this is a - MR. BRADY: Why can't they remove that and move it closer to the house? Isn't that what we're trying to accomplish to get away from that fault line where the earth is shifting every year, they keep adding steps7 I think Mrs. Brady presented you with a little information there so you'd understand the geolot~cal effects. OK, do we have any other questions? CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: No, is there anything else you would like to ask? MR. BRADY: What's the size of the pool going to be? Anyone know? CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: Apparently it's a 14 feet - MR. BRADY: I'm not talking about decks now. I'm talking about pool size. C~ PRO TEM D1NIZIO: Right. The pool is 14 feet - MEM]3ER TORTORA: 14 x 45. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: Right. MR. BRADY: 14 x 45. So if you put it up against the present deck, you'll be down then to about 17 foot from that fault line and ! think it would be much better offifthey moved it as everyone seems to be determined that they put a pool there. OK, we don't have any answer on that. Now we've had a drywell mentioned. But I have not seen the plan detailing the piping surface to that pool and where it's going to be located. And that's very critical because the way the grading is there I could end up having them flooding my part oftha property. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZ10: Well he says he's going to place it on the south side of the house. MR. BRADY: So I don't think he should get any approval without an approved drawing of that location of the drywell. That's just as important as the pool. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZ10: I agree and my questions will go to that direction. He did testify that it would go to the south side of the house. MR. BRADY-: Oh, I know that. Yes, but wliere about on the south side? See that's the critical thing because the grade runs over towards my place at that point and runs over Page 23 -May7, 1~9~ Hearings Held Southold Town Board of Appeals towards my garage and I'm getting flooded at the south end because of the tennis court they put in. They should have specified a drywell there and they didn't. My road gets flooded when the snow melts off the asphalt tennis court. But that's another year's problem. So we don't have a size on the drywell. We don't have any information where it's going. OK, so you're not moving the pool any further south because you don't want to move any of that massive deck. One deck is 32 foot wide and the other deck is 41foot 6" wide plus 20 foot deep. Those are massive decks. You can hold a Maldi Gras or something on it, there too big. I mean I think he should be able to give up some of those decks to get that pool closer to the house. We may seem overly concerned about this, but when we built our home, we built it ourselves. I was in the construction business by the way for over 35 years and reading plans everyday, you know. I'm use to plan, dealing with engineers and people who put everything down where you can see what it was, if it was legible, you know, but anyway we built our home, 65-66, taxes were $1,000 a year. Not bad. Now there over $13,000. But what do you suppose would happen to the value of our home? It's already been decreased because of the encroaching bank. Catastrophe happens here and another disaster or something and that thing starts to really landslide, what will happen to my real estate values? No-one may get hurt. The house might even remain there, even though the house was put close to there before split in half. Doug wouldn't remember that I guess. It'll cost me a, well the taxes I'm paying says my home should be worth about two million dollars. Now if something comes up it's going to kill real estate values what do you think it'll cost me, a million and a half?. That's why we're concerned, one of the things. We're also trying to protect people who live in Manhattan and not acquainted with what happens out on this mountaineer and which in sense, trying to protect them from having problems too. So let's see, is there any chance that we'll be able to get Mr. Stroutenburg to present these you know, these plans and drawings so we know where everything is going so we don't have craps and problems later. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: Like I said, he did submit a revised survey. MR. BRADY: Oh, I saw that. Would you like to see a copy of it, and you tell me what - CHAIRMAN PRO TEM D1NIZIO: Well I have it right here. This is it, fight? MR. BRADY: Yeah, well that's the one with all the crosshatch marks? Where the pool is going to be shifted around? CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: No, it's a legible proposed pool. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: You want to see this Mr. Brady? This is the original. Well we got this today at 4:00 o'clock Mr. Brady. MR. BRADY: Oh, I should have called, yeah to get the latest. Well this cross-coastal erosion as outlined is a computer developed thing. Page 24 - May 7, 19'97 ' Hearings Held Southold Town Board of Appeals CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: Yes, no, I understand. MR. BRADY: Yeah. The actual one is the top of those steps. Did you get there to see those steps and where - each year they add steps because they're sinking. Well anyway - CHA1RMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: Well let me ask you this question and maybe you can answer it. Is it your contention that adding the pool is going to add to the erosion of this thing, of the bank? I read the information. So I read your fight against the - MR. BRADY: O1~ yeah, yeah. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM D1NIZIO: So I'm asking you honestly that you know, if they pull the soil out and put a pool here, do you feel like that's going to add to the erosion, or, are you more fearful of some type of catastrophic event that may cause this pool to slide down? MR. BRADY: Well what happened the last time when the house split in half, it had tremendous rain for several days. Water got through sand, hit the clay, it lubricated the clay, (this is what the geologist told me), and it slipped down and that's when the house split in half. MEMBER TORTORA: This house? MR. BRADY: Not the house that's on there now. No, no. This was another house, and they're probably maybe 20 feet further south than the other house was that split in half,, maybe even a little more. I have to check my measurements. But I'm concerned that heavy equipment in there. I know when they bulldozed there for over two months and our house was vibrating you know, and we've got a pretty good size house, and when I built the foundation I put steel reinforcing rods and made a tremendous thing just in case. At that time we had 25 feet, at least 25 to 50 feet of cliff in front of us. Now on one comer we're about down to 8 feet and 5 feet in another place by our lookout tower. So, you know, we don't have a lot of leeway there and that's why we're concerned if something happens. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: Well are you assuming that your house is causing part of the erosion now? MR. BRADY: Well my house isn't causing the erosion or anything. We're suffering when you know, when it eats away at the bottom on the beach and finally the balance, you know, they don't have a natural angle of repose, then it'll shift until it gets that natural angel of repose. Yeah, and I don't have much room for shifting but I can't help it. It's going to shift a little bit each year. It can't be helped. But I didn't want you know, you get heavy equipment pounding away and really a necessity be close to that fault line. Page 25 -May 7, 199~ ' ' Hearings Held Southold Town Board of Appeals MEMBER TORTORA: That's what I wanted to ask you. you keep referring to the fault line, I don't have anything from you, maybe I should have, but I don't have anytlfing from you showing where that fault line is in terms of this map here. So when you keep saying get it away from the fault line, it's hard for me to tell - MR. BRADY: Well lets see. Didn't you get a sheet - BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: Mrs. Brady gave us one. MR. BRADY: Don't you have pictures of the steps? MEMBER TORTORA: We do but the problem is that in terms of, if we were looking and we were saying, when you're talking, OK, it's 31 feet from the fault line, 1 don't have anything that shows me where that fault line is. MR. BRADY: Well that's only because the drawings weren't properly prepared. That's the only reason. But I can give you the dimensions now if you want. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM D1NIZIO: I mean is there, I mean this is visible on the property of fault lines? MR. BRADY: Oh, yeah. CHAIRMAN PRO 'rEM DINIZIO: Because I mean I didn't really see - MR. BRADY: The thing is sliding down there. Each year the north part of that place drdps. You know, six inches one year, 4 another year. They keep adding steps so they can back up to the house and that's where the fault line is, and it's shown on that detail, the one my wife prepared. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM D1NIZIO: OK. MR. BRADY: Well anyway - CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: No, you can't tell from the house. MEMBER TORTORA: You can't tell where the - CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: No I can't tell where the house is, as opposed to - MR. BRADY: Oh, no, not at this point. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: Where would it be on this map? Page 26 - May 7, 1997 Heatings Held Southold Town Board of Appeals MR. BRADY: This is where the steps are by the way. You know where the steps are on the property? CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: Yes. MR. BRADY: There they are. MEMBER TORTORA: In other words, that's just it. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: Where would it be on here? MEMBER TORTORA: The fault line. MR. BRADY: Well this is such a small scale drawing, that you can't do anything with this drawing. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: Well it's not this wavy from-tiffs is that a - MR. BRADY: If the steps are here, it may be. 1 took the measurements today from there to the fault line from both decks but they can get it too. But that's where the fault line is running. It's on top of those steps. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: OK. MEMBER TORTORA: Are these the steps in between the itty platform and the house? MR. BRADY: Yes, yes. MEMBER TORTORA: So that's the second step? MR. BRADY: Where they the first a - CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: Second step. MR. BRADY: Yeah, where they say the grade dropped, you know. MEMBER TORTORA: But see we don't have anywhere to measure from. Do you know what I'm saying? MR. BRADY: Oh, I thought maybe you're going downward. When someone then takes a measurement so you know where the hell everything is going. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: It's not an easy tiring for a person to - Page 27 - May 7, 195~/' Hearings Held Southold Town Board of Appeals MEMBER TORTORA: Exactly, MR. BRADY: No, I've been in the construction business working with plans and dimensions and a - MEMBER TORTORA: Well we can look at the survey and see where the marks to the top of the bank are, and the coastal erosion hazard line, but it's a, the fault line unless a - MR. BRADY: Well the fault line is at the top of the steps. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: Which steps, the deck steps? MR. BRADY: There are two sets of steps. Not the deck steps. There are two sets of steps. About 8 steps in each one. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: Actually these. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: These steps, where the - CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: Well they're probably fight in here. MEMBER TORTORA: Yeah, there are two sets on each side. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: OK, so it's seaward wherever the coastal zone line, OK. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM D1NIZIO: Right, seaward. MRS. BRADY: Can I step up? Maybe I can refine some of those things. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM D1NIZIO: Yeah sure, I'd like to a - MR. BRADY: Yeah we'll make it a family affair. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: Can everybody hear what the ladies are saying? Maybe you ought to use the microphone, OK? Could you use the microphone Ma'am so that, everybody can hear. /V[RS. BRADY: You wanted to know - I can't point it out to you at the same time. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: Oh yes you can. Well if you can point it out to me right here and then maybe another thing you need. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: Now this is the revised survey today. Page 28 - May 7, 1¢~7 ' ' Hearings Held Southold Town Board of Appeals MRS. BRADY: Well the erosion hazard line is a computerized indication right? CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: Well we understand, yeah. MRS. BRADY: OK. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZ10: Well if you want to draw, draw on this page. MRS. BRADY: No, I wanted to show you, one of the pictures shows you where the a - CHA1RMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: I saw that, where it slopes down. MRS. BRADY: Yeah, but that runs, that runs - CHAIRMAN PRO TEM D1NIZIO: Yeah, but where is that opposed to this? I mean we know physically what it looks like, I guess, but I'm just, see there's a measurement here of 55 feet, OK, that's to this bluff This is where it really drops off, right? MRS. BRADY: But that's not a bluff. That's a landfill. That's not part of the bluff CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: OK, but where is the fault in between here and this 55? MRS. BRADY: Let me see what he has indicated here. Well I don't know if he's actually indicating it. As I said, I can't find it. It would have to be up here. Where the steps indicated here? CHAIRMAN PRO TEM D1NIZIO: Well there are no steps indicated. This is a - MRS. BRADY: OK, but we're not educated so I don't know if this is an accurate line or not. But it looks like the fault line becanse it comes across the boundary here to our side and it goes right on over there. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: So you're indicating that the coastal hazard, coastal erosion hazard line is probably the fault line. MEMBER TORTORA: Is approximately where the fault line is. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: Where the fault line is. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM D1NIZIO: This is the coastal erosion hazard - MRS. BRADY: But that's not the fault. Page 29 -May 7, 1997 Hearings Held Southold Town Board of Appeals MR. BRADY: It's computer generator. No that's computer generator. MRS. BRADY: That's not where it's sliding. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: Well they're referring to that as the coastal zone line. MR. BRADY: Well anyway I have the exact dimensions right here 0 from the a each comer of- CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: I'm sure - MRS. BRADY: I mean it connects with ours right here at this point and it's a scary thing because fight here everything goes down like this. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM D1NIZIO: Your fault, the fault that's - MRS. BRADY: No, no, fight here, right at the edge of both of our properties. It's almost a vertical drop fight there. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: I'll tell you what, Give me the measurements that you have and I'll write them in. MR. BRADY: All right. From the east end of the east platform deck, you want to call it a deck, down to the fault line, you know, just to the top of the steps is 33 foot 6 inches, I used the 100 foot tape to make it easier. MEMBER TORTORA: Now this is to the top of the steps? CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DIN1ZIO: Fault line. MR. BRADY: To the top of the steps and the fault line, right. And then at the western extremity of the eastern platform or deck, I get 31 foot 6 inches to the fault line. That's between the steps and then over on the west deck, about the center of it, to the fault line, I got 33 foot 7 inches. So as I said, if they took off' some of this deck, they're massive decks, and shifted the pool in that way, it will be much safer you know. MEMBER TORTORA: Well is that your figures based on the new survey? The location of- MR. BRADY: My figures are based on the actual location of everything that is on the site. I'm verifying the site dimensions. Page 30 -May 7, 1997 ' Hearings Held Southold Town Board of Appeals CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: I think you're very clear on that. MEMBER TORTORA: To the existing deck. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: And that's, OK, well we can consider that fault line. MEMBR TORTORA: What is it 33? MR. BRADY: Well that's the area. See these people have only been there about 6 months. The3, don't know what happens here. You know how people keep adding the steps and adding plantings to disguise it. What happens, every time somebody lives there and they find a crack in the foundation, they put it up for sale, and they keep moving you know, and this is what happens. Somebody spots it they put it too close initially. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: OK, well, but you don't really feel that the pool would contribute to erosions but that there's erosion actively going on at this site? MR. BRADY: Oh, no you can't. That's going to carry on. That's Mother Nature. You can't do much about that. But I'm saying that if the further back from that fault line and you know vibrations of the disturbance of the earth, will not be as effected. You get near that edge and that edge will break and then it's a question of real heaw rainfall and you get a shin of weight, but it's very fragile and it's hard to analyze it. Thank you gentlemen for your attention. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM D1NIZIO: Thank you very much Mr. Brady. OK, I guess we can give Mr. Stoutenburg a, know hold on Mr. Stoutenburg.. Sir? Anybody against? MRS. BRILLEN: My name is (Joe Olive Brillen?). I live on the cliffs of what is known as Mattituck Hills. We built our house is 1963. In 1978 the cliff started to s'mk from erosion and we had to move our house back 125 feet. I just want to say I'm concerned about anything that goes on in that cliff area. It is a very fragile area. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: Thank you ma'am. Hello Sir, do you want to state your name please. MR. WILLS: Good evening. My name is Frank Wills similar to Joe Olive Billen. In fact she and her husband bought the land together. I also built my house in 1963. Having lived in Wading River on the water and Center Moriches before that. I built my house in 1963 and having an engineering background I was sought ora careful type. So I got the erosion record, which apparently went back 70 years in those days and indicated that the average erosion on the North Fork in our area was one to two foot a year. So I took the worst case of 2 foot a year and the beach was 192 foot wide and said well 92 foot so I put my house 35 foot from the edge of the cliff and said I'm not going to worry as long as I'm around. In 1978 due to the Levbon, when the Levbon jetty got built, the first year or Page 31 - May 7, 1997 ' · Hearings Held Southold Tow~ Board of Appeals two we didn't know what was happening but by the second year we realized that we were losing 40 foot of beach a year as a result of the rhetorical drifts, taking sand away. By the time a group of us were active, got everyone involved we forced Levbond to take the jetties up, part of the jetties and I want to emphasize that point. The bedrock is still there. You can still see it at low tide. We have lost 160 foot of beach. There was 30 foot left. When the big storm of 77 took the last 30 foot off, I decided to have my house moved. I like to sleeping nights. I don't like waking up on the beach in the morning. Immediately before we built everything was fine. Except in the last four years and I take a walk on the beach every few days, definitely on weekends, I've noticed where Cooper's Rock which is a landmark out of the sound was there all of a sudden appeared a new rock that we have never known existed in the cliff That rock is higher than this room and must be from the wall at least up to here and it is now free standing in three years. What I'm saying in effect is the erosion and we haven't had any real bad storm for a while, the erosion is continuing because my guess the remaining Levbond jetty and we've also add the human structures, the one that the McCoys, the bulkhead that was referred to was put up all 200 feet is now a shamble. The true east and west wall have disappeared part of it is sunk part of it has come out. I would say within another year that has disappeared and the cliff at that point, the bottom of the cliff, which used to be 25-30 foot back is now at least 60 feet back. So the erosion at that point has accelerated. My own guess is because of the remains of the Levbond jetty, possibly other things. At high tide now where island there is a beach but approximately 300 feet to the west of us, the water at high tide especially now, with the spring 0 is at the bottom of the cliff You cannot walk along the beach anymore and this is where the Bradys and the new property is, so my suggestion is that the is a lot of what Cooper suggested that 0 be put up unless they're put up continuously all the way to the west jetty is hopeless as the people in west end beach found out to their regret to force why Riverhead Township never should forced (Sur?) and Levbond to take the rest of the jetty down I don't know. I could make suggestions as to why not but until those jetties are completely removed, we're having accelerated erosion and anything to the east of that is liable. Therefore, if you put in the extra loads or structures at the edge of the cliff, it's my understanding the new recent the existing zoning regulations say, any structure, building structure must be 100 foot back for the tide, also for swimming pools or anything else. If the pool is built and the cliff starts to go, you will have a near disaster or my calculation is, that maybe 100 ton of water in that roaring down the cliff, and causing tremendous erosion, and deforesting or removing shrubs including the poison ivy from the cliff So that is where the danger is and unless the bottom the jetty, the remains of the jetty are removed, which is the way we do things of (manana?) project I don't think it will ever happen. There is this very eminent danger. Thank you. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: Is there anybody would like to speak? Mr. Brady. MR. BRADY: May I direct your attention to a letter from Paul A. TeNyenhuis. He's with the Suffolk County Soil & Conservation Water District and we made a visit to the site and I coincidentally thought of their agency and I called to have someone come and Page 32 -May 7, 1997 Hearings Held Southold Town Board of Appeals see to give me an appraisal on my property. Well anyway, Paul TeNyenhuis showed up and I pointed everything out to him and then I said, the people next door want to put in a pool and I'm a little concerned that it might effect us, and it may be you know, it may not work out and so finally he opened up and said, well I've already been there and gave them my approval. So I said, well you know, I don't think you realize that these properties, are connected by a fault line, and it runs in and out, and e~,erybody has their point where it's dropping o~.. Well he couldn't connect it between the Asness' property and ours because I bad a 6 foot stockade fence there and dense growth of vines that you couldn't see anything. So anyway he left and I realized then he had given lfis OK, and he did in the letter. I called up his boss Tom McMann and said, I removed the fence and all the brier, you can see the form now and I'd like to have you come down and look at it, and he showed up and we went through the same routine, and he saw where everything was but of course his man had already approved it so he was in a difficult position but anyway I homed in on him, and he finally said, well that's not my area of expertise. You should have a geologist. So anyway that's the same thing his man Paul said. So they were out of their league on the situation like this because they didn't know the background on what had happened, that the house had split, you know, a lot of trash had been bulldozed down, stumps and trees, and oh, you can't believe the stuff that was pushed down. And anyway, you know, you've got to evaluate their letters and their opinions in that context. And then we have a letter from Warren Sambach, a letter of approval and he's the P.E. but anything he said, didn't indicate that he was familiar with the history of the property and in the absence of this, it is understandable that he did not provide a schedule of test borings of this landfill because if you have any questions so we build any big buildings, you always make test borings to see what's going to support this building. They had a tragedy in Hauppauge. They messed up on the borings. They built a building and it tilted like the leaning Tower of Pisa and I've been there personally myself so I'm acquainted. But the elevators wouldn't work because the building was tilted. They had a lot of problems so that's critical and no-one told him about what went on so that's why he approved it just looking at it on the surface. He said, oh it looks beautiful, the grass is healthy you know everything looked good. But anyway you know, you said in my opinion, but we don't know what his opinion was based on. He didn't say that I dug into the ground, or I did this, or had impact tests, you know. So I wouldn't give too much credence to his approval. Thank you very much for your time. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM D1NIZIO: OK, thmxk you Mr. Brady. Is there anybody else would like to speak against this application? Mr. Stoutenburg I'I1 give you a shot at this if you like. MR. STOUTENBURG: I made a list of the questions. Do you want to ask them back or do you want me to give it my best shot? CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: No, I think you probably can ~ve it your best shot. Page 33 - May 7, 19¢7 Hearings Held Southold Town Board of Appeals MR. STOTENBERG: All right. There are no plans on the drawings we submitted that were either stamped by Mr. Sambach or on the survey that was done. We're not removing any deck in its present plan. We removed the deck that was around the existing pool so there is none there that reduces the setback of this whole addition and additions. The structure being built to but not attached to the existing structure by 6 foot and by shirr'rog it to the west approximately 14 feet it is now off`the center of the house 9-1/2 feet to the west. That allows the distance from any of the lines on the survey and the fault line that everybody is talking about is something that I've never seen published or I don't see any surveys, or I don't see any of the documentation that we've looked for. I'm just trying to do a respectful job of laying this om. I don't have anything with a fault line. So the only thing we had or the licensed individuals who did this, were the surveyors had to work with were the maps, which have the coastal hazard line on it and the topography bluff as they have laid it out as they were on the site. So I don't have any numbers for this fault line. Drywells, I do not have the size of those. They're very easy for me to get and if you want we can put those on the survey as well and show- ideal locations along the rest of it. Thaffs something just an added expense for the homeowners but we surely can do that. Normally it's not required on any of the other pools I've ever installed before by the Building Department. The size of the pool is 14 x 45. That does have a 12 inch coph~g around the outside of it. Normally it's done by the size of the pool. It's the amount of opening. One tking that is interesting if you've looked at any of the surveys in the area er any of the photographs that lay out the coastal hazard line, everything that the Asnesses have been looking to do, fell within the setback if you drew a straight line between the house on the east and the house on the west decks~ that includes their deck area in the proposed pool area. Also between the houses and the decks, not as your approaching any further towards the sound, it narrows where it's moved back to because it's always on a bit of an angle. It's not perfect right angle. It falls within what their neighbors on either side have been allowed to do with their houses, and their request'rog us for a pool in a deck area. They're set well back from the house to the east to the west. Did I miss any questions? CHA1RMAN PRO TEM D1NIZIO: No, only about the drywell. I guess if you could put it on a - MR. STOUTENBURG: No problem, That's something when we had the Soil Conservation fellow there and I walked up and down the stairs and around the property, we went around actually looked at exact location for where filters would go and how the access you know to the equipment would be made so that's easy enough for - CHAIRMAN PRO TEM D1NIZIO: We need, I'm assuming that drywells are going to be in the ground, you know it's not going to - MR. STOUTENBURG: No surface water, none of that, no. Page 34 -May 7, 19¢'~ ~ r/ Hearings Held Southold Town Board of Appeals CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: You know it'll be able to handle anything that's back washed from the pool. MR. STOUTENBURG: Right and I'm sure they'll be quite, there's also talk of this being done with a very efficient filtration system so there's very little back washing to be done anyway. It is not a big activity pool. It's not a deep pool. It's a minimal pool. I don't know how many pools with the exception of lap pools you've seen that are 14 foot wide. CHAIRM~ PRO TEM DINIZIO: OK, that's all I have. Thank you very much. Anybody else have questions? Lydia? MEMBER TORTORA: Yes, just one question on the test borings on the soil. Discuss that a little bit. MR. STOUTENBURG: Not a problem. In fact that's something that we said we would do on the two comers closest to that. From eveiything that people have indicated who have expressed past history of the area. As far as I know, everything was moved from this site where the pool is to go and "because I know nothing of this push further towards the water." So this is very virgin soil in here. There is no indication that anywhere around the deck or where the house was put together did they dig a hole and bury soil. If you look at the cherry tree to the west between the two houses that we were discuss'rog so much, you can see where that cherry tree actually has 1 mean it's been there for a good eighty some odd years or so. That hasn't been filled around there. MEMBER TORTORA: OK, lets kind of go over where we're at this point. You will give us the results of the test borings. MR. STOUTENBURG: Test borings of each of the outside bor'mgs closest to the water, yes. MEMBER TORTORA: OK, and the drywell, the location and - MR. STOUTENBURG: New survey and the sketch of the plumbing to get there. MEMBER TORTORA: OK. The only thing I was a little confused you said you would move the pool 9-1/2 feet to the west - MR. STOUTENBURG: I'm sorry, to the east. MEMBER TORTORA: Good, OK. MR. STOUTENBUT, G: It was 9-1/2 feet west of center of the house. There was a question how close it was to the center and if you look at the prints there, there's an 18- Page 35 - May 7, 199r .... Hearings Held Southold Town Board of Appeals 1/2 foot section that's in the middle of the house or what's considered the center of high arch and it,s 9-1/2 feet from the center of that. MEMBER TORTORA: And you're going to have the calculations on the - MR. STOUTENBURG: I'll get you the water and soil. MEMBER TORTOKA: Anything else - CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: No, I think that's a - MR. STOUTENBURG: If there's more you know, I mean just get a hold of my office. MEMBER TORTORA: (inaudible) he has to provide for us? C~ PRO TEM DINIZIO: No, I think that was everything. MR. STOUTENBURG: I think we covered everything. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: Yeah so far. Thank you Mr. Stoutenburg. Yes, Ma'am you'd like to speak? MRS. BRADY: I would like to ask Mr. Stoutenburg, what experience you had in building pools on the crest of bluffs on the sound? CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: Ma'am you'll have to address your questions to us. MRS. BRADY: OK. I would like to ask Mr. Stoutenberg, what his experience has been in building pools on the crest of bluffs on the Long Island Sound, and if he has built any and what has become of them? MR. STOUTENBURG: I know of no pool that I have built or anyone else has ended up in the sound. MRS. BRADY: That's not what I asked. I asked if you've ever built a pool on the crest of the bluffs on the Long Island Sound? MR. STOUTENBURG: I've never built a pool on the sound bluffs. MRS. BRADY: So there is no history of longevity as far as that type of location is concerned, right? CHAIRMAN PRO TEM D1NIZIO: Well Ma'am, you know this is really not an inquisition. If Mr. Stoutenburg wants to attest to his qualifications to you know, build a Page 36 -May 7, 199// "'/ Hearings Held Southold Town Board of Appeals structure near the town counties, he's more than willing to do that but specifically speaking about specifically this particular location, obviously no-one has built a pool at this particular location. MRS. BRADY: Well I know they haven't build one at this particular location. Have they built one anywhere along the sound? CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZ10: Well, I don't think Mr. Stoutenburg could answer that question. You'd probably be better offgoing to the Building Department and finding that out. MRS. BRADY: OK. CHAI]RMAN PRO TEM D1NIZIO: I don't think that Mr. Stoutenburg you know needs to answer that question. I don't think he's qualified to answer that question. MRS. BRADY: I withdraw my question then since he's not qualified. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: OK, thank you ma'am. Is there anybody else who would like to speak for or against? Any Board Members? MEMBER OSTERMANN: No. MEMBER TORTORA: Do you want the steps to be on the map? CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: Yes. The second steps. MEMBER TORTORA: Do you have anything on ( )? CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: Mr. Stoutenburg could we get those second set of steps on the map? If you could put them on the survey, the location and that would be helpful. MR. STOUTENBURG: It may take a little bit of time just, it's tough enough at tiffs busy time of the year to get the surveyor and the engineer and people to get stuff done in their office for these meetings, which I'm more than willing to do to get them out to that site maybe today or tomotTow when they have it on the schedule. CHAIRMA PRO TEM DINIZIO: OK. MR, STOUTENBURG: That they would have to go out to the site. All the stuff has been done by them. There's nothing that I make up when people talk about scratches on the survey. I don't have any of this stuff Page 37 - May 7, 1997~ Hearings Held Southold Town Board of Appeals CHAIRM~ PRO TEM DINIZIO: So you're comfortable with waiting that amount of time to - I think it's important that they be noted certainly on there that there are questions concerning that. MEMBER TOKTORA: As long as there is an agreement that affects the fault line if there is, where the top of the steps is, is the fault line, or the crest. I just want it noted if there's no agreement that that's not it. CHAIRMAN PRO TEMP DINIZIO: Well let's put them on the map anyway. It's a good idea to have them on there. It would be a good indication of you know of topography. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: It is a structure too, so. CH,~IRMAN PRO TEM D1NIZIO: Right. Anybody else? Sir? Would you please state your name. MR. MEINKE: My name is Howard Meinke. I'm speaking for the North Fork Env~romnental Council. I would ask one question. What is the Zoning Regulations for a structure setback from the top of the bluff? MEMBER TORTORA: 100 feet. MR. MEINKE: 100 feet, OK. So in theory you should do 100 feet. The reason we're discussing this is because there are other structures closer than 100 feet in that vicinity. That's why this is open for discussion? CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: Yes. MR. ME1NKE: And secondly Mr. Stoutenberg mentioned at the last hearing that he would bring in the gross weight of this whole mess. Now I'm not - my calculations show that between the water and the pool and the concrete of which it's made, is about 120 tons of stuff, which would be the equivalent of parking maybe forty four (tmncos?) on the edge of the cliff up there. So I just want everybody to realize tl~at it is a very heavy piece of business. The 100 foot setback was enacted for a logical reason I would assume and to deliberately not go by that 100 feet there should be a very good reason. Thank you. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZ][O: Thank you Sir. Mr. Stoutenburg? MR. STOUTENBURG: If I could ask some questions since they seem to be coming at me tonight. I was wondering if he calculated the weight of the soil, which we had done and is on record now? That if he knew how much lighter the pool might be? MR.ME1NT,2E: That's a good point. No I didn't do that. That's a good point. Page 3 8 - May 7, 19~rF Hearings Held Southold Town Board of Appeals MR. STOUTENBLrRG: We make it much lighter. We've lighten the load because most of that soil context up there is sand, basically rock, rocks and water and (). We came up with this thing be'rog much lighter. MR. MEINKE: That's a good point. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: The pool structure at this point, the pool structure will be lighter than the dirt that was removed. Anybody else? So everybody is happy. So are we closing this hearing or do you want to leave it open and a - BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: I would say lets leave it without a date and when we get it we'll calendar it in. MEMBER TORTORA: Until we get the information lets see what leave opportunity. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM D1NIZIO: OK, then we'll need a motion to recess this hear'mg without a date. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: Well you can do it the 19c~ but give it time, the date and time. MEMBER TORTORA: If we set the date now we can, if we set the date now and the time we can do it. Do you think you can have that information by the 19th? MR. STOUTENBURG: I'll be here tomorrow morning and try as best as I can. MEMBER TORTOKA: Lets adjourn it until the 19'h and set a time 7:30 - BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: 7:00 - 7:45? MEMBER TORTORA: 7:45. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: 7:45, OK. CHA1RMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: Is that your motion? MEMBER TORTORA: You got it. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: Need a second. MEMEER OSTERMANN: Second. See Minutes for Resolution. Page.'39- May 7, 1997 Hearings Held Southold Town Board of Appeals 8:42 P.M. - Appl. No. 4429 SE & 4430-Variance - LILCO- Conclusions of Hearings. CHAIRMAN GOEH1LINGER: I offer a Resolution to close the LILCO heating based upon two pieces of information that we're waiting for the DEC, which we have received and I did read tonight a letter from Robert Hoag who has indicated that he did send a, we did get them in bits and pieces. We now got them in you know complete and a couple of letters from him. I should read into the record on this issue I ctid call the DEC on the second letter which the second earliest letter which was received and they indicated to me that they had no particular problems with test bohngs and the issue at hand is construction that LILCO intends to deal with and to seal the property basically. It can be done either through a liner or mechanize so a - BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: Through a liner or mechanize? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Yes. MEMBER TORTORA: Are they going to do a liner? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: They haven't made a decision what they're going to do. One thing they're not going to do is mechanize the entire piece of property according to the engineer, Mr. Hoag. He said, however that's subject to change. It'll be up to their own individual engineering department to make that determination. MEMBER TORTORA: I would say we ought to also put into the record the DEC's comments regarding the SEQUA of you know - CHA/RMAN GOEHRINGER: That's what I said, yeah. MEMBER TORTORA: I think you ought to have put down into the record - CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Both of those letters there. BOARD SECRTARY KOWALSKI: Well they are. They're already in the record because it's written, so. CHAIRMAN GOEHR1NGER: Yes, OK, I just want this one, normally you take that away from (). This letter was from I mean my call was to Merlange and Genes, it's either ese or ece last Friday and the discussion was do the test borings that they had seen have any indications would change the SEQUA determination? For the record, the SEQUA determination was made at the end of the second hearing. There were issues that were brought up during I'm sorry, was made during that hearing. There were issues that were brought up at the end of that hearing which caused us to go into a third hearing and caused additional test borings and the valuations by the DEC and that's what precipitated me to call the DEC and ask them regarding those. We do have a Memo but it was a Page 40-May 7, 1997 Hearings Held Southold Town Board of Appeals reaffirmation of what they were saying and this lady had said to me that she saw nothing that was extremely involved in the test borings that would cause a tremendous problem of the construction of the foundational pilings on the property. I did not ask her specifically about LILCO because it was a genetic statement that was what basically what she said. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: What about the pipes and all? CHAIlLMAN GOEHI~INGER: What pipes? BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: The underground piping that - CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You mean to the a - BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: To the gas line. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: No, there was no indication. MEMBER TORTORA: She had no concerns about re-evaluating this for ( ) board action? CHAIRMAN GOEHI>dNGER: No, not at all. So therefore the action stays as an unlisted action. Negative depth and again I ask for a resolution, I make a resolution closing the heating. MEMBER DINIZIO: Second. See Minutes for Resolution. Page 4J-May7 199z Hearings Held Southold Town Board of Appeals 8:47 P.M. - AppI. No. - NYNEX - Acceptance of written material submitted to date. Possible Resolution to confirm the conclusion of the w~itten portion of hemSng record at this time~ CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: We have received from our Planning, Valede Scopaz the study of the area and I wSsh to incorporate that into the hearing trmxscdpt and bearing that in mind I also offer a similar resolution to dose the hearing. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: You're offering that as a Motion? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Yes. MEMBER OSTERMANN: Second. RECEIVED ,RND FILED BY See Minutes for Resolution. THE $OUT~IOLD TOWI~ CLE~t'K End of Hearings.