Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-09/14/2000 HEARINGPage 1 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold PUBLIC HEARINGS September 14, 2000 Meeting SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS (Prepared by Lucy Farrell) 6:24 P.M. - Appl. No. 4849 - TANAS TSATSOS - This is a request for a Lot Waiver as provided under Article II, Section 100-26 to unmerge County Tax Map Lot 1000-38-3- 9.2 (formerly CTM Lot 9) from 1000-38-3-9.3 (formerly CTM Lot 8). On July 12, 2000 a Notice of Disapproval was issued stating that Lot 9.2 merged with adjacent Lot 9.3 pursuant to Section 100-25A of the Zoning Code. Location of Property: 850 East Gillette Drive, East Marion, Marion Manor Filed Map No~ 2038, Lots 49 and 50. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Mr. Fitzgerald, how are you? We're ready and you are James Fitzgerald. MR. FITZGERALD: I am indeed. The two lots in question were each larger than the regulatory minimum lot size when the Marion Manor subdivision was approved in 1958. When the properties were purchased in 1973, Section 100-12 of the Town Code was still in effect, and provided exception to the area requirements of Chapter 100. The Tsatsos purchased the two lots with the reasonable expectation that they remain two lots. The highest and best use of the land was two separate residential building lots and that use was acceptable to the Town when the subdivision was approved, and if the paperwork had been handled differently they would still be two building lots. The merger occurred through the inadvertent deeding of the two properties in the same names. The fact that the Tsatsos live in Chicago made it difficult for them to monitor the various changes, which have taken place in the Town Code since the properties were purchased. A change in the ownership of one of the lots any time before January 1, 1997, would hav.e eliminated the problem. The lots were purchased in 1973, as an investment for their declining years, and we are attempting to see that the value does not decrease. The land is a significant part of their wealth and its value should be maintained. The purchasers Page 2 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold were and are innocent of guild and subterfuge; there was never any hidden agenda. Each lot is consistent in size with the other lots in the neighborhood. In fact, if the waiver is granted, each of the two lots will be larger than almost all of the other lots. Most of the other lots are onlyl0,000 in sq. ft. These are 0 plus and 15 plus. The waiver of the merger will, in and of itself, have no effect upon the neighborhood. The end result of the waiver could be that two dwellings will be built on the properties under consideration instead of one. The waiver will have no effect on the natural state of the land, and it will not increase the population density in the neighborhood beyond that which was approved in the original subdivision. All of the requirements of Section 100-26 Waiver of Merger, are met in the present case. It is particularly true that the waiver will avoid financial hardship for the Tsatsos. Thank you. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Before you sit down. In this case maybe you could supply us with a how many lots are either merged in the subdivision, or possibly how many lots are already built upon. Thank you. MR. FITZGERALD: Yes I can. I can't tell you how many have been merged because they appear to be separate in the tax map, but I can answer the other part of the question and that is that of the 29 lots, 52 lots right here, of the 29 lots north of this point, 12 are vacant and 17 have houses on it. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: So you've actually started from there, which is Midland Road? MR. FITZGERALD: Yes, I did, but they're not counted up. H, is a house, B is vacant. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER. you. MR. FITZGERALD: Sure. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Fitzgerald? MEMBER DINIZIO: No. Can we take a copy of this? We'll give this back. Thank OK, we'll start with Mr. Dinizio. Any questions of Mr. Page 3 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Ms. Collins? MEMBER COLLINS: I'm afraid I sound picky but a, I'm bothered, this, this looks like the merger cases that we see regularly. We see several, a year where people didn't realize that having adjacent lots in the same names was going to lead to their being merged. The problem here is, that on the paper I don't really see that the lots ever merged and in fact technically I think what you're after is a subdivision and the reason is that when the Tsatsos husband and wife acquired this property in 1973, they bought in fact, the two lots under one deed. MR. FITZGERALD: That's correct. MEMBER COLLINS: And they were simply designated I guess is the fight word, when you use a subdivision map as lots whatever they were, 49 and 50 in the subdivision map, and so right from the very beginning, it looked like one lot and the only thing that happened for many years, I went back and looked at old tax maps, for many years the plot, those two old subdivision lots were shown on the tax map as a single lot called 9.1. And then, only four years ago, when the Tsatsos sold another lot that they had under that same deed, it was down the street around the comer, sold it to (?). At that time, they apparently asked the tax folks to split this property that we're looking at tonight, into two tax lots and called them 9.2 and 9.3. But they didn't do anything else like change the title before the exemption on the old subdivision was ran out. This troubles me. I don't think there ever was a merger. I think it was a single lot right from the beginning. And, if you didn't have a merger then under out law you can't waive the merger. They could however ask for a subdivision and that's just sought of where I'm coming from and I'd like your reaction to that. MR. FITZGERALD: Well my reaction is that I initially had I don't know the answer to that question. However, when I was going to the Building Inspector for his decision on this matter, he reacted in such a way that brings me here tonight to ask for a waiver of merger. But I don't know what the details are of the transactions that may have occurred the time for the sale of the merged separate lots. Page 4 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold MEMBER COLLINS: OK, I'm just going to have reserve my view on this because as I said, I know I'm being picky but I don't like to march ahead and waive something that I don't think legally happened. I'll pass. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Just for the record, that particular lot that Ms. Collins was referring to was neither adjacent nor contiguously as parcel. MR. FRITZGERALD: Yes, you're right, MEMBER COLLINS: Yes, the one that was sold in 1996. MR. FITZGERALD: Let me ask you this. If the Building Inspector says, that they're merged and the Zoning Board says, that they're not merged, how do we resolve that? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Well we certainly can reverse the Building Inspector's determination under the merger. I don't think we've ever done that but a there's a merger law would go with it in there, but it's certainly something you can discuss with the Town Attorney. Let me reserve that decision and we'll go on to Mrs. Tortora. MR. FITZGERALD: Ms. Collins is saying that although they appeared to list it separately on the deed, - CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Lot 22 and lot - MEMBER COLLINS: No, no on the deed. He's talking about the deed. CHAIRMAN GOEHRiNGER: Oh, you mean the old one? Yeah the old one. MR. FITZGERALD: Lot number 1 and lot number 2, CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: On the subdivision MR. FITZGERALD: And lot number 7. The fact, it would seem to me, that the fact, that 1 and 2 happened to be next to one another is again what brings us here tonight and it would seem that that would indicate that they were merged and in fact, that they would be listed on the same deed I don't see it necessarily indicating that they're not merged. MEMBER COLLINS: Let me just really just reiterate and make clear what I'm saying. I think there's a single lot that was purchased in 1973. At that time comprised two lots that were laid out on the old subdivision map but to me, what the Tsatsos and this is open argument, I'm just telling you how I read it, what the Tsatsos purchased was a single lot which they then held for the next 27 years and they now look at it and say, gee we really thought these were two lots and we could sell them separately and so they're coming in Page 5 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold and saying, that under our merger law- the lots have merged and they're asking for a waiver of merger but I don't think that what happened was a merger. I think they bought a single lot in the beginning. And if that's the case, then technically we can't waive the merger. Technically what they'd be asking for is to split the lot. Split a single lot and subdivide it. That's the fuss that I'm making. MR. FITZGERALD: That ( ) would seem to me as to what was in their minds in 1973 because I think the deed refers to lot #, lots number, this, that and the other thing. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Of the subdivision map? MEMBER COLLINS: Yes, of the subdivision map. That may be the way to argue it. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Don't leave we have two more people to grill you. Hold on. Mrs. Tortora. MEMBER TORTORA: There is no deed description and no (). However, on the Suffolk County Real Property Tax Map, in 1990, there was a lot (inaudible). It is definitely only one lot. 200 x 3??, lot size, 147 x 132. It was only one lot in Suffolk County Real Property Tax Map in 1990. MEMBER COLLINS: Well that was the case up until199-, the end of 1996, they had - MR. FITZGERALD: They had merged lot ( ) as one lot? MEMBER TORTORA: No. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: They could appear ekher way to be honest with you. MEMBER TORTORA: If it had been separated usually we would have seen it separated on the tax map. If it had been used, two separate lots in 1990, we would have seen it on the tax map. This isn't 100% but usually you would. MR. FITZGERALD: I understand what you're saying but if they were merged, which we're trying to undo, then they would appear as one lot. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The concept that Ms. Collins is coming up with Mr. Fitzgerald, is an issue that we kind of really need to discuss with the Town Attorney. We have not discussed it with either he or she at this time because the Board is so inclined to do so. So in effect I think we're saying, is it may take a little while to come up with a Page 6 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Heating Transcripts Town of Southold decision, which I think is to everybody's benefit because we certainly want to seek counsel. MR. FITZGERALD: OK. CHAIRMAN GOEHR1NGER: We'll mm over to a, we'll go over to Mr. Horning. MEMBER HORNING: I'll restrain myself from any questions. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The grilling is over Sir. We'll see what develops throughout the hearing. We thank you. MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is there anybody else 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 hearing reserving decision until we discuss it with the Town Attorney. I offer that as a resolution. MEMBER DINIZIO: Second. See Minutes for Resolution. Page 7 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold 6:37 P.M. - Appl. No. 4850 - ALLAN & HELEN TUTHILL This is a request for a Variance under Article XXIV, Section 100-244B, based on the Building Department's July 21, 2000 Notice of Disapproval to locate a proposed addition with a reduced front yard setback, at 28+-feet. The existing front setback is shown at 33+-feet from the cantilevered roof and 35+-feet from the dwelling. Location of Property: 295 Albo Drive, Laurel, N.Y.; County Tax Map No. 1000-126-2-9. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Good evening ladies and gentlemen. How are you? I haven't seen you in a little while. How's retirement? What would you like to tell us about your application? I could ask you to use the mike, both of you. MR. TUTHILL: It's a ranch house and when you open up the front door you walk fight into our living room right on to the wall to wall carpeting. This of course makes a mess if the weather is bad on the outside. So the foyer would eliminate that and also my wife is into crafts so we're hoping to put closets in there, put clothes out (), things like that so that will create another closest in the house to put the crafts in there and that's basically what we want to do. CHAIRMAN GOEHR1NGER: Now the total size is what? MR. TUTHILL: 5 x 7 x 7. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: 5 x 7 x 7, OK, good, which leaves a 28 foot setback to the road.? MR. TUTHILL: Right. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Now you will agree with me, that Albo Drive does not have any curbs? MR. TUTHILL: Right. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: There are tums in that road? MR. TUTHILL: Right. CHAIRMAN GOEHR1NGER: So it gives you the impression of being maybe a little bit closer than what it really is, or in some cases a little bit farther away from what it is. How did you arrive at the 28 feet? MR. TUTHILL: It was on the survey. Page 8 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The survey itself. So all you did was take the 7 away from the 35 and that's how you got the 28? MR. TUTHILL: Right. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Good. We'll start with Mr. Homing. MEMBER HORNING: I don't have any questions. CHAIRMAN GOEHR1NGER: Mrs. Tortora? MEMBER TORTORA: I just want to make sure that I measured from the right place because I did drive by and I kind of looked for the established setback but couldn't find it because the road does curve so much. MR. TUTHILL: Yeah, and I think I wrote down what the total across the street. MEMBER TORTORA: It's hard to judge. It's difficult because the way the street curves out. But anyway the only thing I just want to make sure that 28 feet is from the house, right? MR. TUTHILL: Yes. CHAIRMAN GOEHR1NGER: The house to the property line, with a front property line? MR. TUTHILL: Right, with the addition. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: With the addition. MEMBER TORTORA: Correct. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The 35 is what exists now. Ms. Collins? MEMBER COLLINS: The front wall of your house is not a single plane? MR TUTHILL: Right. MEMBER COLLINS: That part of it is about 2 feet further out towards the road than the other and I gather, that the 33 fort setback to the road now, is from that extended wall? And you're addition is going to start at what I call the indented wall and come out 7 f~et and come out 5 feet from the extended wall. MR. TUTHILL: That's right. MEMBER COLLINS: I got the arithmetic right, thank you. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Mr. Dinizio? MEMBER DINIZIO: No, no questions. Page 9 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold CHAIRMAN GOEHKINGER: No questions. We thm~k you very much. We'll see what develops throughout the hearing. Whose applications is this assigned to? George? Is there anybody else would like to speak in favor of this application? Anybody like to, yes Sir? MR. EDWARD WILLIAMS: Well I would as the builder, that's about it. I'm the builder and we would like to finish the siding on the house because the Tuthills have been waiting you know three to four months for a Building Permit. You can see the three sides of the building. We would like to finish the job. How soon will you be making a decision Sir? CHAIRMAN GOEHINGER: I would really like to one tonight. This is highly irregular, but since a we could see that happening, OK. MR. WiLLIAMS: I appreciate that Sir. We would like to proceed. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is there anybody else would like to speak against the application? Seeing no hands I'll make a motion granting this application as applied for. Oh, I'm sorry, you make the motion. MEMBER TORTORA: I'll make a motion granting as applied for. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Second. See Minutes for Resolution. Page 10 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold 6:53 P.M. - Appl. No. 4852 - HELEN GARVEY This is a request for a Lot Waiver as provided under Article II, Section 100-26 to unmerge County Tax Map Lot 1000-115-12-7 from 1000-115-12-8. On May 30, 2000 a Notice of Disapproval was issued stating that CTM 7 merged with adjacent Lot 8 pursuant to Section 100-25A of the Zoning Code for the reason that the lots were held in common ownership. Location of Property: 550 Deep Hole Drive, Mattituck, N.Y. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is someone available? Could you state your name for the record please, Ma' am. MS. GARVEY: My name is Helen Garvey. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Hi, nice to meet you. What would you like to tell us? MS. GARVEY: I requested a review by the Board to return whether one of my two non- conforming ( ) lots on Deep Hole Drive, in Mattituck, qualify for a waiver unmerge to ( ) of Article II, Section 100-26 of the Southold Town Zoning Code. If I could, give you a little bit of history? The lots were created in 1956 when the Gillespie brothers parceled offtheir land in ¼ acre lot sizes. This lot size conformed to the Zoning Code of that time and that was 44 years ago. In 1956 my parents purchased lot number 8 at the same time Mr. Richard Mulhern purchased the adjoining lot from my parents, lot number 7. 27 years ago, in 1973, I purchased Mr. Richard Mulhern's lot. It has always remained. undeveloped nothing has been built on it. 18 years ago in 1982, my father transferred his developed land to me. Over the years I have always received two separate tax bills. It was two pieces of land. Only recently and quite accidentally, did I find out that in the nineteen eighties, there was a change in the Zoning Code that affected my two separate ¼ acre pieces of property. The Zoning Code was changed to say, that the adjacent lots that were non-conforming in small size and owned by the same person would be merged into one piece of property until that property reached ( ) 40,000 sq. ft. size. I was never informed of this merger of my two lots. My tax bills have continued to be sent to me for each individual lot. My two lots are still shown separately on tax maps. When my father transferred his land to me in 1982, there was never any mention of any problem concerning the merger of these properties since I've already owned the adjacent lA acre Page 11 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold lot. I think that the town owes each taxpayer clear precise individual communication whenever there is a major change in the status of the taxpayer's property. This would prevent incorrect assumptions when one is involved in personal estate planning or financial planning decisions. There are several reasons why I'm requesting the waiver. First the 'A acre size lot that I would like to have unmerged is consistent with the size of the lots in the neighborhood. Of the 25 lots shown on the Suffolk County Tax Map, in that 1000-115-12-2 through 24, 12 of the neighbors have lA acre lots, or slightly smaller. 2 of the lots are slightly more than ~¼ acre. This makes the majority of 14 small lots in this area. There are 10 lots between .40 acres and .61 acre and there is one lot that is 3¼ of an acre. None of the lots have achieved that desired one acre lot. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Can I just stop you one second? MS. GARVEY: Sure. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Are you referring to the water side Ms. Garvey? MS. GARVEY: Yes. The second, in my opinion the waiver would not result in a significant increase in the density of the neighborhood. In this section of the lots 2 through 24, there are only two pieces of vacant land, a '/4 acre lot, tot #10, and a .46 acre lot, number 21.1. My lot #7 would make the third if the request to unmerged was (). Incidentally, when I filled out my application back in July, I cited another lot and that was a ~/~ acre lot number 12 and I cited it as a vacant lot. However, only very recently (inaudible-static). CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Excuse me. Again clarification. That is the present new house that is being built? MS. GARVEY: Correct. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: On 127 MS. GARVEY: On 12, yes. CHAIRMAN GOEHRiNGER: Thank you. MS. GARVEY: My third mason is listed rather briefly. My purchase of this lot, number 7, was an investment for the real estate. The purchases made in this ( ) and was strictly 0 the Zoning Code in effect, 1973. When I bought the property, I knew as all people who buy land that I could always build on it, leave it in its natural state, or, sometimes in the Page 12 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southotd future, sell it. When my father transferred his lot number 8 to me in 1982, I presumed that if my financial situation ever changed, I could sell lot #7 and hold on to lot #8 and continue to enjoy the natural beauty that we do now on Deep Hole Drive. The merger conditions concerning non-conforming adjacent lot has made me realize that unless I can () my neighbor to unmerge those two lots, I may- someday be forced to sell all of my property on Deep Hole Drive. To be faced with this kind of a condition in any area where so many of our neighbors are perking with living on ¼ acre lots did not (). In other words if this merger remains in effect, I believe I am being unfairly asked to take a substantial financial loss and I think it could be detriment. Thank you. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Deep Hole Drive does not receive town water at this time is that correct? MS. GARVEY: I have seen that there are pipes going through. I mean (inaudible). We will (inaudible-tape is too statically). CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: And the lot that is directly to your, I'll refer to northwest I would assume is, a double sided lot. Is that correct? In other word it's two lots. The 100 foot lot? MS. GARVEY: That's right. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Who presently owns that property? Ms. GARAVEY: That would be Dr. Lawrence Kelly, formerly the Warren property. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Right. That's that long ranch that is built lengthwise on the property. Is that correct? MS. GARVEY: Yes. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Alright, we'll start with Mr. Dinizio. Mr. Dinizio? MEMBER DINIZIO: Can I just ask you how you found out that your lots were merged? MS. GARVEY: We were thinking of possibly putting up a sun porch and we decided that we really didn't know what the rules were about how far out we could go and this started it. We went to Town Hall and this was when we heard about this long since past merger of our property. We decided we can no longer want to put up a sun porch but we were facing bigger problems (inaudible). MEMBER DINIZIO: That's all I have. Page 13 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Ms. Collins? MEMBER COLLINS: No, actually just out of curiosity, I gather that the house on lot #8 is a, you use it as a weekend retreat. MS. GARVEY: That's right. MEMBER COLLINS: No, I think that Mr. Dinizio's question suggested your situation is not an unusual one. I have nothing further. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Ms. Tortora? MEMBER TORTORA: No questions. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Mr. Horning? MEMBER HORNING: Ma'am you did an excellent drive presented the case. How did you get the piece that your father owned in nineteen something like that? MS. GARVEY: In 1956 he bought it (inaudible-statically) MEMBER HORNING: Were you an only child? MS. GARVEY: No, ! was not an only child. I come from a large family, and actually my dad (tape is too statically). CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Before you leave I just wanted to tell you that there will be no decisions tonight. Our next meeting will either be the 27~ or the 5th of October, OK? Yes? MS. GARVEY: I rather not lie to you. My brothers and sisters are not residents of New York State. I see them every summer, they love it here, but I'm the one that lives here. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. Is there anybody else 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 hearing reserving decision until later. MEMBER COLLINS: Second. See Minutes for Resolution Page 14 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold 6:54 P.M. - Appl, No. 4851 - WILLIAM S. RYALL, JR. This is a request for a Variance under Article XXIV, Section 100-244B, based on the Building Department's July 24, 2000 Notice of Disapproval to locate as new- dwelling with a setback at 25 feet from the front property line. Location of Property: 915 Soundview Drive, Orient, N.Y.; County Tax Map No. 1000-13-3-5.2. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Would you state your name for the record Sir? MR. RYALL: William Ryall, I'm the owner and the applicant and the architect for the proposed structure. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: What would you like to tell us? MR. RYALL: We purchase this lot, which is an unbuilt home on Soundview in Orient a year ago from the neighbor to the east and we intend to build a house on it and by redesigning the houses ( ) land, which are very, very steep we realized that within the buildable envelope that covered the most difficult case to, it's a very difficult area to put the house right in the center of the lots there. The lot is sold as ½ acre, it's non- conforming R-40 and it's roughly a rectangle of 153 x 140 with a rectangle bite taken out of the west corner to allow the neighbor's driveway access to the road. So in looking at the land we see that there's ( ) because there's an elevation 80 at the top ( ) from 80 to 55 or 56 with a ( ) on it. But it's deeper right in the center of the lot. So if we were proposing, I was proposing to place the house closer to the road than the 40 foot front yard setback ( ) so it would be 25 from the front yard from the front lot line. It's a private subdivision dated from 1940, it's not a public private road and they put a lot of land on both sides of that road and so in fact by the location I'm proposing to put a house, the a one corner, which would be closer to the road would be 52 feet ( ) so actually it would be greater. It really would be greater than what we got back. It would require a. Also we talked to all of the neighbors about this and not to Johnson. Johnson is to the east but he also owns the farmer's field to the south and he agreed to the development fights to Peconic (). He hopes to keep it open forever. So by located the house closer to the road, it's farthest away, farther away from the open, open land ( ) and also by putting it farther Page 15 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold up it gives him more privacy from his house to the east. It also moves the house maybe 15 feet farther from the house to west, the Linker's house. So they would have more privacy and then the third house that would see this new house would be the Franklins. They're the ones that are annoyed and they're really very, very high up, I mean there land goes up to more than 100,110 feet above sea level. So they would actually see less of the new house as it's closer than to see over than to looking down at it (). I just gave the cards I got back from Linker and Franklin. Johnson is out of the country for a couple of more weeks but this was part of his idea to do this anyway, So there's not going to be any depth (). CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I have no objection. We'll start with Mr. Homing. Any questions of this gentleman? MEMBER HORNING: Do you know who owns the property on the south east side of the right-of-way? MR. RYALL: Yes, the a, you mean the right-of-way of you mean the private road or - MEMBER HORNING: Yes. MR. RYALL: Yes. Mr. Franklin is to the north - MEMBER HORNING: I mean right in front of your property? Are we ( ) this area than the ( ) there's plenty of room on the other side of the right-of-way. MR. RYALL: Oh, it's owned by something, it's a Brown Hills Association, which is basically owned by all the property owners up to their cabin trail. They may pay ( ) but I mean it's offthe road. MEMBER HORN1NG: Then how much would the road be expanded if it there was a plan to expand part of the road? MR. RYALL: I don't think it would ever be expanded. I don't see any particular reason why they would do that because this subdivision this is one of the last two lots of the whole subdivision as it is laid out in 1940. One of the last two, on 0's farm. So it's pretty much fixed and they're all non-conforming lots, here to say they're not going to be any divided awkward land and build another house up there. There will be one more house out of this land. MEMBER HORNING: It looks to be about 80 feet wide. Page 16 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold MR. RYALL: The lot? CHAIP~MAN GOEHR1NGER: You really couldn't tell George. The road itself is relatively narrow. MEMBER HORNING: I mean the right-of-way for the road. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Yeah, it's not going to be any change anyway. MR. RYALL: I don't know. IVIEMBER COLLINS: No, it's 50. CHAIRMAN GOEHR1NGER: There would never be a change. 38 feet wide. 38 foot pavement. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Mrs. Tortora? MEMBR TORTORA: No, when I went up and visited the site I was looking at, where you proposed to the placement of the house and I think you have a very nice (), the topography of the land and the placement is very (). CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Ms. Collins I see you measuring. MEMBER COLLINS: Oh, yeah, my only question was the same one that Mr. Homing asked and actually after I went up and looked at the property I knew the answer, which is the asphalt road is 10 foot wide, when one car at a time and it's clear that nobody up there is going to want to widen that, and my only question was who owqaed that 50? It is 50 feet wide. I just measured it with my ruler 50 foot wide laid out right-of-way from which your setback is measured. MR. RYALL: 'Right. MEMBER COLLINS: But it's owned by Property Owners Association that land. So no- one, is ever going to do anything with it - MR. RYALL: No. MEMBER COLLINS: And you're going to have the - I mean it's clear in fact, that everybody's driveways and what not are wondering all over the place there. MR. RYALL: Oh, yeah. MEMBER COLLINS: No, I have no problem. MR. RYALL: It's very rustic. Page 17 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold MEMBER COLLINS: Yes, I was very glad to have a reason to go up there and snoop around. I have nothing further. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Mr. Dinizio? MEMBER DINIZIO: I have no questions. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Nothing? MEMBER DINIZIO: Nope. CHAIRMAN GOEHKINGER: OK. Thank you very much we'll see what develops throughout the hearing. Is there anyone else would like to speak in favor of the application? Anybody like to speak against the application? Whose is this? MEMBER COLLINS: Mine. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You want to move it along? MEMBER COLLINS: Yeah, I didn't draft anything because I was too busy doing other things, but I have no problem moving to grant it as requested. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: OK. You're offering that as a resolution? MEMBER COLLINS: I offer a resolution that we grant the variance as applied for. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Second by Mr. Horning. All in favor? See Minutes for Resolution. Page 18 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold 7:03 P.M. - Appl. No. 4856 - JOHN WOLLEBEN This is a request for a Variance under Article III, Section 100-33C based on the Building Department's July 14, 2000 Notice of Disapproval to locate an accessory in-ground swimming pool at less than fifty (50) feet ~rom the fi-ont property line, required in the case of a waterfront parcel when it is located in a front yard. Location of Property: 705 Bridge Lane, Cutchogue, N.Y.; Parcel 1000-11-2-8. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Ms. Mesiano, how- are you? MS. MESIANO: I'm fine, how are you? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Good, thank you. Would you like to start or should we start with you? MS. MESIANO: I'll start. Mr. & Mrs. Wolleben would like to construct this swimming pool on their property. After reviewing the layout of the property we believe that this is the most reasonable location for a swimming pool. The back yard is really out of the question for the placement of the pool because of the proximity to the wetlands, the 10 foot contours 0 of the DEC jurisdiction which really is not enough room landfill of that line to place the pool and it was unlikely that the DEC would grant a swimming pool within the limit of their jurisdiction. So that leaves the back yard out for the placement of a swimming pool and as your well aware the code (coughing) exceptional structures to be placed in the front yard in the event the waterfront lot. This property unique in that we do have two front yards, that is a corner lot. Bayberry Road is the more traveled of the two roads originally is a narrower lane and Bridge Lane started the property provides the most reasonable location for the pool. The variance that we're seeking is a 15 foot variance, for half of the swimming pool. If you notice the line on the survey denotes the edge of the road. That's the line from which we measured because we don't have confirmation of any other line such as the tie line is in fact the property line. We have been unable to establish that so take the most conservative approach, that's the setback from which we measured the setback. The Bayberry Road side is hard because of the slope and part because of the fact that there's a very small area available without Page 19 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold disturbing the present vegetation and the driveway doesn't offer us any alternatives nor does the south side (), That really leaves us the north side, the Bridge Lane side. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I understand your presentation, it just, I really don't know why, I, realize this maybe reversed of what you were saying, OK? MS. MESIANO: H'm. H'm. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: But if it were me, I would of put the swimming pool over in that area, closer to Bayberry Road, and within the actual triangle of where the two roads come together. What did you say the reason why they didn't want to put it over there? MS. MESIANO: Well there's more of a slope there ( ) as you go towards the road, so there is more of a slope. It's pretty well established and the driveway takes up a good portion of that section of the land. They didn't want the pool up near the comer of the road. The vegetation that's along Bridge Lane grows denser and therefore provides a good screening for that pool area and Bridge Lane is suppose to be the less traveled of the roads there. CHAIRMAN GOEHR1NGER: H'm, h'm. OK, I'll reserve to the Board. We'll start with Mr. Horning again. MEMBER HORNING: Was there any thought ofhax~ing it in 5 or 10 feet closer towards the house away from Bridge Lane? MS. MESIANO: We were hoping to be able to maintain it in this area. Bringing it much closer to the house makes that, makes the off step from the comer of the house pretty close and moving it forward more towards the easterly puts it very close to the driveway. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Do you know how close to the house it is now? MS. MESIANO: No. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. MS. MESIANO: It's only about 12 feet off the corner of the house. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. Thank you George. Mrs. Tortora? MEMBER TORTORA: No. That's actually what I was concerned. I was trying to figure out why you didn't stay on the Bayberry side? MS. MESIANO: Well across of the driveway. Page 20 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold MEMBER TORTORA: What about tucking it in between the two. MS. MESIANO: But having it down on any of the two roads, the pool (). CHAIRMAN GOEHR1NGER: We'll go on to Ms. Collins? MEMBER COLLINS: Yeah, you know the reason of course that we're all noodling on this is that one of the things that we're supposed to determine is that you need a variance. That there is no reason feasible alternative and that's why everybody is exploring why not this and why not that. I think I want to get clear in the record here, your answer to the question about why not go in closer to Bayberry? Not up to the corner but actually closer to Bayberry and I think your point was, that that would put the swimming pool out beyond the driveway rather - MS. MESIANO: It would be beyond the driveway. On my sketch that I've just marked 0 might be 0. I can see that the area on the Bayberry Road side is there's not a great amount of space. We'd almost be needing a variance. I think we would be needing a variance if the pool were on the Bayberry Road side because of the curved swimming pool of the driveway, it may be too heavy to setback from the driveway so I'd be coming for a variance. MEMBER COLLINS: I think that's probably true. Thank you. MEMBER DINIZIO: I think I agree with you there too. You would need a variance on that side. MS. MESIANO: I have a sketch if you'd like to see it. MEMBER DINIZIO: I have no other question. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You mean you have it sketched in that other location?\ MS. MESIANO: I have a sketch (changed tape) CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Alright. We'll see what develops throughout the hearing and thank you. MS.MESIANO: Thank you. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is there anybody else would like to speak in favor of tlfis application? Anybody like to speak against the application? Seeing no hands I'll make a motion closing the hearing reserving decision until later. Page 21 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold MEMBER TORTORA: Second. See Minutes for Resolution. Page 22 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold 7:11 P.M. - Appl. No. 4858 - ARTHUR & FRANCES LEUDESDORF/W. MANDEL This is a request for a Variance under Article XXIII, Section 100-239.4A. 1 based on the Building Department's August 18, 2000 Notice of Disapproval to locate a new dwelling at less than 100 feet from the bluff. Location of Property: 1700 Hyatt Road, Southold, N.Y.; County Tax Map Parcel 1000-50-01-005. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Good evening Sir. Mr. Cuddy, how- are you? MR. CUDDY: Fine, thank you. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: What would you like to tell us? MR. CUDDY: Charles Cuddy on behalf of the applicants who are here Mr. & Mrs. Leudesdorf. Their arclfitect Mr. Sherwood is here and the surveyor Mr. Ingegno is also here. This is a lot that except for the bluff requirement, we need all of the setback requirements for a house. The problem that we have is going back to an old word, "practical" difficulty because this lot slopes enormously and not just a little bit but as you get towards the street it drops down so it looks like there's a hole at the street corner and that holds those two distance in the lot. So to place a house so it won't essentially be in the hole, we're trying to move it forward so we can get to a point of 70 feet from the top of the bluff. Doing that will not put the house further than any other house in that line because the line goes east and west so at least at that level it is not further forward than a 70 foot line. The architect is here to testify as to how he came to place the house that virtually the same thing is going to be said, and that is that to place it in any other 0 would put it so far back that when you look out the first floor window, you'll be looking essentially into a wall in front of you which would be the bluff area. So what we've done and we've submitted a copy of the extra design because to bring the house to a point where it first was ( ) to look out (). I believe under the circumstances that this meets the requirements in that there's really no undesirable change in the neighborhood. It's all residential anyway virtually built out on lot nearly the same size as this house. We don't really know of any other way that we can build a house unless we as I say, put it back further towards the road that would essentially place (). It's tree lined and is sanded permanently. It's not a significant variance in a sense that we're asking 30 feet - 100 feet and it certainly is not a self-created situation. We didn't create that hole that's there. But Page 23 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold in order to use this lot, the Leudesdorfs need to have a variance to build their house and I'd like the architect to discuss that issue. MR. SHERWOOD: My name is David Sherwood, the architect, as Mr. Cuddy said, and ( ) would be to gain use of the water and the topography that we've got on this piece of property starting at the town 0 about 58 feet to the top 74 feet to the top of the bluff and then it slides back down to an elevation of 58 at the street level, which isn't within say 10 feet from the hollow on the street side of the top of the bluff. Now the required 100 foot setback if we were to adhere to it would be elevation of the first floor of the house and about elevation 64 if you turn back your top of the bluff elevation of 74 is about 10 feet below the top of the bluff line. So you wouldn't get any water view from the coastal line of the house. And also ( ) and the water problem in that the water from the topography ground has to be dry back to the house. So if we are allowed to bring in more foliage to the top of the bluff you can actually create a little more affect on the ( ) and the house could be constructed at a height of 76 feet ( ) and give them use of the water and it would also give them enlargement area around the house both would be direct water away from the bluff and not be (). CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: What's the anticipation of an over cut on this house? How much of an over cut do you need in the construction and what is the actual anticipation of any foliage that would be removed between the house and the bluff?. MR. SHERWOOD: Well for construction purposes only in order to get a foundation down we would require probably 20 - 30 feet of ( ) dig the hole itself. So if we in addition to the house as it's shown in the site plan it's 70 feet from the top of the bluff. In order to get the wet base of the foundation in the ground since you have a backup you need to build around the hole. Other than it would probably require in the neighborhood of 30 - 35 feet of open area out towards the drift and that would then be you know, landscaped with grass and so forth so that is the area definitely where you can put the house. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I had a discussion with the potential owner today, and they tell me that there were test borings done and that underneath the clay built straddle whatever way you want to put it, it is sand. We are concerned with and have always been Page 24 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold concerned with heavy equipment on the top of these bluffs. Can you kind of give me an indication on what kind of equipment would be used? Certainly, no cranes are available. MR. SHERWOOD: No, no, behind the trees on the site, I think there are trees there probably 8 - 10 feet ( ) that go down between the hollow ( ) up in the area where the house is to be located as the builder told me large trees. So I would imagine that a bulldozer and backhoe would be required ( ) through the area. (). CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The reason why I'm asking that question is, as you know we have an active application approximately two houses down. In that application and in looking at the neighbor's house just to the west of it, there was a slide on the lip of one of those bluffs, and therefore it is, both of them are a concern to us that the least amount of heavy equipment can be and should be used. Let me just direct my thoughts to an application we had in Mattituck of which we required one medium size backhoe and that was the extent of it on the overall height and magnitude of the equipment to be placed during the construction of the swimming pool and I think the Board is probably in the position to deal with the same aspect of it in this particular case. So we would appreciate from you if you could possibly speak to a contractor or the contractor and get back to us in reference to the size and weight of those particular types of equipment that may be used on this particular project bearing in mind that we are aware. I did walk with the neighbors of the adjacent property owner that has the application before us for a swimming pool and a deck and I did see that particular a it's very difficult to visualize that one and when your at the beach and to find out which one that is associated with when your walking on the road, on the private road. So although I couldn't specifically say, I would say it is within two pieces of property of this particular piece of property although we did get a favorable review from Soil & Water Conservation which we did give Mr. Leudesdorf today. But notwithstanding that fact, we do have an ultimate concern on this situation, OK? Do the, any Board Members have any questions of the architect? No, we thank you Sir. So you'll get back to us with that, thank you. MEMBER COLLINS: Did Mr. Cuddy say the surveyor is here? CHAIRMAN GOEHR1NGER: Yes. Mr. Cuddy, you did say the surveyor is here? MR. CUDDY: Yes. Page 25 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Ms. Collins has a question for the surveyor. Your welcome to continue the project however or the presentation I should say. MR. CUDDY: I just want to make one point if I could. Mr. & Mrs. Leudesdorf have no problem whatsoever minimizing the type of activity that's going to be on the site as far as backhoes. They're willing to have the minimum type of excavation put in the building line, that even at a cost to them. They understand the problem. I also would say that as far as drainage goes, we're aware of that situation and through their architect to redesign the pool, they will make every effort to make sure that there is no problem with the drainage. I point out to you that the hole is really on our lot. The other properties are higher so this should not be that type of problem. Finally, I just would like to say that I would hope that the letter from the Soil & Conservation that it would be part of the record because that indicates that they have found that there's no problem with this particular site, that is building at this particular site as we proposed. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I think one of the questions I had of the architect which he may or may not of know is what is going to actually happen to the hole after construction is completed? And he did tell us that the over cut is going to be 25 or 35 feet and I shouldn't say over cut because we're not saying we're saying we're going to regrade in 25 to 35 feet, which means that 35 feet of it to the lip of the bluff is going to remain completely dormant as it exists today. Is that correct? MR CUDDY: I believe it is and I think if you look on his proposed design it shows the slope of the frontage. They have slope and the depth of the dirt that's there. Did you ask me, for Ingegno to come up? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Yes, Ms. Collins wants to speak to him. Mr. Ingegno how are you tonight? MR. INGEGNO: Fine, how are you? CHAIRMAN GOEHR1NGER: It's always nice to have you here. MR. INGEGNO: Oh, thank you. It's a pleasure to be here. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Ms. Collins would like to ask you a question? MEMBER COLLINS: I just wanted to ask while we have you here and on the record, how should I put it, I guess assure us, that the survey that we have in evidence that' s, you Page 26 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold know, yours and signed by you, June 19th, revised August 15m, revised August 28th, that that is it. Your clients submitted a so-called preliminary working drawing in which they were first sketching out where the house could go. It is not in any way a plan of an exact house. And it was drawn on a survey of yours that was carefully marked, you know, this is not an official survey, and crossed out your signature. My problem was that on these two surveys the bluff is in two very different places, and obviously I'm not a bushwhacker or surveyor and I wasn't out there trying to figure out where the bluff really is and I'd just like to be assured that the bluff is where your survey that we're looking at as I said updated August 28th says because we have this letter from Soil & Water, it says, well a, you know they don't have a problem with the condition of the bluff but they mentioned in passing that the a, they said something about the a, contour shown on the survey is not accurate represent the slope. Well that doesn't have to do where the top is particularly. It appears that there is a substantial ravine on the west side. So I'd just like you to assure us that this survey does place the bluff where the bluff really is because the house is going to be 70 feet from that spot. MR. INGEGNO: That's correct. The initial survey when we did it, we went out there an did the topographical survey but when the drew it, the draft person incorrectly connected the wrong ( ) and we went out and reexamined it and we compared the contour line and as they looked to the actual slope of the land to pick out where the top of the bluff was and we adjusted it to a refit the contours and the actual consistence conditions of the slope. MEMBER COLLINS: I just wanted some assurance of that in the record. MR. INGEGNO: Sure. MEMBER COLLINS: Thank you. MR. INGEGNO: OK. Anything else? MEMBER HORNING: Yes. And what survey would the Soil & Water Conservation fellow have had when he wrote the letter? MR. INGEGNO: He most likely would have, in the very beginning we did a by survey with just a rectangular house just to start getting the permit process going. I don't know if they've been given these new additions of the survey but most likely if they gotten Page 27 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold them right from the beginning, they've gotten one that had a fictitious house on there to get things going. MEMBER HOKNING: Is there a time ( ) - BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: Excuse me that was done - CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: It was August, it was, the August. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: It was the last of the day. CHAIRMAN GOEffRINGER: Yeah, I was a little slow on sending this letter out. We thank you Sir. Mr. Cuddy we need to ask you another question. Mrs. Tortora needs to ask you a question. MEMBER TORTORA: ( ) did have no exceptions to conditions to keeping all your grades (). MR. CUDDY: (inaudible) CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: And of course that would be achieved by placing hay bales around. MR. CUDDY: No, actually ( ) CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: In a horseshoe effect. MR. CUDDY: Yes. CI-IAI~ GOEHRINGER: OK. Is there anything else you have in your presentation Mr. Cuddy? MR CUDDY: No. CHAIRMAN GOEHR1NGER: No, OK, we thank you. Is there anybody else would like to speak in favor? Yes Ma'am. This is in favor? I need you to use the mike. Just state your name for the record. MS. TOEDTER: I'm ( ) Toedter. I just don't understand exactly ( ) where the marker is, if there is a marker? (), it's a comer house. CHAIRMAN GOEHK1NGER: Why don't we do this. We'll recess for about 10 minutes and Mr. Cuddy and the architect and the surveyor will explain the process to you so that you have the understanding of it. MS. TOEDTER: We have markers on it ( ) the position of the house (). Page 28 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Let them explain that to you OK? So we'll recess approximately 10 minutes and we'll go on to the next hearing. OK, I offer that as a resolution, 10 minute recess. This is not a recess of the Board. This is a recess of tNs hearing. MEMBER COLLINS: Second. Page 29 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: We must continue tonight. We have a very lengthy situation. I need everybody's attention. We're going on to the next hearing. 7:28 P.M. - Appl. No. 4857 - ROBERT GAZZOLA/JOHN ZOUMAS This is a request for a Variance Article XXIII, Section 100-239.4(1) based on the Building Department's August 16, 2000 Notice of Disapproval to locate a dwelling at less than forty (40) feet from the front property line and less than fifty (50) feet from the rear property line, at 750 Cedar Drive, Southold, N.Y.; Parcel 1000-78-9-5.1. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is there someone here for that? Mr. Zoumas how are you? MR. ZOUMAS: Good. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: How'ye you been? MR. ZOUMAS: Not bad, you? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You made out alright with that other house where you had the drainage situation all that? MR. ZOUMAS: Beautiful. CHAIRMAN ZOUMAS: Oh, wonderful. We're happy to hear that. What would you like to tell us about this application? MR. ZOUMAS: Well the front yard is 40 feet and we're asking for 38 and the back yard is 50, we're asking for 47. All the houses that are on there, they're all basically you know, 45, 48, front yard. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: OK, I'm showing the width of this house is 27 feet. Am I reading this right? Plus 6. MR. ZOUMAS: Well the house is 35. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Yes, plus 6 and the house is 35? MR. ZOUMAS: Right. 27 and then you got like 8 (). CHAIRMAN GOEHRiNGER: OK. So the house is total 35? MR. ZOUMAS: Right. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Alright. Mr. Dinizio any questions of the builder? MEMBER DINIZIO: No. Page 30 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold CHAIRMAN GOEHRIGER: Ms. Collins? MEMBER COLLINS: I'm not sure whether it's a question or a comment. It's an undeveloped piece of land, normal size for the neighborhood and the code has what are fairly reasonable requirements for that size piece of land and this is a variance looking for a couple feet here and a couple feet there and since it's a, you're starting from scratch I don't really see why you need a variance. Why can't you build a house to satisfy the code? MR. ZOUMAS: Why I need a variance. Well the customer that I have they can't build a houses on the house that they'd like to build on. All the houses in the neighborhood if your familiar with them, they always go, they all have like 38, one of them has a 35 foot front yard. MEMBER COLLINS: Yeah, you have put it into evidence. You've put it in. We've seen that. The setbacks on that block and there 38, 40, 40, 51, 40, 35. So that doesn't really support a strong argument that you should be able to kind of chisel off, excuse me, I didn't mean this, that to sound the way it did. But you should be able to chip away a couple of feet because that's the house the owner wants. You know, it's just not clear to me, when you're designing from the beginning why you have to have a variance. MEMBER HORNING: Sometimes the dimensions of the building and the dimension of lumber. MEMBER COLLINS: I want an answer George. MEMBER HORNING: Oh, yeah, yeah. MEMBER COLLINS: The one I got was that this is the house the client wants to build. MEMBER HORNING: From a design. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: OK, that's the answer. MR. ZOUMAS: Correct. MEMBER COLLINS: Alright. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Mrs. Tortora? MEMBER TORTORA: The only thing is that you had said the rear yard should be 47? MR. ZOUMAS: Right. MEMBER TORTORA: The Notice of Disapproval says 45. Which is it? Page 31 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold MR. ZOUMAS: I have 45 for the bay. I don't know if they count the bay as - MEMBER COLLINS: It's a bay window. CHAIRMAN GOEHR1NGER: It's a bay window. MR. ZOUMAS: It's a bay window. So I don't know if they count that as part of the house. They usually count actually from the foundation back. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Like a cantilever. MR. ZOUMAS: Right. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The cantilever is not an overhang and it would say an overhang referring to the overhang of the roof. It's not the same as the overhang of the roof. MEMBER TORTORA: Well my only comment is that you haven't really demonstrated a requirement for the variance in my opinion, because if the client builds the house they want, and you want two variances, that's not one of the things that I would take into consideration as paramount under the guide lines that we look at. So, that's my only comment. CHAIRMAN GOEHR1NGER: Mr. Homing? MEMBER HORNING: No questions. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Any further comments Mr. Zoumas? If we come up with another figure will you take alternate relief if we come up with a foot, or, two in both ways, or something like that? Something in the decision? MR. ZOUMAS: I don't know if they might, just that the customers can, you know, their busy designing this house, you know, ( ) they built the house to the neighborhood. We do have a house, that we're fronting out 35 feet so you know what I'm saying, I'm just. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Alright, we'll see what we can find. I'm going to go back up there an look anyway. MR. ZOUMAS: OK. CHAIRMAN GOEHR1NGER: Alright? We'll have a decision for you in a little while. Have a good night. Don't leave until I close the hearing. Is there anybody else would Page 32 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold like to speak in favor? Anybody like to speak against? Seeing no hands I'll make a motion closing - yes Sir? MR. DALTERAS: I have something to say about the a - CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I need you to use the mike. Please state your name for the record. MR. DALTERAS: My name is Carl Dalteras and I have the property that is to the rear of that. It's not exactly on the side of the house but in the building of the lot. There's a situation that is a that particular lot, it's situated a lot higher than our lot is but against it and the house has been there for 25 years and they would have a drainage problem because that obvious Cedar Drive in the summer which ( ) from that street down all the houses are pretty much on there that slopes, pretty great slope, similar to theirs. My only question would be if I'm not in favor or denial the size of the house, that's yours to deal with. It means that there could be some sought of a ( ) up there, in the construction there, because there's a lot of foliage here, you're going to have a - CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Problem. MR. DALTERAS: A problem. But it's not so much a problem as a gaining (). You've got hay bales and things like that. You know, ( ) you dig a hole, you've got bulldozers running around for the drain ( ) and have stuff flying around, that's understandable. question what happens in the winter there actually is the real problem because when you get a frost in the ground, maybe one day it decides to rain, you have a waterfall. So if we could possibly ( ) the builder here and offer him, and/me, or, maybe we can have these discussions together to be able to put a lead some sought of an area where the some part on my side and some part on his side, be sought of not cleared. Right now there's a lot of road and trees and cliff, shrubs, junk fight there. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Well you have the fight builder because we had a problem with a piece on the other side, which is on the north side of Kenny's Road and this gentleman came up with a very good plan, alright, and so, I'm sure he's willing to work with you, OK? MR. DALTERAS: Yeah, but my problem is located to the rear right on the property. Page 33 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You live directly in back of this piece property? M~. DALTERAS: Right. CHAIRMAN GOEHR1NGER: OK. MR. DALTERAS: And the well is almost on the line. CHAIRMAN GOEHR/NER: Right. MR. DALTERAS: So I'm also concerned with the well creating any problems. The combination from pesticides and fertilizers, you know. MEMBER TORTORA: We can put it on as a condition of a granting this variance that it would be better before we developed these conditions if perhaps you and the builder could work out some kind of an agreement and we could reduce that to a condition. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: To writing. MR. DALTERAS: I would rather do it that way and have all parties be happy with it. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Are you willing to meet with him Mr. Zoumas out in the hall? MR. ZOUMAS: But the one thing that he said about 30 - 35 feet, We just did at 25 feet. We're still going to have another 22 at least between the house and you know. And our front we're going to have 20 feet of wood and we're not going to use that. We don't care ( ) the property. MR. DALTERAS: Well that was my concern. MR. ZOUMAS: When you put down those 20 feet of property I can guaranty that, you know it's going to be about 25 feet behind the house, not even that. MR. DALTERAS: I know. I understand that. But you're going to sell this house. We're talking with the owners - CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Sir, you have to communicate to the Board. MR. DALTERAS: I understand what the building ( ) it would be cleared as soon as possible in any situation it might in his liability of any drainage towards construction. The concern is after construction that the house that is there now bought by somebody else - Page 34 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Let me just say, what Mrs. Tortora is requesting or suggesting in this. What we wanted to do was allow you to have time to discuss it with the builder. It appears that the builder is not going to cut to the property line, OK? MR. DATERAS: Right. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: So therefore within the decision that we make, all we very simply do, is place within that decision that the rear of the property, the rear of the house, the wooded area not be removed so as to cause a drainage problem for you. That goes along with the property. MEMBER TORTORA: Not to be removed. That regardless of the ownership that, no drainage can go into your line, period. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Now let me just explain something to you. Once that goes into the decision, alright, if him, his owners, subsequent owners during the period of the time that you live there, goes along with the land. So therefore, you must inform the Building Department, if there are any specific changes in that because they are the Code Enforcement Agency of this Town, alright. I mean you certainly can mention to them that this is the restriction on that particular piece of property, alright because of typography. So is that alright with you? MR. DALTERAS: That's fine. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: So we'll embody that within the decision. MR. DALTERAS: So then pretty much other do I have to do anything else at this point? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: No. Thank you. MR. DALTERAS: Thankyou. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Alright, any further comments on this? Seeing no hands I'll make a motion closing the hearing reserving decision until later. MEMBER TORTORA: Second. See Minutes for Resolution. Page 35 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold 7:41 P.M. - Appl. No. 4858 - LELrDESDORF- (continued) CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Mr. Cuddy is there something that you would want to tell us or would you like me to go to the next door neighbor? MR. CUDDY: No, I think there is (inaudible-static) CHAIRMAN GOEHR1NGER: OK, great. Is there anybody else would like to speak against this application? Good evening Sir, would you state your name ~r the record. . .6 . the property contiguous to the property where the bluff collapsed a few years ago. CHAIRMAN GOEHR1NGER: OK. ..~: And had to be relocated on the beach. Our concern is very simple. We are concerned about the stability of the bluff. It occurs from a number of people, don't worry the bluff is safe. That's not my point. I've been there quite a while and more than once the bluff collapsed. That's the story. Really what I'm concerned as to one of the questions I had earlier, when you said OK, we're talking about a 70 foot, 30 foot rather, encroachment to the bluff. We don't have a set drawing (). It would be on your list of the things that there would be nothing behind that house, either as far as a studio or along a patio or call it whatever. And where the house is located on the proposed location the elevation does go up like it has. Something is goner have to be cut out of ( ) whatever it is. ( ) my question is, what was the next thing the town has that ( ) ? You were probably just talking another 30 feet. So now we're talking 60 feet instead of 100 feet more than half what it was. One question that just came up to me, one issue that was raised this evening and I disliked the answers. My opinion on this and not an architect is this hole that was talked about as you come down to the private road to the end of the property, the opposite end of this line. Now the property, the elevation is up here, and then there's a hole like that to populate the roadway. Well it's not really a hole if somebody looked at the property. Yes, it is a little depressed hole on the road but it's far from ( ) hole I would say it came from the house there. I'm not sure that that's completely true. I guess my real problem here tonight is I don't know why you're here. There have been many hearings on the grading encroaching to the bluff. People, house, they want to add something, they Page 36 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold want to change something, they want to replace something, their piers fell down or something, so you hear them to see what they want to do. You say, well, I don't like it maybe you do like it. Since it's there I may, I'm entitled to a hearing. Didn't we have an issue where we had a vacancy? A very nice piece of property. Is it buildable? Yes it's buildable. When someone coming in to buy and saying, I would like to build, but I wan't to build where [ want to build and even though there's a rule in there that says, 1[ shouldn't do it, well, so what, you know, let's go ahead and see if we can bend the rules or someway to get a variance. That bothers me. I'm buying into the property "as is". I know that there are restrictions. Maybe the restrictions shouldn't be there, but they are. And whether or not I can see out you know, you have a lovely view on the first floor of your house, well when you're buying in and the view isn't there, you're not missing it you'll see it from the second floor. That's all I have to say and thank you for a your time. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You're welcome. Anybody else would like to speak? Yes Ma' am. Please state your name for the record. MS. JUDGE: My name is Diane Judge. I live on Hyatt Drive. I live two houses to the west. A few months ago I spoke to (). I voiced my opinion. I don't care. I have nothing against swimming pools. I have nothing against houses. I have an enormous as Mr. Alay said, fears of this intrusion on the bluff There are rules why this is ( ) over and over and over. This lot was purchased with the problems very obvious. Why, who, did someone say to them don't worry, buy the property, we'll get a variance? Is that what you people are all about? Getting variances when there are rules to bend, there's erosion and more serious this property is once again on a higher level. You're going to have runoff problems all through there, If anything, I want to say, and everything Jack Alay has said, I agree with him over and over again. I said the first time, there are about 30 houses, 30 lots between the. paved street and (). If you grant one variance the second one whenever it is, two months later, you've only got 28 more to go. That's all I can say. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I did speak to you about the reasoning for placing this law in place and when it was placed. MS. JUDGE: I don't think so. Page 37 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Well I'm going to tell you again that when this law came before the town, I did caution the council person that brought this law in and I did tell him at the time, that I had a concern with the pre-existing lot that were out there. He said to me, the purpose of the law was to have you, meaning me, and the rest of the Zoning Board of Appeals to look at these applications. In looking at the applications, we can place normal reasonable restrictions on these applications. I can replace, I can place the restriction of the size and the temperament and the magnificence of the equipment that goes on this bluff. I can cause all of the drainage to be placed on the property. I can require terracing, which is a reasonable request, OK, and I assure you that we have been relatively successful in all of these situations and we have been successful because we have architects coming in and presenting this. We have good surveyors like Mr. Ingegno and many more coming in. I do understand exactly what this gentleman was saying in reference to this intrusion. But at the same time there has to be an equal balance and the majority of the houses that are on this bluff are in the 70 foot range. MS. JUDGE: You mean the grandfather range? CHAIRMAN GOEHR1NGER: Well, yes, that's true, OK, and I think that if we take an active look, at this particular site, I don't personally think 70 feet is unreasonable. What I am cautioning the attorney is, please do not come back for an application for a swimming pool two years hence, because if I'm on the Board it's not going to be granted, alright, and that's it, and in no way should malign these applicants on that basis. 70 feet is it. We're not interested in substantial improvement passed that point and that is the reason why I asked the architect on what the cut is going to be in reference to not the cut for the foundation but the overall area to be dealt with and in some cases the bluffs have to be adjusted so that the water runoff runs towards the house and not towards the bluff, the width of the bluff. So I just wanted to explain that to you because - MS. JUDGE: That is the problem. The drainage out to the sound - CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: That's correct. MS. JUDGE: The lots to the dune. Page 38 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Dune, right, but I just wanted to explain that to you and because I asked Paul Statenberg at the time why he developed this law and that was the reason why. I'm not speaking to him now. He still lives in Cutchogue and I discuss it with him every time I see him and his wife around and he will tell me that a - MS. JUDGE: Why don't you rescind the law? CHAIRMAN GOEHR1NGER: We don't rescind the law because this law allows us to put reasonable restrictions on the applicant and certainly nothing more than what the applicant will want when he and she, he and/or she, or both, want to build a very expensive house on a very pretty piece of property, that's for sale, and we do have a concern. There's no question about it. But in Mattituck we require a very small piece of machine to go on there, and it's worked out relatively nice and I just wanted to mention that to you. MS. JUDGE: Thank you. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You're welcome. Alright, any other questions? Any other statements regarding this application? Seeing nothing, I will make a motion closing the hearing reserving decision until later. MEMBER COLLINS: Second. See Minutes for Resolution. Page 39 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold 7:50 P.M. - Appl. No. 4859 - ROBERT INGRAM This is a request for a Variance Article III, Section 100-33 based on the Building Department's August 1, 2000 Notice of Disapproval to locate a proposed accessory garage in the front yard, at 600 Shipyard Lane, East Marion, N.Y.; Parcel 1000-35-8-5.8. CHAIR_MAN GOEHPdNGER: Good evening Sir. Could you state your name for the record? MR. INGRAM: My name is Robert Ingram, the applicant. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Pleasure to meet you. What would you like to tell us about your garage? MR. INGKAM: As you can see it's a corner lot. You say that I have two front yards. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: No, we don't say that. The Building Department said that. MR. INGRAM: I would like to move it. I'd like to be able to move the garage 15 foot closer oppose to the 45 foot setback. So I can take 24 off`the back yard. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You don't think that from a point of view or the present day automobile which is 21-1/2 feet long, I mean you could own an MG Sports car, that I'm just saying, you don't think that farther back it would be a little bit more advantageous to you? MR. INGRAM: No. CHAIRMAN GOEHRIGNER: No, OK. MR. 1NGIL~VI: If you have my survey it shows the a, my house farther in the back and it has an 11 foot porch wrapped around so you really don't want to look at the garage in the back. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: OK. We'll start with Mr. Dinizio. Any questions of Mr. Ingram? MEMBER DINIZIO: No, I have no questions. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Ms. Collins? MEMBER COLLINS: No, that was my question. It's clear, what you want is you want l 5 feet of your garage to be forward of the house line on Mariner Lane side and I guess Page 40 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold the question is why? And your answer if I understand it, is that to put the garage entirely behind the house line would mean the garage would be too close to your porch and it would spoil you rear yard. You haven't considered putting the garage further gee I can't get my directions straight here. I guess I would call it west further out in your backyard towards the undeveloped land. MR. INGRAM: No, I don't want to do that. We really want to put that far west. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Southeast. MEMBER COLLINS: Southeast, no, it's got to be west. MR. INGRAM: And that's going to be developed land sooner or later. MEMBER COLLINS: No, I was talking about the house now as proposed, this garage is 30 feet from Mariner Lane and about maybe 20 - MR. INGRAM: 20 feet from my property line. Exactly 45 feet from Mariner Lane. MEMBER COLLINS: From the property line, agreed, agreed, I understand. 30 feet from your property line and about probably about 20 to 25 feet from the porch. MR. INGRAM: Right. MEMBER COLLINS: And I guess I was questioning the feasibility of placing it not 25 feet from the porch but 40 feet from the porch. I think I know your answer and that is 'the garage is too far away from the house. MR. INGRAM: Well, I (). MEMBER COLLINS: Because it is a real possibility. OK, I'm lecturing. I'm not asking for explanation, excuse me. CHAIKMAN GOEHRINGER: Mrs. Tortora? MEMBER TORTORA: The only question I have is what (inaudible-noisy) on the map that ! have as a rear yard where you want you can park in the front yard, park in the rear yard? MR. INGRAM: Right. MEMBER TORTORA: MR. INGRAM: Yeah. You can also be a side yard? MEMBER TORTORA: It's not going to make any difference to me. Page 41 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold MEMBER COLLINS: But if he puts the garage there, then that's going to make it the rear yard according to the Building Department (). MEMBER TORTORA: You know, I looked at the property and I also ( ) to the road, at least I thought was the porch. I say the porch and understand why you don't want your garage on top of the porch. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: George any questions? MEMBER HORNING: Would you accept alternative relief if the Board do not like (inaudible-static) more in line with the line of the house? Would you accept alternate relief or would you rather have to deal with denial? MR. INGRAM: I mean I would like the garage placed ( ) in either way. That's why I'm here, if I'm understanding your question right. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: That is a question, yes. Well [ think the reason being that it's a 3 to 5 vote. So it really depends upon sometimes some people want it 35 you know based upon what a normal setback may be for that area and we would hate to see you lose it for 5 feet because we can garner three votes at 35, it's going to be 35. If we can't garner 3 votes, you know, I don't know what to tell you. Is 5 feet one way or another that much of a difference? I'm just giving you as an example. MR. INGRAM: 5 feet one way or another is not a big thing. I would prefer the 30, but. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Let me just explain to you. We had a similar situation in Nassau Point, OK, very nice people and they then came back, and it you know was unfortunate because they didn't want to alternate it and we ended up with exactly with what we would have ended up with anyway (changed tape) we're not trying to sell you something but we're trying to tell you that sometimes it's important to say yes I'll accept alternate relief and that's the situation as it stands. So we'll see if we can get close to your figure. MR. INGRAM: OK, thank you. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Alright? Just don't leave until I close the heating in case somebody else wants to speak. Is there anybody else would like to speak in favor or Page 42 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold against this hearing. Seeing no hands I'll make a motion closing the hearing reserving decision until later. Member Collins: Second. See Minutes for Resolution Page 43 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold 7:58 P.M. - Appl. No. 4826 - WILLIAM PENNY III (Continued hearing) Variance for proposed building width greater than 60 ft. wide. This is a corner lot located at the south side of CR 48 and west side of Youngs Avenue, Southold, N.Y.; Parcel 1000-. 55-5-2.2. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is there someone here for Penny? Penny Application? No-one here for Penny? William Penny, Appeal No. 4826. OK, we'll pass it. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSK]7: You mean to the end of the night, when you said pass it? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: No, we'll pass it and have it on the next hearing. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: You mean recess it? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Recess it, yes. MEMBER TORTORA: We have it open? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: No, William is an ongoing hearing. MEMBER TORTORA: I know but - BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: You still need a resolution to open it. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: So I'll give you a resolution. Resolution to open it and resolution to recess it in the same resolution. BOARD SECRETRY KOWALSKI: Could we have a date with the recess please, October 19th? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: October 19th. MEMBER TORTORA: Last time up on this. CHA1RMAN GOEHRIGNER: Yes, last time up. We're closing it and that's it. BOARD SECRTARY KOWALSKI: Last time up, OK. MEMBER TORTORA: No more recess. Very, very costly. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Yes. All in favor? MEMBER COLLINS: Second. See Minutes for Resolution. Page 44 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold 7:59 P.M. - APPL. No. 4861 -LESLIE GAZZOLA This is a request for a Variance under Article XXIV, Section 100-239.4B, based on the Building Department's August 29, 2000 a Notice of Disapproval for a proposed two- story deck addition within 75 feet of the bulkhead. Location of Property: 495 Elizabeth Lane, Southold; County Parcel No., 1000-48-5-2. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Good evening Sir how are you? MR. GAZZOLA: Fine. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I had the distinct pleasure of going back down to your property tonight. You might have seen my car in your yard and I apologize. MR. GAZZOLA: No, I didn't. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: When I went down there I forgot one application and forgot about the other one so a, we're here. What would you like to tell us? MR. GAZZOLA: I don't think it's an unreasonable request. It's a small addition. There is already a cement porch on the side. I'm only going down another 4 foot. The bulkhead has a 10 foot ( ) buffer behind it. So there's no issue of environmental concern and none of my neighbors have any complaint. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Now is this a first story deck, or is it a second story? MR. GAZZOLA: There will be children, the first story and then the second floor there's going to be within the confines Of the first. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: OK. So when you say, proposed deck, k's proposed deck and balcony? MR. GAZZOLA: That's right. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: OK. Now as per the garage. Is that within our jurisdiction? MR. GAZZOLA: No, I'm moving the garage back. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You're moving the garage back. MR. GAZZOLA: That's what I'm addressing. I'm giving you a variance to move it up a few feet. Page 45 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I don't we advertised it. MEMBER COLLINS: No, we xvere told that was - CHAIRMAN GOEHILINGER: No, we didn't get the proof of that. OK, so it's strictly the - MR. GAZZOLA: It's strictly the deck. CHAIRMAN GOEHR1NGER: OK. Alright, any questions of this applicant? Anybody? MEMBER COLLINS: Oh, yeah. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Oh, yes, OK. Mr. Dinizio, any questions? MEMBER DINIZIO: No, I have no questions. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Ms. Collins? MEMBER COLLINS: Yes. We never saw anything other than the survey with the building sketched on it. And I know that the text in here somewhere refers to this as a two-story deck. But it's basically a one-story house. Are you expanding? You're going up? MR. GAZZOLA: I'm putting in a second floor, MEMBER COLLINS: In other words, the house is going to get a lot bigger. MR. GAZZOLA: Well not necessarily that but it's going to be about 450 sq. ft. on top. It's going to come to a total of about 1700. But you are going up and so this deck. MEMBER COLL1NS: MR. GZZZOLA: Yes. MEMBER COLLINS: So this thing is, this thing, the structure of element for which you need the variance is going to be what, at the ground level it's going to he an open sought of roof over porch? MR. GAZZOLA: No, it's going to be an open balcony on top. MEMBER COLLINS: It's going to be balcony coming off of your new upstairs? MR. GAZZOLA: Right. MREMBER COLLINS: And at the ground level? MR. GAZZOLA: It's going to be a, it's fairly dose to the grade level and it's going to be about - Page 46 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold MEMBER COLLINS: So it's just going to be like decking? MR. GAZZOLA: Exactly. And it's not going to be high enough to have a rail on the decking. MEMBER COLLINS: OK, so in terms of appearance what you're going to see is at the ground level an open deck close to grade and then one-story up a balcony extending out from the house and you refer to it as going only there was some mention of 4 feet or 5 feet. MR. GAZZOLA: There's currently a bay window- there, which is going to be removed and there's also a cement porch to the right. What I said, was that we're only going 4 foot further than what is there. MEMBER COLLINS: Than what is there. I wanted to get that straight and that's the little rectangular porch of cement. That's going to go? MR. GAZZOLA: Right now that will probably stay. I'll probably replace that with wood also, 50 feet in the new setting. MEMBER COLLINS: OK, I just wanted to get the picture clear because we had no elevation drawings at all. Thank you. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Mrs. Tortora, questions? MEMBER TORTORA: No questions. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Mr. Horning? MEMBER HORNING: No questions. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Don't leave until I close the hearing, OK? Thank you. Is there anybody else would like to speak in favor or against this application? Yes Sir. Which way are you speaking? MR. DELITERAS: In favor. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Oh, OK. You got to state your name again for the record. MR. DELITERAS: Paul Deliteras. I'd like to speak favor. You know ( ) that far away from the ( ) is something that is not offensive to anyone and possibly something that the Zoning Board could do some good with. It's very simple. Page 47 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you, any other comments? make a motion closing the hearing reserving decision until later. MEMBER TORTORA: Second. See Minutes for Resolution. Seeing no hands I'll Page 48 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The next hearing I am not sitting on so the Board has requested a three minute recess at this time and we will wrap up for everybody's benefit Appeal No. 4839 is postponed until the next regularly scheduled meeting and therefore re-calendered so there are approximately two additional hearings before we get to Appeal No., and Special Exception 4855, 485, OK? So that's where we are. So we will take a short recess. 8:18 P.M. - Appl. No. Appl. No. 4828 - (Rehearing) ROBERT D'URSO & R. OVERHULS/M. DeLUCA, Contract Vendee This is a request for a Lot Waiver as provided under Article II, Section 100-26 to unmerge Lot 1000-106-6-35 from 1000-106-6-34. On May 8, 2000 a Notice of Disapproval was issued stating that Lot 34 merged with adjacent Lot 35 pursuant to Section 100-25A of the Zoning Code. Location of Property: 1645 Bayview Avenue, Part of Lots H & I on the Map of Shores Acres Mattituck, N.Y. CHAIRPERSON PRO TEM DINIZIO: Mr. Olsen? MR. OLSEN: How are you? First let me thank you for reopening the hearing. The last time the hearing was on I had an appointment and on behalf, my son David gave presentation, my presentation but I'm really here to see if I can clarify any inference that the Board may have. When my client who was a Contract Vendee first contacted me on this issue, I think he used the word slam-dunk that I thought that's what it would be. Just to put this in perspective. This property was purchased in two separate deeds by our' Contractor Vendors back around 1987-86 to be two tax bills but of course there was a merger at that time according to the 1995 Merger Law, which was not in effect at that point. They then sold off tax lot 35. The Building Department granted a Building Permit for Tax Lot 35. The house was built and a Certificate of Occupancy was issued for that house, and that goes back to 1987-88. In the meantime this former common owner is still getting tax bills for tax lot 34, is paying the bills and then besides he wants to sell that piece 12 years later thinking he had a valid zoning lot because the other one was granted a Building Permit. In the meantime in 1995, the Merger Law came into effect and the Building Department said, because you have common ownership back around 1987, Page 49 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold before we can give you a Building Permit for the piece that you own all by itself since 1985, you have to go to the Zoning Board for a Waiver of Merger to a law that didn't exists when all this took place. I went through my office records and just by chance I did happen to have a copy of the 1981 Tax Map showing Tax Lots 34-35. I also have copies of the old tax book going back to 1982, showing that these two lots had separate tax map numbers and actually it looks like they may have been in separate ownership at that point. So I'll submit these things for the record. After the hearing I obtained a transcript of it, and there was some talk among the Board Members at. the hearing about, well we may not of have a single and separate, I mean we may not have a Merger Law in effect back in the late eighties but there was a Single and Separate Ownership Law. These first of all are lots, parts of lots on Shore Acres which is a very old filed map, filed back in the late nineteen twenties. Of course there was no Planning Board, there was no Building Department and so on in those days. But I, what I did, I asked the Building Department to make a list of all Building Permits issued for new construction, new houses from 1983 which is the look back date that the Merger Law goes to up until 1988 which is why we got rid of one of these pieces. My son and I then spent two-half days I would say do~vn the basement of the Building Department, with the Freedom of Information form file going through all, try to go through all of these files to see if the Building Department on any of these files before they granted a Building Permit between 83 and 88 ever ask for a single and separate ownership search, on anything. I did not go through every file. It would be humanly impossible for the legal fee that I'm getting on this but in any event I went through a lot of files. There's nothing them. I then talked to Gary Fish, the Building Inspector. I spoke to Georgia whose been in the Building Department probably longer than anybody. I spoke to Connie Bunch whose job for the past two years has been to pull the files up from the basement when she gets a request from an Abstract Title Company and everyone of them has told me, Gary, I can tell you fight now, you're wasting your time, your wasting David's time, we never, ever asked for a single and separate ownership search before the Merger Law came into effect in 1995. So if there was a single and separate ownership requirement, it was totally ignored, nobody ever paid any attention to it. I'll give you the list. The Building Permits were issued for new Page 50 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold construction, for new houses are highlighted in pink. Now, I've done a number of, Waiver of Merger Applications and there are standards, in the Code is the type of things that the Board has to look at. Again you have to remember that if this law came into effect in 1995 and these applicants have not had two lots side by side since 1987-1988 but I went through all the waiver applications that this Board has entertained and I would just like to and quite frankly the bulk of them have been granted and a lot where you have these old subdivision maps where people had two pieces together, they were not, these lots were not on an excepted list but by the way, Shore Acres use to be on two whole excepted list. I think 1956 and 1971. After that it was dropped and my reason I think is that probably the town felt that by that time Shore Acres had already been developed and there was no reason to keep it on the old exception list that the code had. But I would ask the Board to consider the Licari decision, Appeal No. 4539; the Pirrera decision, Appeal No. 4785; John Harrison, Appeal 4455; Eva Mullins, 4413; Marie Tober, 4432; Melissa Spiro, 4540; Joseph Melly, 4508; William Beebe, 4395; Theresa Kilduff, 4366; William Schol[ 4427; Loretta Senko, 4363; Lewis Shanks, 4362; Susan Utz, 4372; Lydia Lajda, 4631; Ruth Leonard, 4541; Eleanor Nagy, 4501. All those files this Board granted a Waiver of Merger and the reason that, that it's even, I don't even understand why this is here but if we have to be here I think if you look at the reasons in those decisions apply them to this. In those cases and a lot of those files, the applicant still owned two lots or more that were contiguous. In this case this applicant hasn't had two lots together since for 12 years. I'll give you a copy of all of these decisions that I just stated. A question came up about economical hardship. Part of my original application submitted to this Board, a copy of the contract of sale, that the owner have entered into with Mr. DeLuca who happens to be here today, I believe the price is $44,000. If this Waiver of Merger Application is denied, this property becomes worthless, and if that's not economical hardship, I don't know what is. You might as well give the neighbors a park and that doesn't seem fair to me. Another question came up about the topography of the property, whether it was suitable for building? Granted it's not a flat piece of farmland. There is a slope to this property but first of all it makes it interesting that a lot people like building on something that is not perfectly flat and if that was one of the standards in whether or Page 51 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold not the Board can grant a Waiver of Merger Application, that the property has to be flat, well then it should be in the code. It is a consideration that you have to deal with when you make the decision as to whether we're going to adversely affect by building on this property any creeks or wetlands, water areas, we're not near the water but we're a good ways off of it also. I did also make a list as to what parcels have been built upon; what are still vacant in the area; the general size of the lots; and that's what I'm trying to find out by the new maps. There aren't many vacant pieces. It's a, I've highlighted in pink all of the pieces around this parcel that are improved. Now this is again the Shore Acre area and that's probably why it was left off the excepted list, when it was finally dropped from that list. Because it's all built up and this piece of' paper sets forth all the tax lot numbers in the area, whether it's improved, unimproved and the size of the parcels. It looks basically the only two vacant pieces on the north side of Bayview Road is of one lot that I'm left with, that's tax lot number 34. There might be a couple of others but basically it's all built up. The other thing I did was I asked the Assessor's office to make me copies of all the property cards to the surrounding lots up to the north and surrounding our lot and I'll do that for you too. My son told me, don't get too mired down in the detail but in any event this is for the record. I'm open to questions if the Board has any if, I can clarify anything. Mr. DeLuca, the purchaser is here. I think he would like to speak to you. He also has a builder. His builder is here. If you have any question about how they intend on building on this property because of the contours. I don't think there's any purpose of my reiterating what we did the last time and that is the standards that the Board has to look at unless you want me to. CHAIRPERSON PRO TEM D1NIZIO: Well lets first see if any Board Members have any questions of you, Mr. Olsen. George? BOARD MEMBER HORNING: No, no questions. MR. OLSEN: Also I do have just for the record, a letter from the architect, architectural firm, Suter 86 Suter dated August 31, 2000, addressed to the Contract Vendee. "Dear Mr. DeLuca; I've reviewed the topographical survey of your property on Bayview Avenue, Mattituck and feel that it is very much a buildable lot. We would propose installing the garage on the ground floor with living spaces above it. I hope this clears up any Page 52 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold questions." Unfortunately we were hoping that he could come tonight but he couldn't so, I'll submit the letter for the record. CHAIRPERSON PRO TEM DINIZIO: Lydia do you have any questions of Mr. Olsen? MEMBER TORTORA: No, I'd like to review the information that he submitted. CHAIRPERSON PRO TEM DINIZIO: Lora? MEMBER COLLINS: It's more a comment than a question really. I think my inclination originally was that this case is rather different from the merger. We have a steady drumbeat of merger cases as you know. And almost always it's a family. Someone died, property passed into the hands of an inheritor and nobody realized that now Iow and behold you had adjacent pieces of property in the same ownership and trouble ensued down the road. This is different because these lots, obviously were purchased by Messrs. D'Urso and Overhuls as an investment back in 80, whenever it was they bought it, and I guess that made me feel a little differently about it. That perhaps people who were buying it for an investment I should have been somewhat more open. But I will have to say that I have thought about this case since the earlier hearings and I find it very convincing that when Messrs. D'Urso and Overhuls sold the adjacent lot in 1988 I guess to Allens, that the Allens had absolutely no trouble at all getting Building Permit. I mean the whole issue just never came up and to me that's quite convincing that the matter was simply not present on anyone's radar and that they are caught ex-post. MR. OLSEN: Just for the record. I did not represent those people when they purchased. MEMBER COLLINS: Right, I realize that. MR. OLSEN: Of course hind sight great and probably what I would have recommended at the time was Mr. D'Urso you take one piece and Mr. Overhuls you take the other piece because someday there's going to be a Merger Law in the Town of Southold. MEMBER COLLINS: I just sought of wanted, since I was kind of on the record as being a bit skeptical because they were professional, not professional, you know, they were investors rather than family members willy-nilly falling into this ownership that I feel a lot more sympathetic now but one comment I would make and that's why I think we should hear from the builder, is in the Section 100-26 it gives us the authority to waiwe a merger. One of the things that we're suppose to find, not just think about but actually Page 53 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold find, is something about the natural details and character of the land not being significantly changed to alter and the problem with that provision is the only place in the code where we're told to worry about that. I mean everywhere else where not told to worry about that. But I'd like to hear what the builder has to say about that sought of question, how- are they going to treat the land? MR. OLSEN: He's here tonight. CHAIRPERSON PRO TEM: I'd just like to make it clear, you know, as far as concerning this particular law and you know, town's responsibility in notifying a property owner in that I felt all along when this law was first discussed in a what they called back then Code Committee, I had made a suggestion to one of the council person that they should spend $50,000 and study each individual lot just to find out who is going to be affected by this law and that didn't go over too well. So basically we're ending up here with is people receMng probably their only communication from the town and we can attest to that merely is a tax bill that verifies to them in my opinion that these lots were single because they get two tax bills and nothing that said to the contrary. So I certainly am sympathetic to your (), I would ask about the last time we were presented with a picture of a house with a porch that kind of guttered out. Is that a deck? Does that go to these people's property? MR. OLSEN: No that was not part of my presentation. BOARD SECRETRY KOWALSKI: We didn't have a picture. CHAIRMAN PRO TEM DINIZIO: No, OK, well someone from someone else and I was just wondering if the swing set and the deck or if on this property or - MEMBER COLLINS: Oh, that was the neighbor. MR. OLSEN: It's the neighbor. The house next, tax lot number 35, which was the piece that was sold in 88. CHAIRPERSON PRO TEM DINIZIO: Right. MR. OLSEN: Obviously a house was built and people have been living there. I belie'ye that it came up at the last hearing that their swing set is on or partially on the wrong piece of property. It happens to be on our property. Page 54 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold CHAIRPERSON PRO TEM DINIZIO: Can I ask this question also maybe the builder will be the one who knows. When they built this house, the house next door, did they excavate that land? Did they cut that out to build? It appears to me like. MR. OLSEN: The owners here, I think. CHAIRPERSON PRO TEM DINIZIO: Maybe they can answer when. I just thought you might know or the builder might know. Alright, lets hear with your side first and then we'll go, we'll hear from the other side. I guess you want to speak to the builder Lora? MEMBER COLLINS: I think we should hear from the builder, and his conception of how, he's going to tackle it. MR. DeLUCA: Good evening. My name is Michael DeLuca and I live in Rocky Point for the past 12 years. I'm married with two children, a 12 year old and an 8 year old, two girls. I first want to thank you for having me speak to you, the Board and the neighbors of Mattituck. I thought it was a beautiful dream and I still believe in that dream yet. It's been a very long haul to bring my family here and build this home. I built my own house 12 years ago. I only like to live on a small (). I don't like farmland or flatlands and that's the reason why I'm here trying to purchase this lot because it's my dream house, my dream lot and for a nice family (). I can bring my builder up for a long haul. I was told to go get a Board of Health approval, which was approved two months ago. I was told to come here and I'm still trying. I'd like to bring up my builder, in case you would like to speak to him. Would that be OK? CHAIRPERSON PRO TEM DINIZIO: Yes we'd like to speak to him. MR. DeLUCA: OK. MR. CKISCITO: Hi, my name is Ralph Criscito. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: Can I have the spelling of your last name please. MR. CRISCITO: C R I S C I T O. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: OK, thank you. Page 55 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold MR. CRISCITO: Any questions? MEMBER COLLINS: Well we just wanted a sense of how you expect to install, erect a house on this - MR. CRISCITO: Do you have a copy of the survey with the house on it? MEMBER COLLINS: I guess we do. I guess the question is, how much earth is going to have to be moved? How much change is there going to be in the topography of the land? MR. CRISCITO: We're going to keep the house frontage 40 feet from the road, then set the house right there going back. The backyard appears just a little bit about 20 feet. There's a little slope in the back that's suppose the water came off each side of the house. There might be very little retaining wall on each side, depending upon how much dirt we that can use to change the grade on the side to build up the earth and ( ) the house. MEMBER COLLINS: OK, Mr. Chairman, I think this gentleman has basically kind of referred us to the survey, this drawing that was in our file, which shows the proposed house and it shows it sitting on the land and I think what you've told is that's what it ts, and that's good for the record. Thank you. CHAIRPERSON PRO TEM DINIZIO: Anybody else have any questions of the builder? OK, thank you very much. Is there anybody else would like to speak in favor of this application? Anybody against? Ma'am? MS. WILLIAMS: Hi, my name is Kathy Williams. I own the property that the Board named, lot 34, and 35. Mr. Olsen spoke of the meager pay that we've been receiving and I've had the fortunate experience ( ) meager speaking of Business Law and he said the single and separate search was overlooked since day one. I confess ( ) day one, ignorance of the law is no excuse, in lacking enforcement of the law is no excuse. Another subject I like to propose is the hardship. On the hardship I've read over the contract of Mr. DeLuca and that pending Building Permit so if the Building Permit is not issued I don't feel there's any hardship on Mr. DeLuca. Number two, Mr. D'Urso I feel that economic hardship is there. He's an investor. I've never seen the man since I've lived there. I've never seen him at one of these hearings. As far as I'm concerned I stated at the last Page 56- September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold meeting I work for the Stock Market that would be the investor C. Dimetrian, with every investment comes the possibility of a risk. Mr. Olsen also cited many cases, much case law. I want to reaffirm that every application you read and every application you do them separate. Mr. Olsen also stated that the slope is interesting. He said something about 40 foot setback. As far as I'm concerned 5 foot of the land, is owned by the county. You're talking about a 45 foot setback. The builder said that there might be a small retaining wall. I've spoken to many gentlemen that told me, we're talking about you know a retaining wall the size of a grade wall the kind that people have mentioned to me. That, that set concerns about my property and the slope contour of my property. The builder just said, that there would be a slight change in the grade. The law states that any change in the grading would not allow the unmerger of the property. It is stated that there would be a small change in the grade. The Merger Law was set up to leave open space, When I purchased my home it is my dream home, I don't think it would be a good idea to you know, personally I don't want to have a house 12 feet from my property, secondly I don't think a 45 foot setback house with a deep pitch. I don't find that's interesting will make the children walk in past the house to go to the bus stop. I'm worried about the concerns later on down the road when this house is built the pitch is high and between this property and our property it's caving in. I know that's separate. That's a building issue but I think we should look down the road at what's going to happen in the future. As far as excavating prior to myself moving in I'm not going to leave this out. The house was already established (). CHAIRPERSON PRO TEM DINIZIO: Thank you. MRS. WILLIAMS: Thankyou. CHAIRPERSON PRO TEM DINIZIO: Anybody else? MR. HOUSTON: Good evening, my name is Alvin Houston. I'm the adjacent property owner and since we have the builder here tonight on the survey that I received, it shows the footprint of the house but footprint runs from one grade to another. I guess my question at the moment is, what is the proposed grade level of the garage floor? CHAIRPERSON PRO TEM DINIZIO: Well does the builder have that answer? Anything else? Well maybe you can just give us all your questions and then we could a - Page 57 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold MR. HOUSTON: That's my question at the moment. CHAIRPERSON PRO TEM DINIZIO: So you're just basically looking to see what the lowest level of the house is going to be? MR. HOUSTON: Where the house will actually be. CHAIRPERSON PRO TEM DINIZIO: Right, the lowest part of the house is going to be the garage obviously. MR. HOUSTON: Obviously yes. And the survey shows a variance of about 12 feet. CHAIRPERSON PRO TEM DINIZIO: Right. You mean as far as the width of the house and the back and front, is 12 feet into the hill. MR. HOUSTON: Yes, whether it's going to be set into the (more than one person speaking). CHAIRPERSON PRO TEM DINIZIO: OK, thank you. Mr. Olsen perhaps you could have the builder, or either, you can submit an elevation now, or later? MR. DeLUCA: I'm speaking for the builder right now- because he's goner ( ) and he's sitting down back there but, where the house is proposed at 40 or 45 feet, it'll be on the first level, the garage, as you come into the house you go fight into the garage at the first level. It is kind of similar now where the garage is underneath the house, its only 12 feet, and across the street its part of 12 feet and right into the garage into your home, and step into your house its (). CHAIRPERSON PRO TEM DINIZIO: Mr. DeLuca, well the deck that's in the rear is that going to be on the second-story then? MR. DeLUCA: The deck that's in the rear? CHAIRPERSON PRO TEM D1NIZIO: Yeah you have a deck. MR. DeLUCA: I don't see a deck. MEMBER COLLINS: No, that's the neighbor's house Jimmy. CHAIRPERSON PRO TEM DINIZIO: Oh, OK, I'm sorry, I'm sorry. MR. DeLUCA: It's a very simple project. I would not be here spending my time and my family's time and or your time, if you couldn't do this. Thank you. CHAIRPERSON PRO TEM DINIZIO: Right, OK. Page 58 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold MR. DeLUCA: We also have concerns about the neighbors. We feel that we're expecting some of the neighbors are part of the water. But we're not going to put our house all the way to the top of the hill. We're going to put it in front so everybody will have a view of the water. CHAIRPERSON PRO TEM DINIZIO: Thank you. Is there anybody else would like to speak of this application? Mr. Richards. MR. RICHARDS: Have a question. Will the garage floor be at roughly a 22 foot elevation, or a 6 foot elevation, or a 32 foot elevation? That's basically my question. MR. DeLUCA: The front of the garage will be at the front elevation of 22 feet as you pull right into the front of the house. The garage will be straight under this house. CHAIRPERSON PRO TEM DINIZIO: Mr. Richards? OK, so we can discuss that. Is there anybody else now would like to speak for or against this application? OK, hearing that, anybody have any comment? Alright, I'd like to entertain a motion to close it? MEMBER COLLINS: Close the hearing? CHAIRPERSON PRO TEM DINIZIO: Close the hearing and reserve decision until a later date. MEMBER TORTORA: I'll second that. See Minutes for Resolution. Chairperson Pro Tem Dinizio: We'll take a two minute recess. I have to go get the Chairman. Page 59 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold 8:55 P.M.- Chairman Goehringer reconvened, Member Collins second. 8:55 P.M. - Appl. No. 4813 - A & S SOUTHOLD OIL CORP./E.M.T INC. (Continued from prior hearing calendars). Proposed canopy with request for variance on front yard setback and addition to building with insufficient rear yard setback at 49610 Main Road (and Bayview Rd.), Southold 1000-70-7-4. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: We are ready. Sir, will you please state your name for the record? MR. MARKOWlTZ: Yes, good evening, my name is Leon Markowitz. I am the attorney for Southold Oil and E.M.T. I would like to address several of the concerns raised and also convincing the Board that the installation is in the best imerests of all concerned. To me the concerns raised were the lighting or lights, traffic concerns, esthetics and immediate burn of extensive lights at this facility. With respect to the lighting, we know that the Board has received previously a brochure which shows how lighting will exceed from the canopy and with this system proposed, the lighting will be recessed in the canopy which you can see now that you all have a copy of it on the light, it projects almost directly down onto the tanks and on to the cars that are there and this will be in contrast to of course what is there now a mount of light fixtures and which basically provides no protection to allow from light and there's also canopies where light fixtures proceed out from the canopy that also doesn't provide protection to the lateral front light but the system for the canopy proposed, the lights will be recessed and in fact the canopy will minimize the lateral flood of light, or light (). Second issue raised is traffic safety and congestion I tlfink one concern particularly was how the canopy will affect the line of sight from Main Bayview Road and the road is done, you know, Mr. Strang has taken a picture of that intersection now and the architect Mr. Strang is here, although he has taken the liberty of supperimposing the canopy omo picture. The canopy itself would be 16 feet high at the bottom and you'll see the top of the roof is also 16 f. high so you can get a perspective look of how it can look. The canopy has to be high enough so that trucks can come in to deliver the gas, come in and get gas, and I think if you look at the pictures and the rear canopy you can see that it Page 60 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold shows that that will not be a lot in the line of sight fi-om Main Bayview Road. The second issue was with respect to traffic would be traffic congestion and again, I know the Board has a copy of the site plan and as part of the whole project proposed there would be cuts in pavement and cuts provided for ingress and egress for in the property. Right now the property is just asphalt and cars can go in and out from whatever direction they desire with the cars would provide for a more orderly traffic pattern in and out of the property. Thirdly is the issue of esthetics. I found that one interesting when Southold Oil came to me to discuss this issue because it's almost exactly for that reason that Southold Oil is asking for the canopy and although it's not part of this hearing, to include property. Obviously the reason behind the application is so that, you know, so that help my clients make money at this gas station since we all know it's always about the money. How one goes about making that money, and the way one does that is to make a gas station as appealing as possible for customers, and that's what we're hoping to do with him for contacts in that the neighborhood it is in. Again, the Board is in possession of the plan on how it's intended to be improved upon. So I think that Southold Oil is looking to make this gas station aesthetically pleasing as possible, that is what you get to have the customers visit the gas station. Lastly, I think there was a discussion about the fire suppression system. I believe that we also brought a copy of the letter from Fire Guard of Long Island who is responsible for putting in the fire suppression system. Right now the system is there basically to provide protection for the gas tanks and the pumps itself. The canopy was granted, but suppression system will be in the canopy and besides being more esthetically pleasing it provides protection for the island pumps, the cars, and anybody who happens to be there at the time. I submit to the Board that installation of the canopy addresses all the concerns raised, in such way that it's actually less intrusive to people in town and at ~the same time providing the best possible protection. Like light pollution, traffic congested, esthetics and fire suppression. All will actually improve if the canopy was allowed to be placed on the property. Page 61 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Counsel, I just want to say that our discussions with Mr. Strang were that regarding the lighting that the Board will reserve the right to review the lighting assuming the canopy is done. MR. MARKOWITZ: Absolutely. That's understood. No doubt about it. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Good. As for the others we appreciate your presenting that. The one issue that is still before us, and one of the major concerns is the possibility of minimizing the impact of the canopy by reducing its size. And that is the only issue that I have still of great concern. MR. MARKOWlTZ: OK, we did discuss that. I think that the answer to that is that the canopy proposed is basically the industry standard minimum so at some point, you know, one of the reasons to have a canopy is the rain. That's so important that the canopy can do its work so if it rains. The canopy can't be smaller, it wouldn't serve ( ). CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: OK, thank you. Any questions of counsel? Yes, Lydia. MEMBER TORTORA: Just let me review this because my major concern is that frorn the end of Long Island Expressway to Route 58 all the way to Orient Point, there is not one gas station that has a canopy within one or two feet of the road. This is what you're proposing and I said publicly it's not do-able for me. And now you're saying, that there is no way that you can get back setback any further than a foot or two feet from the road as you applied for. That's the minimum necessary for you. I heard that very clear. MR. MARKOWITZ: Yes. And if you see the height of the canopy is how it is, Mr. Strang is here - (changed tape) CHAIRMAN: We hardly gave you a chance to speak, Garrett. Go ahead. MR. STRANG: To address that issue with respect to the proximity of the canopy to the road. If the canopies are put offthe property line there's 10 feet from the property line to the road, approximately 10 feet line from the property line to the road. So it's 11 feet from the road. So it's really not right out on the road that you may envision it's in. It is a good distance from the traveled part of the road, as well as the fact that it's elevated to the point where we have to get a tanker trailer truck underneath to pass it so that any other type of vehicle driving down the road is never going to be in jeopardy of, you know, coming anywhere close to the canopy. Page 62 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold MEMBER TORTORA: You definitely (inaudible - speaking too low). MR. STRANG: I'm sorry? MEMBER TORTORA: In one of the plans, it's been so long I'm not sure if it serves me correctly, but there was a sidewalk on one of them, the plans. Is that in or out? MR. STRANG: The sidewalk has at the insistence of the Planning Board, the sidewalk has been or will be deleted in lieu of the grass area, or landscaped area. The curbing along the travel bed of the road will continue to be in place. But in lieu of the sidewalk it will be grass. MEMBER TORTORA: Is it 3 foot or 5 foot? MR. STRANG: The sidewalk was originally 5 feet. MEMBER TORTORA: And the grass? MR. STRANG: The grass will now take its place. But the curb line as originally proposed will remain where it is but in lieu of the sidewalk it will be grass. MEMBER TORTORA: Interesting. CHAIRMAN GOEHRIGNER: Anybody else? MEMBER DINIZIO: Well, hold on Garrett? MR. STRANG: Yes? MEMBER DINIZIO: So let's clear this up then. The curb is going to be 11 feet away fi-om the top of that. Am I correct? MR. STRANG: I have to look at the site plan, can I? curb line is along the edge of the shoulder of the road. You not only have the edge, the From the curb line to the canopy there's approximately at least at the closest point probably 10 to 11 feet. The furthest point is even greater. MEMBER DINIZIO: Right, and there's no sidewalk on there now, right? No sidewalk. MR. STRANG: There's nothing there. It's all asphalt. MEMBER DINIZIO: No, but I mean I'm talking about the plans because they have changed considerably. Page 63 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold MR. STRANG: OK. MEMBER DINIZIO: There's no sidewalk in there now? They're not going to put cement, it's all going to be grass? MR. STRANG: It's going to be curbing along the edge of the shoulder of the road, they'll be some curbing on the inside part of the property and they'll be grass between. MEMBER DINIZIO: Right. OK. MR. STRANG: So they'll be an island sort of speak that's landscaped with grass or flowers or whatever they like to put there. MEMBER DINIZIO: Right, and then you're going to maintain that I assume even though it's on town property? MR. STRANG: Yeah, the building owner will maintain that, as is pretty much the case in most commercial ventures. MEMBER DINIZIO: OK. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Before you leave, has there been any change in the opinion of the Planning Board regarding this canopy in your opinion? MR. STRANG: I met with the Planning Board subsequent to our last session and addressed the issue of this Board's concern with respect of the fact that their turnaround if you will, their from originally being in favor of this project, and all of a sudden being objecting, and have been and their reason for it being somewhat generic and this Board looking for some more specifics, their comment to me was that we put in a letter exactly what we had to say and we're not going to say any further on the matter. If the Zoning Board elects to give the variance, we'll deal with it at that time. CHAIRMAN GOEHIKNGER: OK. MEMBER DINIZIO: Can I comment on that? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Yes, just quickly so we can move this along. MEMBER DINIZIO: I've got to say that letter from the Planning Board shouldn't even be put in our record in that~they didn't tell us what they based their decision on. They Page 64 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold just merely stated what the law is and we know what the law is, and we're here to you know, help them when they have trouble applying with that law. So I think that their decision was - I won't put in any harsh words - but I don't think they put much thought into that particular line in that paragraph that they had and I'll leave it at that. CHAIRMAN GOEHR1NGER: Ms. Collins. MEMBER COLLINS: Just a fact question, Mr. Strang. You're back talking about the site plan, the curbing and what not and there were several versions. I just want to make sure that we're on the same page. MR. STRANG: Sure. MEMBER COLLINS: And the one I'm looking at was originally dated January 25, revised 5-24 and revised 5-26. MR. STRANG: That's correct. MEMBER COLLINS: Thank you very much. MR. STRANG: But let me clarify that. The one that you're looking at still shows the sidewalk, OK. The sidewalk itself, once I get a little further deliberation with the Planning Board, it's proposed to be removed. MEMBER COLLINS: OK. MR. STRANG: And it will be a landscaped area as proposed to a sidewalk which I think is, I'm in agree with that. I think that a wise move. MEMBER COLLINS: Thank you. MEMBER HORNING: Can you restate for us the purpose of the proposed structural addition? MR. STRANG: Oh, the addition to the rear of the building? MEMBER HORNING: The one that came out closest to the proposed canopy? MR. STRANG: OK, there isn't anything that in the build- the only projection that is of the building itself, ok, goes out to the south of the building. If you look at the addition on the map and it's 5 feet by 27 feet, and the idea of that is to accommodate the walk-in box in the convenience store building. Page 65 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold MEMBER HORNING: How about this box area? MR. STRANG: That area is strictly a marking on the pavement to delineate the handicap parking stall. MEMBER HORNING: That's what that is, OK. MR. STRANG: That's what that is. It's not a structure. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: All right. We thank you. MR. STRANG: Thank you. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Counselor, anything else? MR. MARKOWITZ: No, thank you. CHAIRMAN GOEHR1NGER: Thank you. Any further comments in favor of this application? Any comments against? I have this gentleman over here. MR. DELATERIS: I'm Carl Delateris. I'm familiar with Bayview Road. I travel ill everyday. I'd like to think that I'm just a Southolder. I mean maybe there are a lot of people that are not really aware of what's going to happen here. This is going to look more like Nassau County rather than the East End. I think what's proposed this canopy is really something that belongs much further up island than the rural look that we have here. Not only that but you're coming down Bayview Road approaching Main, any' structure that is in the way there tends to be a problem unless you're going to put a stop light there because if you can't see up that road, you're going to start smacking cars that are coming. It's not an easy turn as it is. Anything that you start putting there isn't just that you start making it larger, you're going to hinder the abilities for the people to look up or see through it. This is a ( ) situation that has been there. The traffic as always on the gas station, I've been on the gas station, numerous amounts. I really have not been in traffic jam on the gas station. The traffic goes on and off, people have good sense to know where to go. It's not a problem. ! think you might be creating a problem in doing that. The owner better know what problems are created ager he owned the place. Aesthetically I think it's a blight. It certainly doesn't help. It's certainly not a help. Dollars? Sure, get more dollars. I don't think it's going to help the community at all. I ' Page 66 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold think you're right in saying from Southold to Orient, there is none, and there never should be. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. Ma'am, your next? MS. EAGEN: My name is Joan Eagen and I couldn't agree with this man more since everything could be done - I also come from west and it's a terrible situation and I think the issue of whether to something more could be done, I think the issue is more to the protection of the people rather than the esthetics of it. I think you have a very serious problem. I think you're only going to be adding to and changes to it are not for the better. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. Ma'am, back there. MS. HANES: My name is Cheryl Hansen and I would disagree with the man who has spoken. Esthetically I think you're taking away from the charm of what the community really is, and you're bringing it back to super highways, Nassau County or a city. As far as making money, more people are likely to come into a place that pleases esthetically. Certainly not something that would look at the canopy overhead. It would like Garden City which we recently stayed there. I think the more you make something pleasing to the eye, the more likely people are to come into the facility. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. In the back somebody? Yes, Sir. How are you tonight? MR. TRUNCE: Fine, good. I've been here before. I want to keep it short. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I need your name. MR. TRUNCE: Victor Trunce. I'm adjacent from where the property runs. I'll just, for the record I'm here, you know, what my concerns are. I can see people from other than the neighborhood say some of the same things, because I haven't talked to anybody who thinks this is a good idea. Esthetically, they think it's a good idea but that's where it ends. The only thing I can say about that came up today was protection from the rain at 16 feet high. I don't know that it usually rains straight down here and the canopy does a little to protect from the rain. So, those are the rest of my comments and I thank you for your time. ' Page 67 - September I 00 ZBA Public Heating Transcripts Town of Southold CHAIRMAN GOEHR1NGER: Thank you. OK, I'd like to close this heating at this point. Seeing no hands, I'll make a motion closing the hearing reserving decision until later. MEMBER DINIZ[O: Second. See Minutes for Resolution. Hearing was concluded. ' Page 68 - September 1 00 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold 9:17 P.M. - Appl. No. 4839 - HARRY CASHY & MARIA MISTHOS Hearing postponed to October 19, 2000. 9:18 P.M. - Appl. No. 4860 - OLD HARBOR ASSOCIATES This is a request for a Variance under Article III, Section 100-33 based on the Building Department's July 28, 2000 Notice of Disapproval for the reason that a proposed accessory three-car garage will encroach partly in the side yard, at 1195 Old Harbor Road, New Suffolk, Parcel 1000-117-3-8-6. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Who is here for Old Harbor Associates? Would you come up here first please. Right up here Sir and use the mike and kindly state your name for the record. MR. LERNER: Robert Lerner, architect for the owner. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: How do you do? What is your owner propose? MR. LERNER: We're proposing to construct a three-car garage in a required rear yard area of the subject property. The proposal calls for a roof overhang in the front of the garage to the south of the property extend as to the rear of the existing residence and into the side yard. We're asking the Board to grant us relief from the proposed overhang, which encroaches the property three feet into the side yard, which is approximately 150 sq. fi. of roof overhang. The roof overhang is in my materially esthetics of is the least intrusive part of the building and we feel the application is within the character of the neighborhood. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. Would you just hold up one second? Some of you people didn't hear me say, you're certainly welcome to sit in the jury box over here. The chairs are actually more comfortable, just be careful getting up and down when you want to speak. Regarding this application that is the only specific thing that we are addressing as to the variance aspects of this application. MR. LERNER: Yes. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: OK. Mr. Dinizio, any questions? MEMBER DINIZIO: No, no questions. ' Page 69 - September 1 00 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Ms. Collins? MEMBER COLLINS: I just want to get into the record, the way I read your drawing, the garage is located at about as close to the property line as you can be. MR. LERNER: Yes. MEMBER COLLINS: So you can't push it back further - MR LERNER: Anymore. MEMBER COLLINS: And still have a garage, OK? Your overhang I gather is an interval part of the design? MR. LERNER: Yes. MEMBER COLLINS: Without the overhang you'd have to rethink the whole thing, it would look different? MR. LERNER: Yes. The garage itself is within our rights to build in the rear yard. MEMBER COLLINS: Yes, yes, it's the overhang and what it does is it intrudes a couple of feet past the rear line of the house. MR. LERNER: Yes. MEMBER COLLINS: That's how I read this. I just wanted the record to show it. Thank you. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Lydia do you have any questions. MEMBER TORTORA: No, I haven't any questions. CHA1RMAN GOERHINGER: George? MEMBER HORNING: No. CHAIRMAN GOEHR1NGER: OK, don't leave until I close the hearing. Is there anybody else would like to speak in favor or against this application? This is Old Harbor Associates, the last application of the evening. We skipped over the one that you are all here for just to get this gentleman out. I need the original affidavits. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: You have the receipts you can mail them to me if you don't have them. MR. LERNER: Yes. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: Thank you. ' Page 70 - September ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold CHAIRMAN GOEHR1NGER: Hearing no further comment I make a motion closing the hearing reserving decision until later. MEMBER TORTORA: Second. See Minutes for Resolution. ' Page 71 - September 14 00 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold 9:18 P. M. -E.L.I. CANCER RESOURCE CENTER (Landowners: Mr. & Mrs. Marc Levey) regarding premises known as 895 Highland Road, Cutchogue, identified as CTM Parcel No. 1000-102-8-2, Highland Estates Subdivision Lot No. 5, requesting: Appl. No. 4855 - Variances under Article III, Section 100-31B-5a and 5e(4) for reduced: (a) setbacks and/or parking or loading area at less than 100 feet of any street line and less than fifty (50) feet of any lot line. Applicant is proposing to convert and use an existing principal building (dwelling) in its building present location and proposed parking area to meet the site plan regulations: and (b) for a total land area of less than 56,000 sq. ft., the size provided in the zoning code for use of seven (7) health care patient beds on this parcel of40,011 sq. ft.; and Appl. No. 4854 - Special Exception under Article 1II, Section 100-3 lB-5 to convert an existing dwelling to a Health Care Facility. The Zoning Code defines a Health Care Facility as: "A structure and premises regulated by the State of New York and used to provide an integrated range of medical and/or surgical services, primarily for in-patients, on a twenty-four hour basis. Health services may require surgical facilities, therapeutic and diagnostic equipment rooms, counseling facilities, convalescent care equipment and trauma care services. Out patient clinics and other forms of ambulatory, health care facilities may exist as accessory and integral services to the in-patient services. Supporting or accessory uses may include a kitchen for preparation of patient meals, cafeteria or snack/coffee shop for employees and visitors, gift shop, laundry, pharmacy and staff offices (for bookkeeping, administration, medical records, etc.) Shall otherwise be known as a "general or specialized hospital", a "rehabilitation center," "rest home" or "adult home". CHAIRMAN GOEHR1NGER: OK, for the people that are standing in the back there's really no need for it. There is room in the jury box. There are some seats up here, we can even take a couple of these seats and put them down. So please we would like everybody seated so you're at least comfortable. We apologize for the later hour. We had one hearing that went a little bit longer than we anticipated. I have to discuss with this group three specific things, maybe four. Number 1, everyone will be sworn in tonight. ' Page 72 - September 1 00 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold Everybody who speaks, everybody who is going to speak, and after you're finished speaking, I would appreciate your coming up and either printing your name, or signing your name on this yellow pad of paper right down here because I get in trouble with the people that transcribe these hearings. That's number I. Number 2, we expect everybody to have as much courtesy of our fellow friends and neighbors as we do with the Board and we are a stickier on that so please deal with that aspect of it. Number 3, [ have a real estate license with Celic Realty. I am an Associate Broker. I have to have that license for the position that I hold which is my full-time job. I do not sell real estate. It is gratuitous of Mr. Celic to do this for me, and that is the situation. I have discussed this with the Town Attorney. I have no conflict. If anybody has a problem with that please let me knoxv at this time or before we commence this hearing, and number 4, I will reserve as we go on. But I do want to say this. This will not be the end of this hearing tonight. We will reconvene this hearing at 7:45 on October 5th and then we will close this heating as a normal course of business on October 19t~ at our regular session. The October 5t~- hearing will be a special meeting at which we start the meeting at approximately 6:15 and we will do the decisions that you all sat through tonight and then we will reconvene a hearing~ ~vhich will be this hearing as it stands. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: At 7:45? CHAIRMAN GOEHR1NGER: At 7:45. And again, we will close this on October 19t~. So therefore, if you are unavailable for any of those evenings, the future evenings and you feel that you must speak tonight no one is stopping anybody from speaking. We ask you to speak and any other concerns that you have let us know. At this particular point then I am ready to convene these hearings and they are appeals application. They are appeals for variances under 4855 and special exception under 4854. Mr. Hughes, are you present? MR. HUGHES: Yes I am. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Mr. Hughes, are you the first speaker of the evening? MR. HUGHES: Yes, I am. MEMBER DINIZIO: Mr. Chairman~ could I make a statement first? ' Page 73 - September 14,'"'J000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold CHAIRMAN GOEI-IRINGER: I need to discuss something with him first. OK, and then I will let you. Mr. Hughes as a matter of course when we have both a special exception and variance application before us, I would like to merge over these applications together if it's not an imposition on your part. MR. HUGHES: Not an imposition at all. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: OK, thank you. During the time that you're setting this up, Mr. Dinizio wants to make a statement, ls that all right, Mr. Dinizio? MEMBER DINIZIO: Yes. During the course of preparing for this hearing, I discovered that my father, James Dinizio, who was on the Board for this applicant and since then he has resigned and therefore I have no conflict in that respect. I can also say that I've marched with this organization at several of their functions and caused them you know as a concerned citizen and I have one more thing to say. The law that created this and has brought you here tonight, I have fought since its inception in that 1 don't believe this should be a residential area. So you can see I'm in a quandary. I intend to make a decision one way or the other and 1 intend to do it fairly. If anybody has you know any problems with me being on the Board I would appreciate your comments. However, I do intend to stay here. Thank you. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Do you want to make your statement now? MEMBER COLLINS: I think it might be appropriate. CHAIRMAN GOEHR1NGER: There's one more statement Mr. Hughes from Ms. Collins. MS. COLLINS: I just have a statement that I want to get in the record at the beginning of these hearings which I have written out and I will put it into the record as written. I may not read every word out loud. In Application 4854, applicant seeks authorization for a "health care facility." Southold Zoning Code section 100-30A.2.B, referring to section 100-31B(5), permits a health care facility in the R-40 Zone by special exception, subject to certain specific requirements. These specific requirements include setbacks from street and lot lines, and 8,000 sq. ft. of land per patient bed. ' Page 74 - September ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold In Application No. 4855, applicant seeks variances from this Board to relieve it from these specific setback and square footage requirements. I want to record my doubt as to whether this Board has the authority to relieve these requirements by grant of variances. I understand that New York case law has held that any specific requirements for a special exception must be met in order for a special exception to be granted. In 1995, however, a court read section 274-b of NY Town Law, enacted in 1992, as authorizing a Zoning Board of Appeals to relieve such requirements via a variance. (Dennis v. Zoning Board of Appeals, 167 Misc. 2d 555, 637 N. YS. 2d 266) I do not read section 274-b that way, and my limited research shows commentators doubting that a zoning board has authority to relieve express special exception requirements by variance. In a 1997 case, the Appellate Division held that a zoning board may not waive or modify special exception requirements. (_Dost v. Chamberlain-Hellman, 236 A.D. 2d 471,653 NY.S. 2d 672). Our agenda states that we are hearing an application for the setback and square footage variances described above, and also an application for a special exception. Although we are going ahead on that basis, I believe that further inquiry is needed as to whether this Board has authority to relieve specific special exception requirements by the grant of variances. I wanted this in the record just so that everyone knew that [ at least have doubts about this procedural element. Our agenda says and the Chairman has said that we are hearing these two applications, we are hearing them together and that's fine and I'm here and I'm hearing them but I have strongly urged the Board and I know that they agree at least with my sentiment that we pursue this further with the Town Attorney and I'll be very happy to hear from other counsel on it and I just wanted to record that at the outset so that people were upfront. Thank you Mr. Chairman CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. Mr. Hughes you are an officer of the Court. There's no need for me to swear you in. You may proceed. MR. HUGHES: Thank you very much. My name is Robert Hughes. I represent the E.L.I. Cancer Resource Center and also here tonight is Christian Anderson. She is the Executive Director of the E.L.I. Cancer Resource Center. And also here tonight is Dr. Marc Levey He is the owner of the subject parcel of land. At the moment this property Page 75 - September 14 O0 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold is in contract. The Breast Cancer Center is the Contract Vendee and Dr. Levey is the Contract Vendor. The purpose of this hearing is to obtain a special exception to have a health care facility at 895 Highland Road, which is in the R-40 Zone, which is one of the zoning and this is a permitted special exception as Ms. Collins said, it also requires the granting of various variances dealing with variance required facilities, number of kitchen, beds and also the setbacks from just the front and side yards for parking and for the building itsel£ The reason why Breast ELI Cancer Resource Center is a Non-For-Profit Association, it's a 501-C3 Corporation under the Internal Revenue Code. It's incorporated and (). The existing building consists of seven bedrooms as well as a two- car garage, or a three. The garage will hold two cars. It's a two-car garage. The purpose of the proposed facility is to provide a retreat for women who have had breast cancer surgery. It is post operative and is meant to be a reason for them to recuperate for a period of 3 or 4 days without the demands of the normal lives if there are families that work, or any, or just grocer), shopping that they could take care of themselves, so they can be taken care of where they do not have the suited support system relieving their family or ( ) status. The actual number of beds is there will be six instead of seven and I apologize for not having more ( ) but that will be the actual number of beds that will be used. Now, if this application is approved, there are various changes that would have to be taking place on the property as required by the Town Code for the State Building Code and other Rules and Regulations. The Town Code requires to compensate for each patient there. They're will be six parking spares. Our proposal is that there are, there is parking for three cars within the house and besides a three-car garage and a one-car garage. The proposal at this time is that those three parking spaces would in the front yard to the south of the existing asphalt driveway. One of these spaces would be required to be black top because of the handicap it says here and the handicap spaces have to be white and the other two spaces do not have to be like that and the applicant is we're willing to think of every material The ZBA is going to have here. The other reason aspect visual aspect is that there will be a public size wall is that the building be handicap excessively which would require a handicap ramp and if you'd like I can show you where we propose to put them in. But just to let you know that it would be approximately 25 Page 76 - September 14,'*g000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold feet long and wide about 21 inches and again the applicant is more than happy to ( ) this grant so it is visually current, however the Board would like it to be accomplished. There are new ( ) outside the corporation (). It would be the same footprint that now exists and the only other changes to the outside of the property would be what ever the requirements, ZB.A. would want to a propose. Now the New York State Town Law provides the Special Exception and Subsection 3 of Law 274B~ I feel ( ) it actually anticipates the need for areas that enhances tbr special exception. The case of Dennis v. ZBA and Village Briarcliff Manor it talks about the legislative intent ( ) and that the legislative history indicates that the ( ) anticipated then what they called the ( ) and the reading, my reading of Subsection 3 of this law supports that. Subsection 5 of that law talks about the fact, that the ZBA, is permitted to waive certain requirements of that, are imposed by the Zoning Board. It is found that the requirements are not requisite to raise interest of the public health safety and general welfare or (). Now as far as the public health threat it is our contention that there is no public health threat. The possibility of postoperative damages and other medical waste being placed in the garbage is not going to be. It's not going to be because any waste will be disposed of under the guidelines of the Health Department. None of this is contagious life or and it's not a communicable disease. The public safety threat, we don't feel there's any public safety threat. There's going to actually be minimal traffic from this road. The reason I say that is, that we mn 3 or 4 days staying with six recoups. These people are there to relax, to recuperate. They are not out to first of all to go visit the winery, to go to Wickham's Farm Stand they're there to recuperate. The idea of visitors is certainly going to be discouraged because we're trying to keep the families or the children away from you know, or the demands on the patient. It is our contention that six beds being occupied by recuperating women, will cause much traffic than if you drove it in to be used like a Bed & Breakfast. Again, 5 rooms and there would be people confing in ali hours day or night, or could be. I'm saying that Bed & Breakfast you could come in all hours day and night. But there's much more of a possibility of that~ The general welfare of the community, there will be no outwards magnification if there is a health care facility being ( ) at this site. There would be no signs. Again, a B & B would have a sign out and probably it would be a lot 'Page 77 - September 14,"2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold quieter than if, there was an extended family living in a house with 7 bedrooms. Now the area variance the Town Code required 8,000 sq. fi. for kitchen, bed. We're talking now six beds instead of 7. We're talking the requirement of 48,000 sq. ft. of land. The lot is 100 or so feet larger than 40,000 sq ~. So, you're talking 3 for a variance of 48,000 sq. fi. The setback variances are that Town Code requires that the front yard there should be no parking or building within 100 feet of the street, or any street. And that the side yards there should be no building or parking within 50 feet. At the moment the proposed plan is that the parking and the front yard would be approximately 50 feet from the side yard and the house from the side it would be about 30 feet (). Ihe house is approximately 50 feet from the front and about there's the nearest point is about 31 feet from the side yard. It is our contention that allowing this facility would not create any undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood. There will be no change, parking and handicap ramp to the exterior of the building. This is a building that has been there and has been accepted by the community as a residence. Whether you like the way it looks, you don't like the way it looks, this is what's been there. The outside of the building is roofed with no plans to change it and being of course the requirements being imposed on us by the ZBA. There will be no difference on it. There is no adverse impact on the physical or environmental condition. As I said, there is no change in the footprint and what I would like to do is with this diagram it's a little hard to show everyone at the same time but I think the easiest way is - CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: What we will do is after your presentation we may recess for a moment or so, so that everybody can take a look at it. MR. HUGHES: What I'd like to do is - CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: We'll let everybody see this in a few minutes. MR. HUGHES: This has all the different setback requirement, setbacks. It's hard to understand even if you know it's going to be in. Hopefully this will help. This is a footprint of the building itsel£ What you have here is, this is not perfectly scaled and where the dividing line is on the two-car garage and one-car garage. Ihere are three garages. This area, this black area is the existing black top driveway, which services both garages and against the property you know there's a large expansion of black top. It does ' Page 78 - September 14,~"000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold not adequately provide space as is or the necessary (). What we prefer to do for the parking is yellow is the existing black top this part is. We've actually cut out some of the black top to make the entrance to the driveway narrower than it is now and then we have three spaces to park inside the house. We propose three parking spaces here. The one closest to the house would be the Henry house and would have asphalt. These other two spaces not necessarily need to have asphalt If the Board would prefer another material that's alright with us. Whatever the Board's pleasure is on that. Now the proposal is that this area here you would enter a handicap ramp here as you go up and have access towards the house and there's this little porch here and the ground is parallel with the house and the front of the house and the street here and we propose to put an l l footed buffering and siding you know to the point of being same siding as on the building on the ramp so that visually you wouldn't even know that it is a ramp as oppose to (). Again, whatever planting would be what the Board tells us. In addition to this, this green outline is not exempt to normal. What it is, is, the proposed arborvitae border all the way around the side. 7 foot high arborvitaes maybe 3 or 4 foot apart. The way it is laid out now it would stop on this side, the frontage would be towards the house and then come across. Again~ there may be a haven back here for the client would also block the view from the neighbors from seeing what's in the back yard. We are happy and prepared if the Board would like to bring this arborvitae down all the way to the pump and across to the end of the driveway. If that is done, and you bring the arborvitae all the way over here, and you have arborvitaes here the only way you can really see these parking spaces is they're very conjectural and it will be dangled and you'll probably would hardly know that there are parking spaces other than the handicap and this is what we propose to do. This is not some new fact of the fact that they'll be no proposing argument. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Can I just ask you to turn that around so the public can see it and if any other of your other speakers refers to it we can turn it back around. Thank you Mr. Hughes~ MR. HUGHES: OK. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Yes please and Ms. Anderson you are an attorney - ' Page 79 - September 14,~'2b00 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold MS Pd'qDERSON: By profession, yes. CHAIRMAN GOEItRINGER: Therefore there's no need to swear you in. MS. ANDERSON: I'm Christine Anderson, the Executive Director of the Eastern Long Island Breast Cancer Resource Center, which I will hereafter refer to as the Center. We would like to thank very sincerely the Town of Southold for providing us with the forum to further introduce to further introduce the Center and to dispose of questions and rumors which may be lingering in the minds of those present tonight and of Southold Town residents, in general. I would also like to thank all concerned residents who have taken the time to attend tonight, either in support of or in opposition to the matter before the ZBA tonight. At the outset, I think it wise to clearly define the parameters of the hearing tonight. We are here to support or oppose an application to grant a variance from the customary setback requirements. The ZBA will also decide, on the merits, as to the Center's eligibility for a special exception, as to use, provided pursuant to Southold Town law. Also, at the outset, I would like to extend an apology to the residents of Southold, for having inadvertently placed an issue of housing women recovering from cancer in to the public forum and thereby having raised a controversial issue and which has substantially divided Southold residents. Also, I shall apologize for the much-touted, "none of your business" allegation. Since it is not my style of speaking, and since I am competent to deflect irrelevant or non-pertinent questions, without resorting to "none of your business" as a response, I very much doubt that I uttered it~ In any event, I am willing to accept the responsibility and apologize for the fact that my response elicited the upset of the members of the residencts of Southold Town rather more specifically kind of ruined the incidence. In fairness to my self, however, I must point out that I voluntarily initiated at that meeting on August 7®, to introduce the Center and to answer questions the proposed Retreat House would elicit from residents. As to the purpose of this hearing, it is important that everyone here this evening understand, very clearly, that this hearing is not about myself personally. It is not about funding sources. It is not about the existence of a Board of Directors, a Medical Advisory Board, nor a local Advisory Board, nor its Members. With respect to which, after the August 7th meeting with the residents, I furnished certain of the residents of Highland Road with the names of all of ' Page 80 - September 14,'~2'000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold our Board Members. The matter before us tonight is that of the approval of a special exception variances. In this connection, therefore, ! make it very clear that in discussion with our Board, I have informed them that I believe this ZBA Board to be a well seasoned board, with a great deal of experience in the law of variances and special exceptions and that 1 have a great deal of confidence in and respect for their judgment. Accordingly, as an agent of and on behalf of my Board of Directors, I bring their message to be submitted confident to their jurisdiction and to their guidance. Since Mr. Hughes, our attorney, has set forth the issues of parking, handicapped access and the number of women to be served at full capacity I shall not dwell further on those points, in the interest of moving this hearing along. Instead, I will show you, who we are, and what we propose to accomplish, inasmuch as certain issues have become somewhat obscured in the recent weeks. The Center is a validly existing non-profit charitable organization. Formed in 1994, we have worked closely and worked well in what is loosely regarded as ultimate. That term encompasses education, via talks and presentations to varied groups of people. One most recent such presentation was to the Rotary Club at Skippers Restaurant in Greenport~ The term also encompasses answering questions from cancer victims, their family and friends. We also match up newly diagnosed women, with women who are survivors. Together, their share experiences and many solid friendships have been forged through this matching. Please be advised that it is not our intention to operate a group home. The Retreat House may be most closely likened to a transitional retreat for respite and healing before plunging back in the demands of daily living. It would not, for example, create the traffic of ten people, constantly coming and going, which a bed and breakfast, with ten people could create in a property such as this. Accordingly, we are confident that a Retreat House such as the one proposed can and will be not merely unique, but will fill a desperately needed void. We know this from the many, many calls we have received from women themselves, husbands, sons and daughters, asking how soon we will be operational. Without violating any confidences, there have been women totally alone, single or divorced, with young children, or grown children, who are either too young or too far away to be of assistance. To date, the concept we are pursuing is not available to residents of America's North East. We have ' Page 81 - September 14 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold an unusually qualified medical advisory board, with some of the top surgeons in the cancer field, from Memorial SIoan-Kettering, Mount Sinai, St. Vincent Comprehensive Breast Center and St. Lukes Hospital Comprehensive Breast Center, all of whom concur with the need for such a Retreat House. Together with Eastern Long Island Hospital, the Center will continue to sponsor information and education on this disease and to carry forward our mandate. Together with ELIH and the Peaceful Dwelling Project of Easthampton, and funded with a grant from the Ellen P. Hermanson Foundation, for Ellen's Run, in Easthampton, the Center sponsors a weekend of healing at the end of April, 2000. This pilot program featured in microcosm, ail the services which the ongoing Retreat House will offer, spanning a variety of therapies. Nine women attended, and were chaperoned by two nurses from New York City's Beth Israel East Hospital. All the services of the practitioners were donated. Ail of said practitioners gave up a weekend, without pay, and traveled great distances to attend. The identities of all the women attending were anonymous, they signed a confidentiality agreement, and at the end of the weekend, completed anonymous evaluations. Their responses on those evaluations exceeded the Center's expectations as to the need and the viability of such a Retreat House. In order to dispose of some concerns of residents, please be advised that we will not house men and boys suffering from prostrate and testicular cancer; we will not bring additional traffic to the road. There may be three cars. Retreat guests will be dropped off and picked up; parking has been planned for six spaces Further, visitation will be discouraged - in the same manner that the person attending a religious retreat house and no-one attends alone, so will this retreat apply, l will not live rent-free and tax free at the Retreat House. I have my own home. No one, including myself, receives a penny for our services. We are blessed with over 61 volunteers, and the numbers keep growing. So-called "red-bag waste", to the extent that it may occur, will be disposed of in strict accordance with Department of Heath mandates. As to what type of women will be housed at the Retreat House, they will be primarily women who have no relative or friend available for post-operative, around the clock home care. Indeed, rather like your mothers, sisters, friends and co-workers. Such women will be referred, by their physicians, hospitals, clinics, religious institutions and other cancer organizations and the Page 82 - September 14,~21300 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold women will enjoy strict and complete confidentiality. As to payment, women will pay for their stay from personal funds, applicable insurance coverage and in some cases, from partial or full funding offered by the Retreat House, which will in turn obtain such funding from donations from the public and civic and service organizations. The Center already has in place physicians and registered nurses on a volunteer basis. Once the Retreat House becomes operational, then a medical director will be hired. The Retreat House, at full capacity, can accommodate six women guests. We have placed a written copy of these questions and answers in the outer lobby for those of you who may wish to review them. And yes, a non-profit organization can, and does, in the real world charge for its services. We have only, for example, to think of a hospital, which is certainly a non-profit. One hospital, which 1 checked, charges $1200 per day per bed, before the provisions of services. Certainly, in contrast to that our proposed charge of $400 per day, with numerous services comes off as a remarkable bargain. As to the concern that undue hardship would be visited on the taxpayers of Southold Town if the property were to be removed from the tax rolls, it is my understanding subject to verification, that there are 18,000 taxpayers in Southold If that number were divided into the $8,000 tax to be put on tax of your property, that would amount to an additional 44 cents per taxpayer per year, in exchange fbr the creation of this retreat. I would gladly add that sum to my tax bill. As to my so-called "private agenda", alleged by an opponent, it is true that I have an agenda. But it is not private. Rather, it is very public. My agenda is to promote and support women's health - women's healthy bodies and women's healthy minds. As the fate of women goes, so goes the fate of society. Women are the glue holding our families together and there is no one who would deny that. Accordingly, a healthy wife and a healthy mother is the key. Finally, I would issue a word of gentle caution to such member of the community who has slandered me in print, amounting to libel, and to such member of the community who made a harassing telephone call, at 11:30 P.M. one night, that such behavior should be repeated. I shall take any and all appropriate action in response. My personal life is, and will remain private and there should be no attempt to invade the privacy of my home or to violate the confidential relationship of an attorney and a former employee (albeit a very brief one, from a temp agency), of privileged Page 83 - September 14,~2~500 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold information gained in a legal office, since divulging any information both unethical and volatile of the agreement as to confidentiality entered into upon commencement of secretarial services. I wish to thank you for your time in listening and hope that you will be able to accept the information I have posited in a calm and reasoned fashion. As I have said, this hearing is concerned with a special exception and a variance. Accordingly, that is a very narrow ambit and I would encourage the participants tonight to restrict their remarks to just such issues. A special thank you to you, Supervisor Jean Cochran and the Town Board for three special Proclamations, over the last three years, recognizing and applauding our endeavors. In closing we have received a great outpouring of support since the newspaper articles and letters, and to those who are not here tonight, I thank you. For those who are here tonight, in support of this much needed Retreat House, I thank you very much. Thank you. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. Who is next on your agenda? Anyone Ms. Anderson? OK, alright, ~ve will now then go into the aspect of any questions or answering from the Board, or, would you rather continue the process and then worry about this later? MEMBER COLLINS: May I ask you a procedural question? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Sure. MEMBER COLLINS: Mr. Hughes in making his presentation was focused on the variances- CHAIRMAN GOEHRIGNER: Right. MEMBER COLLINS: Which I think we all agree are a sort ora threshold issue. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Right. MEMBER COLLINS: Therefore, he didn't talk at all about the standards for special exceptions, the considerations and I just wanted to get it out in the open at some point we will have to talk about it. MEMBER TORTORA: I think the exceptions, consideration issues, he talks about the health and welfare of the community - Page 84 - September 14 00 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold MEMBER TORTORA: Well, [ didn't hear it as precisely as, I'm just going on record in saying at some point I would like to hear a recapitulation of a little more than it addresses. The stuffin Article 26, - MEMBER DINIZIO: Get him up. MEMBER COLLINS: Well he may not want to do it tonight. He may want to do it after he's dealt with the variances. I'm just, just, I don't want to drag this up. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: OK. Speaker number 3, we are requesting anyone that would like to speak in favor of this application. Yes, how are you? MR. HAAS: My name is Jason Haas. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Pardon me. I must give you the oath. Raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear the information your about to give us is the truth to the best of your knowledge Sir? MR. HAAS: Yes. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: How do you spell your last name? MR. HAAS: HAAS. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: Thank you. MR. HAAS: I actually have here the statement I prepared to read for the record. I've worked with the Eastern Long Island Breast Cancer Resource Center. My work with them has been ( ) the last few years. One of their goals has always been over the Retreat or Halfway House, as some call help by giving them support and counseling after being treated for cancer at the hospital. I've read numerous articles regarding the group's interest in buying a large house with many bedrooms. This house, was once owned by a doctor (). I have read the concerns of residents have regarding what happens to the house if it were sold down the line, also the concerns regarding medical waste, and parking. I would like to offer the following: Number 1, regarding the sale of the house down the line. You, the ZBA has the power to place a restriction that any transfer of ownership if this continued to change of use, reverting it back to residential use. Number 2, regarding the parking, again, you, the ZBA will have the power to place restrictions for any Page 85 - September 14 00 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold parking. These two points here that I have mentioned, can be enforced and the ZBA has the power to have these restrictions filed in the Suffolk County Clerk's Office, that way if there is a transfer of property, these insertions will be found and when the title search is done by the title insurance company, the town will be contacted. Regarding the medical waste, I am involved in a local ambulance corps and have to treat the same, and I was in many households. There are many households that have some form of medical waste due to diabetes, ( ) from them, or from those caring for their parents or ( ) all the family members who may be disabled or bedridden and have to give certain things to them but by themselves provided a living nurse. These homes were equipped with containers such as sharp containers, and red bag waste containers, and are kept inside and disposed of properly by the law. I feel that this, to make this part of the argument would be like telling your long time neighbors, gee John, I'm sorry to hear that about the diabetes but you'll have to move out of the area because we're afraid of the needle. This I feel is not an appropriate argument to be used. There are those who say do it elsewhere. Well this group is not receiving aid from our local government, nor a county, or our State. They're doing this with the money they have raised, some people have donated No one has come forward to offer them some huge place that won't take~ much alterations to get it up and running. They are working with the thnds they have. Ca'oup ( ) statements in this week's Suffolk Life, this I hear is something phenomenal and long overdue I agree with them 100% or more. I lost my father this year of cancer after a long battle and my mother developed cancer last year. After her stay in the hospital it was a ( ) she had placed on us through since she ( ) for support and counseling. Instead they had to travel one and a half hours to get to that place and my father couldn't drive either because of his condition. As for the ( ) Center, the location is just plain wrong I don't agree with them at all. Why not the neighborhood where they could see people, go about their normal lives? They can see children playing and hear their laughter. After all isn't a child's laughter good medicine? In closing, I implore you to grant them the ( ) use they need to do this. This project is long overdue in North Fork. Over the past years there has been numerous studies showing the high rate of cancer among the women out here. It could be your Page 86 - September 14 0 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold mother, your sister, your grandmother, your daughter. If this group would change their views, the place would be supervised (). Thank you. CHAIRMAN GOEHR1NGER: Thank you Mr. Haas. Would you sign here? I think there was another hand over here first. Someone on this side of the room would like to speak in favor? No, OK Sir? MR. DeALIERIS: Carl DeAlteris. I apologize about that. I don't come very often but I'm going to do a lot of talking on this. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You've done a pretty good job so far. MR. DeALTERIS: I would just like to relate to you an experience. My sister-in-law passed away about a year and a half ago and she was a long time resident here, Patricia Schrieber. The situation that they're talking about, which was right after the operation, that put her there, and I'm just saying by accident I just happen to understand what the problem was. They couldn't move Patricia. Her bedroom was upstairs. She stayed in the den that was horrible. People came to visit they didn't want anybody there. It was a bad scene. She passed axvay but a, it might of helped. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. I need you to sign it. Yes Ma'am in the back. I didn't swear you in either so. Ma'am I need you to raise your right hand. You solemnly swear that the information your about to give us is the truth to the best of your knowledge? MS. SHELBY: Yes. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: State your name for the record. MS. SHELBY: Valerie Shelby. CHAIRMAN GOEHR1NGER: How do you do? MS SHELBY: I'm here to support the Breast Cancer Retreat Center. My mom is a survivor of breast cancer. I think 8 years. I don't know if you know me but we have a great big family and when my mom was in the hospital, she had ( ) of taking care of her grandchildren. Everybody all over thought if she had been treated by the treat center I think she would have healed much quicker. She would have gotten the proper rest and the proper care and also my father died of cancer so I'm a big supporter on this. I think · Page g7 - September 14,~00 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Soutlmld we need it. I think it's long overdue. This touches everybody's life. It's not discriminatory. It touches everybody and we need it. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. Oh. I need you to sign in Ma'am, if you would. Anybody else like to speak in favor? Yes ma'am. Raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear that the information you are about to give us is the truth to the best of your knowledge? MS. RIMM: Yes. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: State your name please. MS. RIMM: My name is Joan Rimm. I'm a Mattituck resident. I wasn't intending on speaking tonight but, l'm a breast cancer survivor and 1 just feel compel to ask the community to open their hearts and have some compassion and 1 feel ! think that if we do approve this together our time to allay and adhere that we might have an opportunity to make a place that you know, we could go on the map as something real important because in my little block my neighbor has had breast cancer, the woman around the corner had breast cancer. Where 1 came from in Babylon, my neighbor had breast cancer, I mean I never thought I would ever have breast cancer and I was stricken, I was fortunate, 1 didn't have passed stage l. So I am a survival who stands a very good chance of never getting it again. But I just want you to encourage the people in the community to open their hearts and open their minds to something that is really very important. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. I need you to sign in. Thank you. Anybody else? We will now shift gears over to anyone that is against the application, or the applications and we'll ask for spokespersons. Mr Goggins are you representing anyone? MR. CK)GGINS: Yes, William Goggins. I am the attorney for the people in opposition to this. I tried to make an orally presentation. In order to do that, the people are going to come up and speak briefly. (inaudible). CHAIRMAN GOEItRINGER: No, problem. MS. YOURDON: Who's the other attorney? MR. GOGGIN: He is an attorney. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: He is an attorney? Is everybody aware the fact, why we're not swearing in attorneys? They are officers of the court. Page 88 - September 14,',~00 ZBA Public Heating Transcripts Town of Southold MS. YOURDON: No it wasn't the swearing in issue, it's just the issue of informational point. BOARD SECRETRY KOWALSKI: What is your name please? MS. YOURDON: My name is Melanie Yourdon. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: Thank you. CHAIRMAN GOEHR1NGER: Sir~ we apologize. MR. SLEDJESKI: That's quite all right. CHAIRMAN GOEHR[NGR: Just state your name for the record. MR SLEDJESKI: My name is Thomas Sledjeski I reside at 1170 Highland Road, Cutchogue, N.Y. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: How do you do? MR. SLEDJESKI: Good evening everyone. Thank you very much for allowing me to have the opportunity to speak. I would also like to ( ) here tonight as your ( ) reside including my wife, my first neighbors and distance neighbors going down the street. In regard to any of the allegations concerning fears and hostility and rivals and I apologize to Ms. Anderson and anyone else who may have taken ( ) meeting. Unfortunately, vet hot neighbors had a lot of different kinds of rival and we offer different parts of information. Perhaps that might have caused some miscommunications. Therefore, I think what we need to do tonight is concentrate upon the application which is currently before this Board. The factual issues, the legal issue and in some way distance ourselves emotionally because we certainly and insidious to these which effects a multiply of individuals within our community and outside communities. As I speak from experience, as my mother - CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Take it easy and compose yourself Sir. MR. SLEDJESKI: 1 apologize. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: No, no problem. MR. SELDJESKI: My mother-in-law is also a survivor, my grandmother contacted this but a, my father-in-law passed away from cancer. Rather than hear to speak about the fact or legally concerning this particular application I would like to advise this Board about background, entitled (). These two subdivisions, which were created some time Page 89 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Heating Transcripts Town of Southold ago which basically required the community consisting of a one-family residences. They comprise of various sorts of homeowners and types of homeowners all of whom are hardworking and there are retired individuals who can't work. There are any number of children who reside in this neighborhood. Starting from infants all the way up to teenagers. When I moved to this subdivision, I had visions of ( ) to stay forever. I still do. However, I also envisioned it and I'm sure others would agree with me, that we saw this as a place so that it would be one-family residential usage of the property. We did not precede any type of businesses within ( ) invading our community. This particular enterprise we view as a commercial enterprise, one of which we did not and something did not certainly envision on when we purchased our home. What is currently before the Board is an item involving the use of the property and a request to go to certain zoning criteria. In particular we're dealing with portion of Article 3, Section 100-31 Subsection B number 5 of the Zoning Code (). I would like to take the opportunity just to address several particular sections to that for which the variances are sought. Additionally, I would like to address Subsection A that deals with the request for setbacks or yet, actual specific requirements for setbacks and a specific criteria which calls for 100 foot setbacks from the building to the street line. As it has been discussed, this street line to the home currently is 50 feet approximately. I think it's actually a little more, about 51. Nevertheless, this required approximately 100% variance. We granted 40 with this particular criteria. The parking setbacks, also requires 100 foot distance from the street line. As proposed the nearest parking spot would be 15 feet from the street line. From my simple mathematical calculations this constitutes over 500% request for a variance. The particular driveway that's been talked about does affect ( ) Street and that would never change. Whether or not they're going to lessen it, or grade it, simply grade it, would greatly increase the volume because I have a driveway. Before I could understand his point but based upon ( ) what they have is (). There must also be a 50 foot setback from a particular property lot line. Currently there is a one side approximately 33 feet on the other side and apparently 31 feet you need to build a home. This constitute over 50% increase and 50% variance is requested. They're also further requirements that insist that the building be fire resistance begin from the structure. I believe this to be a safe built Page 90 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold home without any type of fire safety equipment inside as far as sprinkler systen than anything else. The particular variances being requested for these lot size acreage with respect to the beds would now constitute six as oppose to seven which Mr. Hughes indicated tonight. Regardless as to what constitutes approximate a 20% variance. I would also like to submit several photographs for the Board to review if they so desire. They set forth the exact location the property line distance is and such which I would ask you take a look at your leisure. I think they basically describe and show the distances and distances in ( ) relationship between the adjoining properties and the house itself and the type of size of the coverage. As they say, pictures are worth a thousand words. With respect to what's permitted by the Board that the variances, which are being requested are significant and extreme in light of the criteria that was set forth, more specific. When this particular portion of the Code was adopted, it is clear from the intent of the language, that the Board envision a particular type of property with a particular type of setbacks and a particular description in usage of the property according to the Bill of Particulars and specific criteria. At the current time and presently living in the Town of Southold which is ( ) preservation of guarded light by means of various checks and balances on development, commercial growth and the light to care for ( ) planting, upzoning and compliance with current zoning. Our neighborhood is bound together by a particular fabric, which includes over current uses in the zone that is current there. To approve this application I respectfully submit that you 0 directly exception to the criteria in the code, you can damage this fabric. Furthermore, I believe it makes that a precedence ( ) further and future applications for this particular Board and the erosion of the type of subdivision created for one family residential. As I indicated earlier, I feel qualified to speak on this particular regarding breast cancer survivorship. I appeal to this Board not to allow motions to run ramped and to decide this issue strictly out of factual legal basis with the Board. I apologize for my earlier emotions and unfortunately this is the type of ( ) which is ( ) but to separate ourselves from it. There is not one person in this country I would imagine hasn't been touched in some way by this illness, whether it be friend, relatives or acquaintance. However, I would ask that you'd set that aside in making your decision. I can also suggest to you that families of paramount ( ) this particular situation. Again, I Page 91 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold can speak from personal past experience. Therefore, I respectfully request, that this Board deny this present application to the Board, which is being sought for 895 Highland Road, and allow to maintain the current use of status as a one-family resience. I thank you very much on behalf of myself and anyone else that speaks after me. Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You need to sign in Sir. Thank you. Next person? Ma'am would you raise your fight hand. Do you solemnly swear that the information your about to give us is the truth to the best of your knowledge? MS. McGOWAN: I do. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: State your name please. MS. McGOWAN: My name is Tonya McGowan. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: How do you do? MS. McGOWAN: My husband and I bought the house at 1295 Highland Road, because on the same side of the street one house away from the proposed 895 Highland Road and I'll just read my statements that I'm going to make for the record. My main reason for being opposed to the conversion of this retreat house are as follows: changing the makeup of our neighborhood from a one-family; adding traffic to the street filled with children; and also opening the doors to other group housing that may not be suitable to our neighborhood (). Before buying our house two years ago, I found it very difficult to find a neighborhood without a rundown summer cottage, or, abandoned property in the area but I wanted to find a neighborhood filled with young families. I've been driving through the neighborhood everyday hoping to see a "for sale sign". When 1295 went up for sale on a Thursday, we had our offer accepted by the Monday. My dream had been fulfilled. My 6 year old and 3 year old son had never been without a playmate, or a babysitter. We can walk to ( ) for ice cream, or to the library, and my son's soccer game is right in our neighborhood and those things are priceless to me. By putting a business as a retreat house where there will be different people coming in and going will change the character of our family neighborhood. Our neighborhood does not have sidewalks. We've paved the road for our children to ride their bikes and play. At this point when someone speeds by my house and my children are playing outside I just call them on the phone and tell Page 92 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold them to slow down because I know everybody that goes by. Because the road doesn't go through, and a but having a business that services people from Manhattan to Orient Point, on our street will endanger the children living in our neighborhood. What I fear most, is that the variance, if the variances are accepted, by the Board it will provide an open door to other less favorable group housing, such as a possible drug rehabilitation house for the future. So for the future of our neighborhood, and our children, in turn our children are at risk of being violated if the Board allows the proposed variances to be accepted. In conclusion I wholeheartedly oppose the approval of the proposed variances by Christian Anderson. ! request that the Zoning Board uphold their 1996 decision to protect our family and myself, from being subjected to the proposed changes in our neighborhood. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you, I need you to sign in. Can I just ask you one question before you leave? Are you the house directly to the south? MRS. McGOWAN: North. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: North, oh, directly to the north. MRS. McGOWAN: No, one house away. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: One house away, thank you. Next please. Sir, would you raise your right hand. You solemnly swear the information that you're about to give us is the truth to the best of your knowledge? MR.L'HOMMEDIEN: I do. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: State your name please. MR. L'HOMMEDIEN: Gregory L'Hommediein. CHA1RMAN GOEHRINGER: How do you do. MR. L'HOMMEDIEN: Good evening. I reside at 500 Highland Lane, Cutchogue. I am one of the property owners in Highland Estates and I oppose the application for commercial use in a residential neighborhood. I purchased my house in this residential subdivision because it is zoned residential and I wanted to live in a residential community. I do not want a commercial use in our residential neighborhood. The commercial use will increase traffic in our neighborhood. Presently there are no other parking lots in this neighborhood. I do not want to see a parking lot in our residential subdivision. I purchased my house in this residential subdivision so I would not have to Page 93 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold live next to what's here, for commercial use. Having to walk or drive by this commercial use in our neighborhood adversely affects my quality of life. There are no other commercial uses in this neighborhood. I do not want my property value to decrease because of the proposed commercial use. Thank you. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you Sir, would you come up and sign this. Thank you. Next person. Yes Ma'am. Kindly raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear that the information you're about to give us is the truth to the best of your knowledge? MS. CHRISTINE :Yes. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINER: Would you state your name please. MS. CHRISTINE: My name is Mary Downe Christine and I live at 1350 Highland Lane, Cutchogue and having to walk or drive by the community (inaudible) quality of life. I do not want my property value to decrease because of the proposed commercial use and there are no other commercial uses in this neighborhood. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you very much. Would you come in and sign, thanks. Anybody else? Yes Sir. Kindly raise your right hand Sir? Do you solemnly swear that the information you're about to give us is the truth to the best of your knowledge? MR. SUROZENSKI: I do. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Would you state your name please. MR. SUROZENSKI: Antone Surozenski. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Pleasure to meet you Sir. MR. SUROZENSKI: I live at 525 Highland Road, two houses to the south to the proposal variance. I live there with my wife and two daughters. I built my home in 1985 and there were approximately ten homes in Highland Road. At that time I believe it was a residential neighborhood. Since that time I watched Highland Road grow to approximately at the time 30 homes. There are no commercial uses in the neighborhood. I do not prefer having commercial uses in the neighborhood. I would like it to stay residential without parking lots, etcetera. It effects the value of my home and I do not like to have my home decrease in value. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you Sir. Page 94 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold MEMBER D1NIZIO: Can I him a question? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Sure. MEMBER DINIZIO: I don't mean to pick on you Sir. You probably can hold your own. You say you talk about quality of life and how, it affects you. I heard the last two people. I wonder if you can just ( ) on that, just a little bit as to what bothers you in particular. Mr. SUROZENSKI: I mean that's quality of life. MEMBER DINIZIO: OK, I thought that you were speaking to that and that you object to this for some reason. I didn't quite get the reason why you object. MR. SUROZENSKI. My point I did mention that it is residential (inaudible). MEMBER DINIZIO: All right. Now say if she didn't this application didn't require the variances for say, she met the 100 feet, everything except for the fact that she needed a special exception which is required by law for any of these uses. Would you be in favor of it? MR. SUROZENSKI: No, I'd be disappointed. MEMBER DINIZIO: OK, you would be disappointed but I mean would, you wouldn't be in favor of it? Say, if someone bought a house, there's a 100 feet, they met all the requirements that the lawyer spoke first, stated that this applicant doesn't need. Would you be in favor of it? MR. STUROZENSKI: I don't know why you pick me. MEMBER DINIZIO: No, no, I was just wondering if, if - CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You can refuse to answer the question. MEMBER DINIOZIO: Yeah, you can. I was just wondering. I want a discussion on this because I need to make a decision and if you oppose to it because of the variances that are required, say the parking lot is so close to the road. If it didn't require that, would that be less intrusion on your neighborhood? MR. STUROZENSKI: I wouldn't know. I'm interested in the commercial residential uses. MEMBER D1NIZIO: OK, then I would say, you probably this particular law, what you're concerned about is commercial uses in residential zone? MR. STUROZENSKI: Correct. Page 95 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold MEMBER DINIZIO: OK, that's all, that's what I wanted. MR. STUROZENSKI: Well what would be next? MEMBER DINIZIO: Well let's not worry about ~vhat's next? that's what's a real concern of yours? Lets stay on this but MR. STUROZENSKI: Isn't that ( ) a stepping stone? MEMBER DINIZIO: Right. No, but we can't really discuss you know, we can't worry about what this applicant say enforce the law but you know, if I see your concern, your concern is, there's a business going up and what you always thought was a residential piece of land. MR. STUROZENSKI: Yes, that's what made me buy when I buik my house. I watched it grow from residential and now you're coming into a commercial range - MEMBER DINIZIO: No, I just wanted to be clear on that and I thought' that if I could get the a lesser of an intrusion on you if they had met all of the criteria and I think I'm getting to believe that that's not the case. MR. STUROZENSKI: No~ it isn't. I can't see (). MEMBER DINIZIO: No, I just wanted to see how intrusive you thought it was and I established that idea. Thank you. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER:OK, Ma'am would you kindly raise your hand. Do you solemnly swear that the information your about to give us is the truth to the best of your knowledge? MS. TEDDELBACK: Yes. CHAIRMAN GOEHR1NGER: Would you state your name please. MS. TEDDELBACK: My name is Lisa Teddelback. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: How do you do? MS. TEDDELBACK: Fine, thank you. My name is Lisa Teddelback and I reside at 1530 Highland Lane, Cutchogue with my husband and my father and my 3 year old son. I stand before the Board to speak against the application for the variances submitted by the petition in regard to the home and the ( ) county road. I speak against this proposal because this will be a commercial facility in a residential neighborhood and commercial Page 96 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold business does not belong in a residential neighborhood. My family and I chose to live in this neighborhood because k was family oriented and residential. This will take away the opportunity for another family to live here. When this home is renovated for business as been proposed it would be unlikely that the house would be saleable as a residential home again especially in the event it would be a (). It would be extremely costly to renovate it back to into a family home. It seems to me that the Town of Southold do not want to take away the opportunity for a family because it's a beautiful location as described. This is a decision that will add to the fever of development on the North Fork because there are not enough homes for families to purchase. Allowing families to live here it contributes to the town's desire to reduce the Highland development. I would lastly like to say that no- one in the neighborhood is insensitive to the tragedy of cancer and have (inaudible). I've come to say 0 this Board ( ) and desired that this house do not meet the town requirement of local law county and further exceptions on how to (). This is regarding commercial issue and not a health issue. I strongly urge that the Zoning Board deny this application 0 in the integrity of uses ( ) and provide a new home for a new family. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you Ma'am. Would you sign in please. I just wanted to say that I have to address the organization prior to the end of this hearing because there are certain issues that I want them to address on October 5th, SO at some point we will stop and we will go back into the particular issues that I would like addressed and any other Board Member. Yes Ma'am? Sir, pardon me, I apologize. (changed tape). State your name for the record. MR. REILLY: My name is Thomas Reilly and I live at 770 Highland Road, Cutcho~e and I am one of the adjacent property owners. In fact, 770 is across the street from 895. I purchased my acre in this residential area in 1983 and I built my house again, this residential subdivision because it was zoned residential and I wanted to live and retire here. It was a residential community. Frankly, I never envisioned a commercial use property anywhere in this subdivision and it's across the street and I'm concerned about that. Initial traffic is an issue that I'm concerned about and the children and my grandchildren. I have a lot of them and I'm concerned about the commercial use and the traffic it brings. I have to stress that there are no other parking lots in this residential Page 97 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold community and what I see now in 895 is a residential home. I don't agree with these variances if approved appearing as a residential home. It's a commercial home in a residential community. That's all, thank you. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. Come up and sign in please. Sir, would you kindly raise your fight hand. Do you solemnly swear that the information you're about to give is the truth to the best of your knowledge? MR. NORDSTROM: I do. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: State you name. MR. NORDSTROM: Arthur Nordstrom. I reside at 350 Highland Road, Cutchogue, N.Y. I purchased my house in this residential subdivision because I wanted to live in a community, live in a residential community. I do not want a commercial use in our residential neighborhood. The commercial use will increase traffic in our neighborhood. Presently there are no other parking lots in this neighborhood. I do not want to see a parking lot in a residential subdivision. I purchased my house in this residential subdivision, as a matter of fact, I purchased it in 1985, so I would not have to live next to or near a commercial use. Having to walk or drive by this commercial use in our neighborhood adversely affects my quality of life. There are no other commercial uses in this neighborhood. I do not want my property value to decrease because of the proposed commercial use. Thank you. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. Can I ask you to come up and sign it? Mr. Goggin I need to ask you a question. How many people do you think you might have speaking? MR. GOGG1N: Every property owner in the subdivision. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: OK, so what I need to do at this time is to ask any property owner that may not be at the October 5th hearing to let us know because I need to address the actually I need to address Ms. Anderson and Mr. Hughes and at some point we are going to stop this hearing for the evening that is and that time will be approximately 10:55 OK? And the Board has questions, OK? I guess my question is, are you going to synopsize anything at that point? MR. GOGGINS: I was going to synopsize fight. Page 98 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: So OK, then lets stop at a with the audience participation at approximately 10:45 and we'll let you synopsize and then I'll disguise and then anybody else who hasn't spoken we of course welcome them to speak on October 5th. IS that alright with you? MR. GOGGINS: Yes. CHAIRMAN GOEHIL1NGER: Mr. Sullivan I believe you're next. Mr. Sullivan would you raise your right hand please. Do you solemnly swear the information you're about to give us is the truth to the best of your knowledge? MR. SULLIVAN: I do. My name is John Sullivan. I reside at 1760 Crown Land Lane, Cutchogue. I one of the property owners of Crown Land Estates and I oppose the application for commercial use on a residential application. I built our house on this residential subdivision because it was zoned residential and I wanted to live in a residential subdivision community. We do not want commercial use in our residential subdivision community. Presently there are no other parking lots in the neighborhood. We built our house in this residential subdivision so that I don't have to live next to a mere commercial use. We do not want our property value to decrease because of the proposed commercial use. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you Sir. Could I ask you to sign in? Anybody else? Yes Sir. Sir would you kindly raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear the information your about to give us is the truth to the best of your knowledge? MR. McGOWAN: Yes. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: And what is your name, Sir? MR. McGOWAN: My name is Andrew McGowan. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: How do you do? MR. McGOWAN: Good evening to all present. My name is Andrew McGowan and I live at 1295 Highland Road. I moved to this address two years ago this past June with my wife and two boys, age 6 and 3. The proposed commercial facility is located on my side of the street and one house south of my home. As I understand in 1996 when the R- 40 Zone designation was created certain stipulations to such commercial facilities were affected by the Zoning Board to protect property owners in residential in populated areas Page 99 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold from destruction of the character, quality of life and property values of their neighborhood. Such stipulations were created by a body of people with common sense and the foresight to see the need to preserve and nature our neighborhood for all of its residence young and old alike. The proposed commercial facility at 895 Highland Road, a textbook example, why these zoning stipulations were established and why such a facility is unacceptable in our neighborhood or any Southold neighborhood with similar residential layout. As I see it the variance of special exception should only be considered if number 1, the neighbors, especially those adjacent and near-by do not oppose to variances and exceptions and number 2, if the variances are relatively minor in nature and deviation from the Town Code, do not grasp the effective appearance of the property of the surrounding neighborhood. This is not the case that Ms. Anderson's proposed commercial facility. Number 1, the Town Code expected to protect its citizens and homeowners requires a structure to be setback 100 feet from the street. The setback in question is approximately 51 feet. Number 2, the Town Code expected to protect its citizens and homeowners requires a structure to have a side setback of 50 feet from the neighbor's property owner. The setback in question is approximately 31 feet. Number 3, the Town Code expected to protect its citizens and homeowners requires that there be 8,000 sq. ft. of lot size for every patient. In this case the allowance ( ) by people. Ms. Anderson's request is for seven people total excluding herself, if she desires to live there at such future date. Number 4, the Town Code expected to protect its citizens, homeowners and the people who stay in such a facility requires that the structure be fire proof. I stress that this feature would be extremely important due to the physical condition of Ms. Anderson's proposed patience who would not be able to vacate the structure as readily as most people. I live in a similar structure design and created by the same builder. I believe it would be nearly impossible to reasonably provide fire protection and quick escape so that the inhabitant of such a facility without extensive renovation to build the interior and exterior of the structure. I also do not believe that a two-story dwelling is a proper way out of such a facility. Please note that the proposed variances are not minor, not an exception of such a few feet here or there and not just an extra overnight guest every now and then. The requested variances require that the Page 100 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Heating Transcripts ToWn of Southold property be altered as is evident in Ms. Anderson's site plan, which I find offensive in both appearance and concept. I ask the Board to deny Ms. Anderson's request based on the premise that the code was written with strict setbacks and usage requirements to protect all the R-40 residents of Southold and that the Code was written with the concerns of fire safety also to protect the patients of such a facility. The denial by the Board will send out a clear message to those individuals, organizations and realtors who persist that the code will only be overridden if it is in the best interest of those who have already staked their claim in the neighborhood and also if the proposed variances are within reason. The denial will also send out a clear message that such organizations and facilities should look at the surplus of available properties in the Town of Southold that fit the zoning criteria instead of stubbornly stalling their very own projects while also throwing a neighborhood of decent people in turmoil and subjecting them to unfounded criticism by the local media and partially deformed public. I could have picked anywhere on the North Fork to settle and raise my family and in many ways our neighborhood is inconsistent with the laurel and seaside character of Southold in that it is a true development. I chose to locate to Highland Road because I assumed it to be protected from any commercial development and desire to live in an area densely populated with young families so that my children could enjoy interactive with other families and children close by. What is proposed at 895 Highland Road is a commercial facility, plain and simple profit or non-profit. Once the structure is altered common sense dictates that it is highly unlikely that it would ever revert back to a family residence. What if the proposed facility fails as most small businesses statistically do? What happens then? Neither I nor anyone else knows the answer to these questions. ! can tell you however, that my wife and I are not in a financial situation that affords us to casually or helplessly sit by to watch these uncertainties take their natural course. Were this facility approved my family would be at a serious crossroads regarding our financial and emotional commitment to our home ownership on Highland Road. To sum up my position on this matter I say to all in this room I would never have located to 1295 Highland Road had I known that less than 2-1/2 years later my family and I would be subjected to this situation. I'm going to ask with all due respect that the Zoning Board deny the variances Page 101 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold and special exception and thank everyone for hearing my arguments. In closing I thank my neighbors for their support showing me just how exceptional all of you are. I also would like to address Ms. Anderson by stating with all sincerity that I wish you and your superiors the best of success in your enterprise and hope that it grows into a substantial one in a proper location and site. MS. ANDERSON: I certainly appreciate your sentiment. MR. McGowan: Well we're competent Ms. Anderson that combination of your unfaulted determination in concert with the proper realtors and competent local ( ) will lead to a suitable and affordable location to your facility in the very near future. Goodnight to everyone and may your family be fortunate with good health. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Mr. Goggin? MR. GOGG1N: I'm William Goggins. I represent the property owners. My office is at 11775 Main Road, Mattituck, NY. I've decided that I'm going to reserve my presentation October 5t~ and maybe some of the other people might what to speak before I mean in opposition, they can do that now and I'll make mine on the 5th. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Yes, we're actually going to stop you at this point. We're going to now go into the aspect of what we want to discuss with the applicant. We really didn't do that at that point if it's alright with you. So I do want to say to the people who have spoken I thank you both pro and con for your courtesy. Mr. Hughes, where are You? Ah there you are, OK. Mr. Hughes what we kind of need from you is a list of or at least a detail dollar amount, what I need from you is a detailed dollar amount of what you think you're going to put into this building. MR. HUGHES: To the building itself?. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: To the building itself. Quite honestly, myself, and two of the Board Members did see the building last Saturday and the building is in pretty good condition. I realize that it may not lend itself to exactly what your organization you're representing need for you know to a I'll be very trite because of the hour to crank up this facility. So I really would like to have that prior to October 5th if I could so that we could Page 102- September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold review it and we understand the course of the driveway and so on and so forth and I'm primarily concerned with the interior and any other exterior alterations to include the ramp and of course the cost of the screening that you were referring to and that is all I have to say. I'll start with Mr. Dinizio. MEMBER DINIZIO: I'm going to want to see how this house meets New York State Fire Code. I have a suspicion that it will meet all the criteria but I would like you to present to us you know if this is going to be a State Facility according to state standards. We heard a lot of I did anyway, I don't want it because it ( ) and I have an opinion on that. However, the town has allowed in their intermit wisdom to allow these in residential areas. I'd like to hear a little bit of discussion concerning more of the setback, the established setback in that this is an existing facility and a any case law or any discussion you can have with respect to that. I don't think we can discuss quality of life because that's a personal thing and the traffic the same thing. I'm concerned that you know, no I'll hold off on it because we're going to meet again and we'll be able to make our comments on that. That's all I have to say. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. Ms. Collins? MEMBER COLLINS: Since you're being asked Mr. Hughes for input before the next meeting let me just add something that ! think would be helpful which is a little more clear sense of when this facility assuming it happens is up and going other than presumably six patients probably from what we heard operate it pretty much of capacity sought of who else would be staffing it? How many folks will be around? I think probably a concern of anyone with respect to a new presence in a residential neighborhood is how different is it from a residential use and I know we've heard references to a housekeeper and we've heard reference to a nurse and resident and it's all kind of anecdotal and I would like a sense of what the place will really be like when it's operating in terms of who will be there. Page 103 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold MR. HUGHES: Staff?. MS. COLLINS: Yeah, bodies, not, no, their names. And I also, I think it would just help us to understand the nature of the facility if you can just give us a little submission in the other things that you're giving us of to what extent this particular facility would be, will be regulated by you know, Jim asked about New York State Fire Codes, by other aspects of state or county law having to do with health care facilities or whatever. I mean I haven't a clue to what extent this facility is subject to regulations and I just like to know. I think that's k Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. Mrs. Tortora? MEMBER TORTORA: Yes, one of the things I'd like see to as a ( ) there was a lot of discussion this evening about the appearance that the house would be outward appearance and it would have the outward appearance of a commercial use that would be a parking lot. There are some things we're asked to look at under New York State Town Law is alternative that would not require variance and in looking at the site last Saturday it became apparent to me that you could facilitate virtually all of the parking in your rear yard without any alterations to the front of the house. There are a lot of ways that could be accomplished but one of the ways that's obvious was to maintain the two cars or two- car garage in the front as exists without no alterations to the front of the house and you have that only as access for handicap parking. Alternatives would be to have the driveway extend on the south side of the house to the entry way to the back. Therefore, the entire front of the house would not change the interior portion of that would not change whatsoever and the neighbors concerns here were repeatedly voiced that it would maintain a parking lot, which would be immediately be eliminated as with that variance. So I'd like to see that alternative parking, put forth before this Board. CHAIRMAN GOEHR1NGER: Mr. Horning? MEMBER HORNING: Mr. Hughes. At the next meeting I would like to hear the compelling reason why you situate this facility at this particular location and tell us what other locations you have researched and looked at for alternative site. Also, at this Page 104 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold location then you might have to answer the question why you would not have five beds and eliminate the one bearing it because you would be down to the 4,000, 40,000 sq. ft. drainage with (). I have a couple of other questions. I don't know perhaps these are for Ms. Anderson though. Is there a higher radius cancer in this area? I've read (too many people talking) and am I reading this that you're going to discriminate against men? I'm not a male chauvinist but a, you know I would like you to address that. What is the roll of men? I mean and the internet of breast cancer among men? MS. ANDERSON: It does exist. It's very minimal and we certainly with flaunting in time establish such a retreat house for men and boys. MEMBER HORNING: So you are discriminating? MS. ANDERSON: No, but we're very serious. Why a man would not be allowed into the house is that women are staying there very often with dreams after a mastectomy for example which means that you'd be walking around in a robe and it would not be appropriate to have men intermixing with women at that time. That is actually the reason. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. Mr. Goggins is there anything that you're looking for from this organization at this time that would be filtered through this Board? MR. GOGGINS: The only thing that I could think of would be the contract of sale between the seller and the applicant. MS. ANDERSON: Well, I suspect that the others would disagree with that. Of course no two attorneys would ever agree on anything under the same roof together. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You must approach the Board on that issue. This is Ms. Anderson speaking. MS. ANDERSON: I disagree with respect to Mr. Goggins's request. I don't think it's at all relevant. We have a contract of sale which prior to a closing is not usually revealed to the public as I think (). CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Well, in due respect we ask for those all the time. We have not asked for it at this time. But as I said, this is a democratic organization and it is Page 105 - September 14, 2000 ZBA Public Hearing Transcripts Town of Southold up to the Board and a three to five vote, three to two vote, to a, if they want it, then it's you know, we're going to ask you for it. MS. ANDERSON: Very well, obviously if it's requested then you would have it. We would produce it for you, certainly. Thank you. CH)dRMAN GOEHRINGER: Anything else ladies and gentlemen? Again, I want to reiterate, we thank you for your courtesy. We thank you for coming and we will then hear the rest of the community on October 5th and safe home and we hope the weather is good that night as it is tonight. Ladies and gentlemen I offer a resolution to recess to October 5th. BO)d>,D SECRETARY KOWALSKI: 7:45, right? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: 7:45. MEMBER COLLINS: Second. See Minutes for Resolution. End of Hearings Prepared by Lucy Farrell PH914 duplicate