Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-05/14/1981Southold Town Board of Appeals MAIN ROAD- STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD. L.I., NiY. 11971 TE _EPHONE (518) 765-1809 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS CHARLE~ GRIGONIS. JR., CHAIRMAN SERGE DOYEN, JR. ROBER'~ J. DOUGLASS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER Joseph H. S~m~icki M I N U T E S REGULAR MEETING MAY 14, 1981 A Regular Meeting of the Southold Town Board of Appeals was held on Thursday, May 14, 1981 at 7:00 o'clock p.m. at the South- old Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, New York 11971. Present were: Charles Gr±gonis, Jr. (7:00 7:25 p.m.), Chairman; Serge J. Doyen, Jr.; Robert J. Douglass; Gerard P. Goehringer; Joseph H. Sawicki. Also present were: Mrs. Ruth Oliva (North Fork Environmental Council), Mrs. Shirley Bachrach (League of Women Voters), Mr. Henry Lytle (Seniors Club of Southold-Peconic, Inc.). PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2814. Application of Joseph and Sara Woolston, 27 Greenwood Road, Fishers Island, NY 06390, for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Art. III, Sec. 100-31 for permission to construct deck with an insuffiCient rearyard setback at 27 Greenwood Road, Fishers Island; bounded northeast by F.I. Ferry District; southeast by Gilman; northwest by Bar- mache; east by Greenwood Road; County Tax Map Item No. 1000- 12-1-13.4. The Chairman opened the hearing at 7:08 p.m. by reading the appeal application and related documents, legal notice of hearing and noting affidavits attesting to publication in both the local and official newspapers, Notice of Disapproval from the Building Inspector, and letter from the Town Clerk that notification to adjoining property owners was made; fee paid $15.00. MR. CHAIRMAN: We have a section of the County Tax Map show- ing this area and the surrounding area. Is there anyone here to speak for this application. Anyone to speak against it? (None). I'll offer a resolution granting this as applied for. MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Seconded. Southold Town Board of Appeals -2- May 14, 1981 After investigation and personal inspection, the Board finds as follows: By this appeal, appellants seek permission to construct a 20 by 12-foot deck to the backyard leaving a setback of approximately 21 feet from the rear property line. The property in question as shown on plan revised 6/5/80 by Shepard B. Palmer, P2E. is 163 feet along Greenwood Road, and an average depth of 93 feet. The premises is improved with a preexisting dwelling. The Board finds that the relief requested is not substanti&l in relation to the Code requirements; that ~he relief requested is within the spirit of the zoning ordinance; that the variance if granted will not change the character of the neighborhood; that no adverse effect will be produced on available governmental facil- ities of any increased popUlation; that the hardship or,practical difficulty is unique; and that the interests of justice will be served by granting the requested relief. On motion by Mr. Grigonis, seconded by Mr. Goehringer, it was RESOLVED, that Joseph and Sara Woolston, be granted a variance to the zoning ordinance, Art. III, Sec. 100-31 as applied for. Location of property: 27 Greenwood Road, Fishers Island, NY; County Tax Map Item No. 1000-35-5-20. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Doyen, Douglass, Goehringer, Sawicki and Grigonls. PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2810. Application of Karl E. Fransson, 11 Dodge Drive, West Hartford, CT 06107 for a Variance for approval of access, New York Town Law, Section 280-a. Location of Property: Private Road, Fishers Island, NY; more particularly known as County Tax Map Item No. 1000-3-6-4 and bounded north by Private Road; south, east and west by Fishers Island Development Corp. The Chairman opened the hearing at 7:16 p.m. by reading the appeal application and related documents, legal notice of hearing and noting affidavits attesting to publication in both the local and official newspapers, Notice of Disapproval from the Building Inspector, and letter from the Town Clerk that notification to adjoining property owners was made; fee paid $15.00. MR. CHAIRMAN: We have a section of the County Tax Map showing this area and the surrounding area. We have a survey of the prop- erty. Is there anyone here to speak for this application? Anyone to speak against it? (Negative) Do any of the Board members have any questions? (Negative) I'll offer a resolution closing the hearing. Southold Town Board of~'APpeals -3- 14, 1981 On motion by Mr. Grigonis, seconded by Mr. Douglass, it was RESOLVED, to close the hearing in the matter of Karl E. Fransson, Appeal No. 2810. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Doyen, Douglass, Goehringer, Sawicki and Grigonis. At 7:24 p.m. the Chairman asked Member Goehringer to act as Chairman in his place. (The Chairman was not feeling well, and left the meeting until approximately~ 10:15 p.m.) PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2816. Application of Odysseas Pyrovolakis, 83-16 170th Street, Jamaica, NY 11432, for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Art. III, Sec. 100-31 for permission to construct dwelling with insufficient front and rear yard setbacks at 3180 Stars Road, East Marion, NY; Stars Manor Subd. Filed Map ~3864, Lot 26; County Tax Map Item No. 1000-22-2-19; bounded north by Zerris, west and south by Stars Road, east by Schroeder. The Chairman opened the hearing at 7:25 p.m. by reading the appeal application and related documents, legal notice of hearing and noting affidavits attesting to publication in both the local and official newspapers, Notice of Disapproval from the Building Inspector, and letter from the Town Clerk that notification to adjoining property owners was made; fee paid $15.00. ACTING CHAIRMAN: We have a survey in the file indicating the proposed position of the house and County Tax Map indicating where it appears in the subdivision. Is there anyone here that would like to speak in favor of this variance? MR. SGOUROS: Would the Board desire any additional information with respect to the location of the house--we would be glad to provide it. We have some drawings if it is appropriate at this time? SECRETARY: Your name please. MR. SGOUROS: Sgouros. This is the map. The width of the house would be as it is situated right now. We need this southern exposure, and the dimensions in size is very little variation as the northern is, by classifying the 50-50 and classify this as a sideyard. ACTING CHAIRMAN: Are these active solar panels, or just roof. MR. SGOUROS: Just roof. ACTING CHAIRMAN: Is this a passive or an active system? Southold Town Board of Appeals -4- May 14, 1981 MR. SGOUROS: Passive. A lot of window space. We need the window space for a greenhouse effect and also for hot water. MEMBER DOYEN: My nephew has one that's surprisingly -- (remainder of statement was inaudible.) MR. SGOUROS: They're very good. This will be the layout on the site, the first floor. ACTING CHAIRMAN: Oh this greenhouse goes up from the first floor. MR. SGOUROS: In comparison to the other houses, we think it will add to the area because it probably is going to be more of a house than most of the houses in the area. MEMBER DOYEN: It's very attractive. MR. SGOUROS: It3s a very attractive house. And actually-- I happen to have a lot just across the street from it, but I Won't be facing the same situation. If this is approved, th~nl I will proceed in my own behalf across the street. But we're both facing the same limitation. We beg in this petition that you favorably pass on this variance. ACTING CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much. Is there anybody else that would like to speak in favor of this variance? Anybody to speak against the variance? (Negative) Hearing no further testi- mony, I'll make a motion to reserve decision until later tonight. MEMBER DOUGLASS: Seconded. On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Douglass, it was RESOLVED, to close the hearing and reserve decision in the matter of Odysseas Pyrovolakis until later tonight, in Appeal No. 2816. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Doyen, Douglass, Sawicki and Goehringer. (Mr. Grigonis was absent.) At the end of the hearing, Mr. Sgouros had agreed to drop off or mail a copy of the building plans to the Board of Appeals as soon as possible. , , . PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2819. Application of Donald Scott, Critten's Lane, Southold, NY for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Art. III, Sec. 100-31 for permission to construct addition to dwelling with insufficient front and rear yard setbacks at the northeast corner of Beachwood Lane and Critten's Lane, Southold; bounded north by Hoffmeister; west by Oates; south by Beachwood Lane; east by Critten's Lane; County Tax Map Item NO. 1000-70-11-8. The Chairman opened the hearing at 7:35 p.m. by reading the /appeal application and related documents, legal notice of hearing Southold Town Board of k~peals -5- Ma~ 14, 1981 and noting affidavits attesting to publication in both the local and official newspapers, Notice of Disapproval from the Building Inspector, and letter from the Town Clerk that notification to adjoining property owners was made; fee paid $15~00. ACTING CHAIRMAN: We have a survey in the file indicating the position Of the present house, the addition, which is the subject of this variance, and a copy of the County Tax Map indicating the property and the surroundmng properties. Is there anybody here that would like to speak in behalf of this variance? Yes, sir, could you please step up to the mike. We're trying to get this on the tape. I hope it's working. CHARLES HOFFMEISTER: My name is Charles Hoffmeister, and I just wanted it noted that I have.no objections. ACTING CHAIRMAN: Thank you. WILMA HOFFMEISTER: I'm Wilma Hoffmeister, and I h~ve no objec- tion to this either. ACTING CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Is there anybody else to speak in behalf of this application? Anybody to speak against it? Hearing no further testimony, I'll offer a resolution to reserve decision on this until a later date. MEMBER DOUGLASS: Seconded. On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Douglass, it was RESOLVED, to close the hearing and reserve decision in-.the matter of Donald Scott in Appeal No. 2819. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Doyen, Douglass, Sawicki and Goehringer. (Mr. Grigonis was absent.) PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2820. Application of Alfred T. and Audrey M. Young, North Bayview Road, Southold, NY for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Art. VII, Sec. 100-70A, B, for permission to convert preexisting nonconforming dwelling into a two-family dwelling in a B-1 District. Location of property: 295 Beckwith Avenue, Southold; bounded north by Mallgraf; west by Southold Equities and Plyko; south by Bucci; east by Beckwith Avenue; County Tax Map Item No. 1000-61-1-23. (by Rudolph H. Bruer, Esq. as attorney). The Acting Chairman opened the hearing at 7:43 p.m. by reading the appeal application and related documents, legal notice of hearing and noting affidavits attesting publication in both the local ~ 0 and official newspapers, Notice of Disapproval from the Building Inspector, and letter from the Town Clerk that notification to ~djoining property owners was made; fee paid $15.00. Southold Town Board of Appeals -6- May 14, 1981 ACTING CHAIRMAN: We have a survey indicating the house on the property, and we have a county tax map indicating the position of the property with respect to the surrounding properties in the area. Is there anybody that would like to speak in behalf of this appli- cation? RUDOLPH BRUER, ESQ.: Rudolph Bruer on behalf of the applicants. I would just like to state basically that we have an unrealistic zoned area for this time. The zoning there is business and the houses on that street are residential and I believe all but one of them on that street is a nonconforming two-family house. What we have is a house that was built prior to the present zoning ordinance. As a residential house the zoning came in back in 1957 and the various changes up to date. Originally it did not prohibit up use of the property. In other words, if you had a business zone you could always use it for a one-family dwelling, you could also use it for a multiple, etc. Two or three years ago to avoid cer- tain problems the Town Board changed that to noncumulative zoning, so therefore if you didn't have the exact use unless you were nonconforming or grandfather clause type situation'.you were stuck with the use that the ordinance said, and unless you got a variance from this Board. I would say that the premmses on that street, think you all are familiar with it having visited it, is suitable for two-family dwellings. As I said the houses mn the area are primarily, as a matter of fact all but one, are two-family except for the Church and Grange gomng on one side gomng down to the stores-businesses on Main Street. I don't believe and I don't think the Board really would.believe that pedestrian traffic is going to walk down the street to this particular property at this particular time, and I think that's more like 20 years from now when that property will be used strictly for business. It is primarily in the heart of town and it's beautifully suited for a two-famil57 dwelling. There is a need for this type of housing in the town. I think the town ms appreciating that, and I believe it should be granted for that reason. Again, the structure of the district, the existing structure is not suitable for a business at this particular time. Now there are practical difficulties. Basically, ~he Youngs own the house. They wanted, if you denied it, what they would be able to do would be to rent it, and it could only be rented for a one-family dwelling. With respect to reasonable return, I notice the Board requires certain information. Do you want that by sworn testimony and witnesses, or will you take my statements as it exists right now from the floor? I can give you the cost of the building, various maintenance costs~ and things like that. MR. CHAIRMAN: It's a good question, Counsel, because our Chairman isn't here. I don't know what to suggest. Do you want to swear him in, Bob? MEMBER DOUGLASS: I don't. Let him give wkat his information is and then let him give it to us in writing. MR. CHAIRMAN: Why don't you just give us your information tonight, and when you have the additional information, we'll-- Southold Town Board of Appeals -7- May 14, 1981 (Alfred YoUng, Appeal No. 2820 continued:) MR. BRUER: Well, I can give you certain information from my own knowledge having represented some of the parties in this transaction from the point where the Youngs bought the property. I represented the seller at that time, the Estate of Helen Linton. I know that the property was sold for $60,000. I know for a fact that there is a $20,000 mortgage. I know for a fact that the interest payments at this particular year run $2,000 a year. I know for a fact that the -- MRS. YOUNG: A year is too long to wait. I'm getting old. MR. BRUER: That's Mrs. Young. Insurance is -- MRS. YOUNG: I am. MR. BRUER: $398 a year. The taxes in 1980-81 were approxi- matelY-S1,000, a little bit over. I know for a fact that the 1979-80 taxes were $938 I think. I don't know what their fuel bill for that would be. I don't know what the other repairs are but if you add all this up, and the maximum amount of return that you could probably obtain on this building is approximately $350 a month for a one-family dwelling. You have a zero or minus return. You lost money. You should be using this as a business, saying to these people, they got a business, their business is losing money. As a two-family dwelling, you can double that, or $700 a month, and that makes sense. The uniqueness of the situation is that you have a one-family dwelling in an area that's primarily two-family dwellings in a business zone. You're not going to change the character of the neighborhood because all but one I think and maybe that's not even true, all but one of the buildings in that street are two-family, You go through Main Street to the Grange to the railroad tracks. And adjoining this property is you read in your notice Southold Equities which I think is a business, not businessmbut I think are looking for a multiple use, and then there,s the Traveler. So I don't think it's unreasonable for the request that's been made here. Thank you. Oh, excuse me. I believe you also have as part of the record, I think plans of the proposed alterations? MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes, I was just going to say that we do have the plans of the second floor. Is there anybody else that would like to speak on behalf of this application? Yes, Mrs. Young? MRS. YOUNG: A year is too long to wait. I mean I work for a living, and I have to make judgments like this, and we've waited a whole year for this decision. And I think it's too long. I hope I'm not out of order. I think a year is too long to wait. MR. CHAIRMAN: I don't know what you mean by"a year". MR. YOUNG: It hasn't been applied for, Audrey. MR. CHAIRMAN: This is the first initial part of the application. Southold Town Board ~f Appeals -8- May 14, 1981 MRS. YOUNG: You're right, Alfred. I forgot about that. The other one waited a year. MR. CHAIRMAN: It has been approximately a month or so. MRS. YOUNG: I mean, you know. A decision~-is a decision, and I have to make them daily.. I can't go to the office and say, "Well, let me wait a year and tell you--" I don't mean to be out of order, but I just would appreciate an answer. MR. CHAIRMAN: I don't think you're out of order. I understand what you're saying. You're very welcome to say what you would like. MRS. YOUNG: Money is money. MR. Y©UNG: May I say something in my own behalf? MR. CHAIRMAN: Certainly. MR. YOUNG: I'm Alfred T. Young. My wife and I bought the house. Our intention is to eventually live in the first floor, and if you grant the two family we'll rent the upper floor. It's a very nice house, built in 1910. It raised in it 12 children of the Dickerson Family. You cannot raise a 12-children family these days. So a one-family house is not what that house is going to be used for in the future. So if we make it a two family, if it's granted, eventually we'll sell the house that we're in and yes we'll move in there and we'll rent the upstairs. Another apartment in town is needed. Many people are looking. The expense to rent it as a one-family house, as attorney Bruer said, would not bring in enough money to support that building. The heat alone in a big house like that goes right up through the roof the way it was constructed. With a reconstruction into two family, it will prevent a lot of heat from going out the roof by making a two-family situation. And basically that's the plan that we have. And that's the purpose of buying the building, and yes, it is a commercial area now but I dare say in our lifetime, we're not going to see any business basically on that street. And the next good use for that property from a one-family area is into a multiple dwelling. A two-family situation. Eventually it will be business. Again, I doubt whether we're going to see it in our age of time. So our request is to try and put it into two family, u~e the first floor, rent the second floor, and continue from there. And I dare say the construction that we put into the house we've put some into the first floor area and have improved it considerably. We would like your considera- tion to make it two family and get the apartment made upstairs. MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. I would just like to say Mr. Young that there is a committee being formed between the Planning Board and the Zoning Board, and we are going to study this particular problem. The situation is such that we have not actively met. We are in the process of meeting on zoning code revisions at this Southold Town Board of Appeals -9- May i~, 1981 particular time. Mr. Douglass is the member on the committee and I'm the alternate of that committee. I can't tell you when we will meet, but it would not have any affect upon our decision here based upon what happens there, but we are perfectly aware of what's going on and what the town is presently in need of in reference to rental units. Thank you. MRS. YOUNG: Can I ask you one thing. If the whole block is two family, why does there have to be consideration of another family being two-family? I don't understand. If the whole block is two family, I mean-- am I making myself clear? MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes, you are. The bulk schedule as we deal with it basically states, Mrs. Young, that you are supposed to have 80,000 square feet of land to denote a two-family house in Southold Town. MRS. YOUNG: I can't have a decision tonight, because I have to make up my mind? MR. CHAIRMAN: I can't tell you that. MRS. YOUNG: You can't give me a decision tonight? MR. CHAIRMAN: I can't give you a decision now, and I can't tell you what will happen later when we go into recessed decisions, or deliberations, executive session. All I can do is tell you to call the Town Hall tomorrow morning. MRS.YOUNG: There's no way of getting a decision? I can't wait forever. MR. CHAIRMAN: Does anybody else wish to speak on behalf of this application? Does anybody like to speak against the appli- cation? A~ybo~y on the Board like to say anything? (Negative) Hearing no further testimony, I would like to close the hearing and reserve decision until a later date. MEMBER DOUGLASS: Seconded. On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Douglass, it was RESOLVED, to close the hearing and reserve decision until a later date. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Douglass, Doyen, Goeh- ringer and Sawicki. (Member Grigonis was absent.) Southold Town Board of Appeals Ma,-ii4, 1981 PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2821. Application of Peter and Helen Puric, 1250 Second Street, New Suffolk, NY for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Art. III, Sec. 100-31 for permission to construct addition to dwelling with an insufficient rearyard set- back at 1250 Second Street, New Suffolk, NY; bounded north by Capaldo; west by private right-of-way; south by Victoria; east by Kinirsky; County Tax Map Item No. 1000-117-7-23. The Acting Chairman opened the hearing at approximately 8:00 o'clock p.m., read the appeal application in its entirety and related documents, legal notice of hearing and noting affidavits attesting to publication in both the local and official news- papers, Notice of Disapproval from the Building Inspector, and letter from the Town Clerk that notification to adjoining property owners was made; fee paid $15.00. ACTING CHAIRMAN (Goehringer): Is there anyone that would like to speak in behalf of this application? RUDOLPH H. BRUER, ESQ.: Yes, Rudolph Bruer on behalf of the applicants. Again we have a situation where we have a developed area that was developed prior to the zoning ordinance, the res- trictions on the size of lots that we are trying to overcome in this particular application. What the applicant really wants to do is to square off that building, go out beyond where it's jaggered, if you have that survey, go out there an additional six feet and then attach a 10-foot deck. That would leave approximately 29' rearyard which is I think more than sufficient for the area. I think it's a reasonable request. The building was originally constructed to be a summer-type use. The present applicant has spent a lot of money fixing up what's there already, and he's creating a more permanent-type structure although the building seems to have been there forever. The addition would be a, I think, aesthetically nice for the neigh- borhood and would help the applicant, the living quarters, and would help the residents and the town. And we respectfully request that you grant this application because I think it's very reasonable. ACTING CHAIRMAN (Goehringer): Mr. Bruer, can I ask you two questions? MR. BRUER: Sure. ACTING CHAIRMAN (Goehringer): We received something from Ronnie's Home Improvements on May 12th. The application reads that the rearyard will be 29 feet, and the sketch that came from the home improvement company reads 45 feet. Secondly, the sketch that we have in the file that was given to us when the application was filed shows the sideyard on the south of approxi- mately two feet, and again this sketch that Ronnie's Home Improve- ments gave us shows three feet. MR. BRUER: I guess his ruler and Mr. VanTuyl's mre a little Southold Town Board'-~of Appeals -11- (Appeal No. 2821 - Peter and Helen Puric) May 14, 1981 different, but, regarding Ronnie's sketch, I think there's a second page to it, which then shows the addition which would then show a backyard of 37 feet and that doesn't take into consideration the depth. ACTING CHAIRMAN (Goehringer): I see. MR. BRUER: That would come pretty much with can't explain the three-foot sideyard. ACTING CHAIRMAN (Goehringer): Would you let that, what the actual sideyard is-- MR. BRUER: I would assume Mr. VanTuyl ls cot as it goes on there, maybe his intention, as he b there, it would come out three feet from the line Mr. VanTuyl's survey is as of the existing buildi line of the projected construction probably will feet from the line. ay line. I us know about rect. But, uilds on because ng. Now his ~ake it three I think that's what he means. ACTING CHAIRMAN: Would you let us know? The reason why this is such a critical question is because if you see the property on the south line is a chainlink fence which runs parallel to the house and actually stops at the house, and indicating when we down there doing the inspection, the property owner to the south came over and he very simply said, "That,s where the monument is." And I don't think he knows where the monument is. I don't think anybody to date knows where the monument is. The chainlink fence appears to be on this property. So -- MR. BRUER: Well, the survey that you haze there is dated October of 1980. It's a guaranteed survey by Mr. VanTuyl for the Purics and also as you can see guaranteed to the title company, so I would-- ACTING CHAIRMAN: May I see yours? We have a poor copy. MR. BRUER: You can have that if you want it. ACTING CHAIRMAN: Oh, yes, that's much better. MR. BRUER: Sorry about that. ACTING CHAIRMAN: No, that's all right. MR. BRUER: But that's the line and it's on-- ACTING CHAIRMAN: This looked like a 1930 sketch. MR. BRUER: It must be my copier. ACTING CHAIRMAN: This shows two feet. Southold Town Board 6f Appeals -12- (Appeal No. 2821 - Peter and Helen Puric) Ma~ t14, 1981 MR. BRUER: I think the fence is definitely on our line. That's a current survey if I might point out. ACTING CHAIRPLAN: Yes. I couldn't read the other. MR. BRUER: I'll leave that for your file. ACTING CHAIRMAN: Could you also Ronnie to come in and amend this portion in the back here indicating the deck on the rear of the addition? He's not showing the deck which reduces it down to the 29 feet. MR. BRUER: Ok. ACTING CHAIRMAN: Is there anybody else that would like to speak in behalf of this application? Is there anybody that would like to speak against the application? (None) Does anybody have anything to say on this board? (None) Hearing no further testimony or discussion, I'll make a motion to reserve decision until a later date. Thank you. On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Doyen, it was RESOLVED, to close the hearing and reservedecision in the matter of the application of Peter and Helen Puric,. Appeal No. 2821. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Douglass, Doyen, Sawicki and Goehringer. (Mr. Grigonis was absent.) The Chairman called a ~recess at 8:12 p.m. The Chairman reconvened the meeting at approximately 8:17 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2825. Application of Wilhelm Pranken, 75 Carroll Street, Brooklyn, NY 11231 for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Art. III, Sec. 100-32 for permission to build garage in the front, side and rear yard areas at 830 Tarpon Drive, Greenport, NY; bounded north by Starkie; west by Reese; south by Weismann; east by Southold Shores Association; County Tax Map No. 1000-57-1-8 and 9. A~ting Chairman Goehringer opened the hearing at approxi- mately 8:19 o'clock p.m., read the legal notice of hearing, appeal application, notice of disapproval, and related docu- ments pertaining to this hearing. ACTING CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: We have a copy of the survey indicating the proposed garage which lies approximately 50 feet from Tarpon Drive and approximately 15 feet from the sideyard Ma~ 14, 1981 Southold Town Board of Appeals -13- (Appeal No. 2825 - Wilhelm Franken) and a copy of the County Tax Map indicating this property and the surrounding properties. Does anybody wish to speak in behalf of this application? HENRY WEISSMAN: Chairman and members of the board. My name is Henry Weissman and I am, and my wife, the only people who would be affected by this application. We live immediately to the, I thought it was, the east but apparently it's the south of the premises in quesion. We feel that the proposed structure, construction of this garage, will in no way adverse- ly affect our property nor our enjoyment of our property, nor out tranquility in living there. As a matter of fact Mr. Franken stopped by this morning to advise me that would be unable to attend this meeting, so at his behest I am here and for the purpose of asking this Board to act favorably upon his application and grant it. If you have any questions, we will be perfectly happy to answer them. ACTING CHAIrmAN GOEHRINGER: Would anyone else like to speak in behalf of this application? Anybody like to speak against it? (None) Do any of you fellows have any questions? Hearing no further questions, I'll make a motion approving this application as applied for. MEMBER SAWICKI. Second. (The findings and determination of the board are continued on the next page.) Southold Town Board of Appeals -14- May 14, 1981 DECISION: Appeal No. 2825. Application of Wilhelm Franken, 75 Carroll Street, Brooklyn, NY 11231 for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Art. III, Sec. 100-32 for permission to build garage in the front, side and rear yard areas at 830 Tarpon Drive, Greenport, NY; bounded north by Starkie; west by Reese; south by Weismann; east by Southold Shores Association; County Tax Map Item Nos. 1000-57-1- 8 and 9. After investigation and personal inspection, the Board finds and determines as follows: By this appeal, appellant seeks permission to construct a 24' by 24' detached garage in ~hel frontyard area, 50' from the front property line, and in the sideyard area, 15' from the easterly sideyard line. The premises in question is 19,867 square feet in area and immediately abuts Southold Shores Subdivision Lot ~38 also owned by the appellant and his wife (containing area of approxi- mately 22,000 square feet). Existing on Subdivision Lot ~37, the subject portion, is a one-family wood framed dwelling. Constructed along the rear property line is a substantial bulkhead the full length of the premises. The Board finds that the relief requested is not substantial in relation to the Code requirements; that the relief requested is within the spirit of the zoning ordinance; that the variance if granted will not change the character of the neighborhood; that no adverse effect will be produced on available governmental facil- ities of any increased population; that the hardship or practical difficulty is unique; and that the interests of justice will be served by granting the requested relief. On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Sawicki, it was RESOLVED, that Wilhelm Pranken be granted a variance to the zoning ordinance, Art. III, Sec. 100-32 as applied for in Appeal No. 2825 to construct detached garage in the front and sideyard area. Location of Property: 830 Tarpon Drive, Greenport, NY; bounded north by Starkie, west by Reese, south by Weisman, east by Southold Shores Association. County Tax Map Item No. 1000-57- 1-8 and 9. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Doyen, Douglass, Sawicki and Goehringer. (Mr. Grigonis was absent.) Southold Town Board of Appeals -15- May 14, 1981 PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2822. Application of David Strong, Box 1033, Mattituck, NY for a Special Exception to the Zoning Ordinance, Art. VI, Sec. 100-60C(2) (a) for permis- sion to erect sign with insufficient front and side yard setbacks at 11455 Main Road, Mattituck, NY; bounded north by Van Ryswyk and O'Neil; east by Mileska; south by S.R. 25; west by Burgon; County Tax Map Item No. 1000-142-2-17. The Acting Chairman opened the hearing at approximately 8:26 o'clock p.m., read the appeal application, notice of hearing, notice of disapproval and related documents pertain- ing to this appeal. ACTING CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: We have a copy of the building permit indicating where the sign is to be placed. And we have a county tax map indicating this property and the surrounding properties in the area. Does anybody wish to speak in behalf of this application? DAVID STRONG: Yes, I'm David Strong, your best customer here. It was our understanding when we first went before the Planning Board, we went to them and we laid this out for them. There was an existing sign there that has been changed many times, the last one was called "The Black Oak Restaurant." That sign we have since cut down to 4' by 4' post, was where we were going to place our existing sign which is directly across the street. We got permission to put the boat in the front and we were trying to do this as I am sure you are all aware, nice, and we spent a lot of money on the front, and so I asked Mr. Hindermann, and I said, "You know all I want to do is move the sign across the street." And the Planning Board came down and Said, "We don't want to block the access to this." The sign, we checked it with the car to drive under it and you can see when you go out, it is high enough, I am sure so that you can see when you're sitting in the car. They said, "Well you can't do this because it doesn't mee~ the requirements." Well, that sign has been there I don't know how many years, and I've been there 15 years, the existing sign. I must agree if I measured it, it doesn't meet the requirements. I'm not arguing that. I just feel very frustrated by this. We tried to do it right. The only way we could put that sign was in this location because that would place it off to the east of the blacktop road, which we're trying to maintain as an entrance and an exit. That side happens to be the entrance. The only other location to place the sign and meet the requirements would be to put it in front of the building, which could be done. But when we originally went to the Planning Board and we laid this all out, and they approved for us to use that area for the display of boats, and of course we have been, you know, to you people for that. And that came to everybody's approval and we met that. And then when -- all I can say is I really just don't know what to say. You know, we tried to meet these requirements. There is no other way that we can do it but to erect the sign in Southold Town Boar~ /of Appeals (Appeal No. 2822 - David Strong) -16- Mg~14, 1981 the position of where the Black Oak sign is. The only other place we could place we could put the sign would be on the other end of the property where the oak trees are, and those are the oak trees that have been there for years. The neighbor to the east, he wishes, you know, if I'm going to cut them down then cut them down, but they're really nice oak trees and I would hate to do i~. So I would like to see this approved because once again I feel it's the only way we can do it aesthetically nice. ACTING CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Can you tell me how big the sign is? MR. STRONG: Well, it's right across the street. It's, that sign has been approved by the town. I don't know the exact measurements, but the permit ~387 or whatever it is. It's listed there. The sign was approved to a maximum limit of the town, I believe that was 5 by 6. ACTING CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: 4' by 6' MR. STRONG: Ail right. 4' by 6' That's what, it's actually a little bit less than that. The sign is the maximum height up and we did that before because at Lindsay's, people come in that road too and they want to be able to see so you don't smack into somebody. And that's all our intent to pick that sign up physically and put it where that Black Oak, those two 4 by 4's, that Black Oak sign was. That's really what we have in mind. ACTING CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is there anybody that would like to speak in behalf of this application? Anybody else? Anybody to speak against the application? Any of you gentle- men have any questions? (None) Hearing no further questions, I make a motion to reserve decision until some time later today, and I think you, Mr. Strong, for coming in again. On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Doyen, it was RESOLVED, to close the hearinq and reserve decision until a little lager today in the matter of Appeal No. 2822, appli- cation Of David Stronq. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Doyen, Douglass, Goeh- ringer and Sawicki. (Member Grigonis was absent.) Southold Town Board o~.Appeals -17- Ma~_~14, 1981 PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2817. Application of Stephen J. Kmetz, Jr., 652 Village Drive, Hauppauge, NY 11788 for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Art. III, Sec. 100-31 to construct dwell- ing at 550 Greenway West, Orient, NY; bounded north by McCoughlin; west by Greenway West; south by Eufemia; east by Stuke; County Tax Map Item No. 1000-15-1-19. The Chairman opened the hearing at approximately 8:33 p.m., and read the legal notice of hearing in its entirety and appeal application, and letters of objection concerning this application. MR. ACTING CHAIRMAN (GOEHRINGER): We have a copy of a survey which indicates that the applicant is asking for a 42' setback from Greenway West, that is a frontyard setback; and a 35' setback for rearyard. And we have a copy of the tax map showing this property and the surrounding properties in the area. Would anybody like to speak in favor of this application? STEPHAN J. KMETZ: Good evening. I am Mr. Kmetz. The Associa- tion I belong to, one of their restrictions is that I have to stay 25 foot off the side line. Originally when the builder got the permit, it was put on the ll-foot line, which is in direct violation with the Association. So what I am asking is for you people in relaxing the rearyard and the frontyard. Most of the homes there now are 40 feet from the street. I don't know what else to say. I hope you approve it because I was going to retire and spend the rest of my few years out there. Well, anyway, that's it -- I really don't know what else to say. But the property itself, it's most irregular--the west is 181 feet west. South is 113 feet. East, I think it runs 167. North is 119. So it's sort of a crooked rectangular shape, and at the time I was looking at the property, it didn't look crooked to me. I thank you for your time. MR. ACTING CHAIRMAN: Does anyone else wish to speak in favor of the application? (None) Mr. Douglass would like to ask you a question, Mr. Kmetz. MEMBER DOUGLASS: Is there covenants on that area? ~. KMETZ: Yes. You see, originally you.people gave me an 11' sideline, and that's where I ran into a little difficulty. It's here, either the second or third paragraph down. (...5 .... Any structures constructed on any lot shall be set back 40 feet from the front property line and 25 feet from the side line .... ) Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions Dated the 31st Day of December 1977 by Petty's Bight Assn., Inc. MRS. SOPHIE GRANLIKE: We really don't know what is going on here-- ACTING CHAIRMAN: Could we have your name? MRS. GRANLIKE: Sophie Granlike. I'm in the area, I'm down directly across from him. Southold Town Board of Appeals -18- Ma~ 14, 1981 (Appeal No. 2817 - Stephen J. Kmetz continued:) ACTING CHAIRMAN: Would you like to use the mike? We have to get used to using the mike because a lot of people -- we don't know who is who during the hearing, and this has to all be put down on paper. MRS. GRANLIKE: Ok. I'm Sophie Granlike. I,m a neighbor of Mr. Kmetz, and he,s directly across from me. Now I don't know what's going on here. We have restrictions in our area for ail the homeowners there, which we have a setback of 40 feet from the front property line, a 40-foot setback and 25 feet side line, and each and everyone in there has built a home accordingly. I mean they've accommodated the house to the lot, let's say, that is within our restrictions. ACTING CHAIRMAN: If you'd like to look at this apPlication, you are very welcome to look at it. It appears that he is look- ing for a frontyard setback of 42 feet. MRS. GRANLIKE: But our resnrictions are 40 feet, so it's right within that. What are the sidelines? ACTING CHAIRMAN: 30 and 53. MRS. GRANLIKE: Would there be any problems now, because adjoining properties like mine, probably like cesspools and wells--no problems there--Board of Health all right, where they'll be set up? ACTING CHAIRMAN: The Board of Health requires 100 feet between well and cesspools. We, of course, can't make that determination. But the lot is 181 feet on the road, so it appears that -- MRS. GRANLIKE: Well it is on the lot-- ACTING CHAIRMAN: Yes. Is there anything else that you would like to look at? Would you like to look at the application? MRS. GRANLIKE: I'm not an officer of Petty, I'm just a property owner in there. Mr. Smith is an officer of Petty's Bight Association that we have in there. So I think Mr. Smith would be the one having to look at it, but he wouldn't -- (remainder of statement not audible). He's rather have others in on it also, the other officers. Thank you. MR. SMITH: One point I would like to make, the home as I see it now would be 42 feet from the road, 45 feet in from each side, I mean they would have about 35 feet in the back instead of 50, and is 50 feet a town rule? ACTING CHAIRMAN: For a frontyard. And rearyard. MR. SMITH: For a front and rear it should be 50? Southold Town Board Of Appeals -19- May~14, 1981 (Appeal No. 2817 - Stephen J. Kmetz, continued:) ACTING CHAIRMAN: That's correcn, sir. MRS. GRANLIKE: When did this 50-feet setback go in, because we have our own restrictions in there also, and all the houses in there have been going according to that? ACTING CHAIRMAN: Several years ago. MRS. GRANLIKE: Well, although we've been -- when is that, 1962, I think the map was-- ACTING CHAIRMAN: When I say several, I mean, four, five. MRS. GRANLIKE: So let's say we were in existence before you-- ACTING CHAIRMAN: Well, Southold Town was in existence. MRS. GRANLIKE: Yes, I know, but the restrictions for a 50-foot setback. ACTING CHAIRMAN: That's correct. MEMBER DOUGLASS: I would like to ask a question, are you-- Mrs. Granlike, are you still one of the enforcing officers of this association? MRS. GRANLIKE: No, it ended in 1978, our -- Now it's done by the association. Right. MEMBER DOUGLASS: Your regulations-- MRS. GRANLIKE: They picked i5 up and they have set up a new set of rulings, but it is, they are recorded. MEMBER DOUGLASS: They come ahead of our zoning, if they are stronger. However, I just want to say this. If one party chanqes those regulations, makes a change in those regulations without ~he authority of your association, these will be damaged. MRS. GRANLIKE: That's right. It would be. MEMBER DOUGLASS: Now yours are stronger than ours right now, on some of this stuff. Sideyard and things. They precede ours. MRS. GP~ANLIKE: So, actually if you don't let this here go, to the 42 setback and you're requiring the 50, and if you make him put it to 50, well he just can't put up his house because he would- n't have sufficient backyard or whatever. MEMBER DOUGLASS: Well, he has to meet your standards where they are stronger than the town's. Where the town's are stronger, he would have to meet the town's or get a variance on the town's. So I just wanted to bring that out because when you have your own Southold Town Board of Appeals -20- May~14, 1981 (Appeal No. 2817 - Stephen J. Kmetz, continued:) MEMBER DOUGLASS continued: covenants, changes in it to one eliminate the control on the balance of your property. MRS. GRANLIKE: Right. And the area looks the way it does because of our restrictions. I mean nothing is haphazard there. MEMBER DOUGLASS: He needs to get your permission, or whatever, along with ours. MRS. GRANLIKE: That's right. Yes. MEMBER DOUGLASS: May we keep this so that we make a photo- static copy of it to put with the application, and then we'll mail it back to you. MR. SMITH: Certainly. Would your objection be on the back, or the front, or both? MEMBER DOUGLASS: I don't know whether we'd have any objections, but I'm saying that he has to get your permission. ACTING CHAIRMAN: Do you have any other questions, gentlemen? MR. KMETZ: I don't see the problem here. I got a letter from the association, saw over my plans, and gave me the go ahead to build the house. If you can go on the 40 front, 25 side, I don't see what the problem is here. ACTING CHAIRMAN: I really don't think there is any problem here. I can't speak for the board, but I don't think there is. Ladies and gentlemen, may I continue? Ok fine. Is there anybody else that would like to speak in favor of this application? (None) Anybody against? (None) Hearing no further questions, I'd like to make a motion reserving this decision until a later date. MEMBER SAWICKI. Second. On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Sawicki, it was RESOLVED, to close the hearing and reserve decision until a later date in the matter of Appeal No. 2817, application of Stephan J. Kmetz. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Doyen, Douglass, Goehringer and Sawicki. (Member Grigonis was absent.) PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2803. Application of Agnes Dunn, 276 Concord Drive, Hereford, PA 18056 for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Art. III, Sec. 100-31 for approval of insufficient area of two parcels and insufficient road frontage of one parcel, Southold Town Board °~Appeals -21- (Appeal No. 2803 - Agnes Dunn, continued:) May 14, 1981 located at the easterly side of Queen Street, Greenport, NY; bounded north by C.R. 48; west b Queen Street; south by Malin- auskas; east by Conklin; County Tax Map Item No. 1000-40-3- 9.2 and 9.1. The Acting Chairman opened the hearing at approximately 8:49 p.m., and read the legal notice of hearing in its entirety, and appeal application. ACTING CHAIRMA1N GOEHRINGER: I would like to open the hear- ing and indicate that I have a letter from Mrs. Dunn, which I will read, and together with that letter is a copy of an updated survey dated May 5, 1981. The letter reads as follows: ...Mr. Charles Grigonis, Jr., Chairman... RE: Your letter dated 4/27/81, Appeal No. 2803. Per our conversation, the six copies of my updated survey was delivered to the office of the Board of Appeals 5/6/81. The preexisting parcel in question was split according to the same premises conveyed to my father, Ignas Malinauskas, by Sarah E. Conklin by deed dated 11/2/23, recorded in the office of the Suffolk County Clerk on November 5, 1923, in Liber 1081 of Deeds, page 516. It was then taxed under one ownership. Should it be necessary for additional footage to clarify the zoning variance, my brother has consented to allow some, depending how much would be needed to complete the appeal. This in turn would then involve a new survey, deed and tax status. Would these be automatically resolved through the County records. Trusting the updated survey has met the requirements. Yours truly, /s/ Mrs. Agnes Dunn Is there anybody here that would like to say anything about the application at all? (None) On monion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Douglass, it was RESOLVED, to close the hearing and reserve decision in the matter of Appeal No. 2803, application of Agnes Dunn'. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Douglass~ Doyen, Goehringer and Sawicki. (Member Grigonis was absent.) Southold Town Board of Appeals -22- May 14,-1981 PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2818. Application of Herbert W, Davids,. by Stanley S. Coffin, Esq., 634 First Street, Greenport, NY--~ a variance to the ~oning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-31 for approval of insufficient area and width of three pro- posed parcels known as Seawood Acres Subdivision Lots No. 25, 26 and 27, Filed Map No. 2575; bounded north and west by Reese; south by McDermott; east by Seawood Drive; County Tax Map Item No. 1000-79-7-64, 65 and 66. The Acting Chairman opened the hearing at approximately 8:55 p.m., read the appeal application and related appeal documents, legal notice of hearing and noting the affidavits of publication in both the local and official newspapers, Notice of Disapproval from the Building Inspector, letter from the Town Clerk that notification to adjoining property owners was made; fee paid $15.00. MR. CHAIRMAN: We have a copy of the survey indicating Lots 1, 2 and 3 which are Lots 25, 26 and 27 of Seawood Acres. We also have a map of the surrounding property and this property on the tax map. Is there anybody that would like to speak._in favor of this application? HERBERT DAVIDS: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Board, my name is Herbert Davids. What I would like to say is that when we bought the property back in 1967, the two lots were for sale, as, you know, separate sale. We bought them as a matter of protection for ourselves and privacy while the children were growing and investment later. And now it's later and the time has come to, you know, we would like to sell the lots and I would like to point out that I don't have anything more to add essentially to the application except that Mr. Sherwood in the Assessors' Office indicates that all the lots on Seawood Drive are in single and separate ownership. Thank you. MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Is there anybody else that would like to speak in behalf of this application? Does anybody wish to speak against the application? Do any members of the Board have any questions? (Negative) Hearing no further questions, I'll offer a resolution closing the hearing and reserve decision until a later date. MEMBER DOYEN: Second. On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Doyen, it was RESOLVED, to close the hearing and reserve decision until a later date, in the matter of Herbert W. Davids, Appeal No. 2818. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Douglass, Doyen, Goeh- ringer and Sawicki. (Member Grigonis was absent.) Southold Town Board of Appeals -23- May-14, 1981 PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2824. Application of Robert Ketcha~, Box 295, East Marion, NY for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Art. VI, Section !00-60C(2) (a) for permission to erect off-premises advertising sign at 6800 Main Road, Greenport, NY; bounded north by S.R. 25; west by Dobek; south by Cowan; east by Pekunka and Keefee; County Tax Map Item No. 1G00-53- 2-15.001. The Acting Chairman opened the hearing at approximately 9:00 p.m., and read the legal notice of hearing in its entirety and appeal application. ACTING CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: We have a written consent from the property owner, Joseph Schoenstein for the applicant to erect this 4'~by 6' sign. We have a sketch of where the sign is to be located and a copy of the tax map indicating the area in which the sign is to be located. Is there anybody that wishes to speak in behalf of this application? BOB KETCHAM: What indeed do I say. I just presented to you as written. Mr. Claudio asked me to make a sign for him, and I said it was an off-premises sign, so it is all written down. ACTING CHAIRMAN: May I have your name? MR. KETCHAM: Robert Ketcham, Jr. Excuse~me, I just got through work. ACTING CHAIRMAN: No problem. So did I. MR. KETCHAM: I thought I did everything correctly, and I thought it was correct to like, have an off-premises sign for Mr. Claudio's Restaurant. It was agreed to by the fellow who owns the property. ACTING CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much. Does anybody wish to speak against this application? (None) Hearing no further comments, I'll offer a resolution to close the hearing and reserve the decision until a later date. On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Douglass, it was RESOLVED, to close the hearing and reserve decision in the matter of Appeal No. 2824, application of Robert Ketcham, Jr. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Doyen, Douglass, Goehringer and Sawicki. (Member Grigonis was absent.) Southold Town Board of Appeals -24- May'~t4, 1981 On motion by Mr. Douglass, seconded by Mr. Sawicki, it was RESOLVED, to approve the minutes of the March 12, 1981 Regular Meeting of this board. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Doyen, Douglass, Goeh- ringer and Sawicki. (~. Grigonis was absent.) On motion by Mr. Douglass, seconded by Mr. Sawicki, it was RESOLVED, to approve the minutes of the March 28, 1981 Special Meeting of this board. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Doyen, Douglass, Goeh- ringer and Sawicki. (Mr. Grigonis was absent.) On motion by Mr. Sawicki, seconded by Mr. Goehringer, it was RESOLVED, to approve the minutes of the March 5, 1981 Regular Meeting of this board. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Doyen, Douglass, Goeh- ringer and Sawicki. (Mr. Grigonis was absent.) PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2823. Application of Peter Stouten- burgh as agent for Perrie Pascucci, 3075 Indian Neck Lane, Peconic, NY 11958, for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Art. III, Sec. 100-31 for permission to construct dwelling with an insufficient rearyard setback at 305 Narrow River Road (and King Street), Orient, NY; bounded north by Tannenbaum; west by Matthews; south by Harbor Road; east by King Street; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-26-3-11. The Acting Chairman opened the hearing at approximately 9:24 p.m., and read the legal notice of hearing in its entirety and appeal application. ACTING CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: We have a copy of a sketch showing this eight-sided structure and indicating the setbacks which appear to be 50 feet on both roads, with rearyards of approximately 15 feet to the north, and it says minimum sideyards on the -- revise that, it's 16~ feet on the north and 8½ feet on the west. We also have a copy of the County Tax Map showing this property and all the surrounding properties in the area. Does anybody have anything to say in favor of this application? Southold Town Board of Appeals -25- Ma~Jl4, 1981 (Appeal No. 2823 - Petrie Pascucci, continued:) PETER STOUTENBURGH: Thank you. My name is Peter Stoutenburgh and I'm the one who filed the application. It is a relatively small lot, figured by today's standards of the zoning, and what we are trying to do --perhaps someone on the board might have a better suggestion. We are locating the house as we set it best, trying to hold what we feel the residents in the area and to the public, the setback from the road being the most important. The lot is barely more than 100 feet in depth in either direction, and with a frontyard requIrement of 50 feet and 50 feet i~ the rearyard, it doesn't leave you a lot of room to set any type of dwelling. The Health Department of the County needs to know a very close, in fact what they would like zs a survey from a certified individual with an exact location and this location is what we came up with. We're concerned about the residents on both sides, being able to maintain the view that they had always had out across the wetlands and of course the Bay. And we tried to hold the dwelling back as far as we could and that fell right on the 50 foot setback from both roads. I am sure that the individuals on the board have been out to the location. And I believe it was staked, although not by us but by the original surveyors. So it's pretty adamant where we're asking to do this. I think that's about all I have to say at the moment. ACTING CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Ok. I'd like to read a couple of letters into the record, just one letter, from the Suffolk County Department of Health Services to Mr. Charles Grigonis, Jr. ...We are in receipt of your letter dated May 4, 1981 concern- ing the above. Information available to this Department indicates that there is a limited ~roundwater supply which would normally require a test well prior to approval. In addition, due to the high ground- water conditions, fill would normally be required for the installa- tion of the septic system. It should be noted that such filling may adversely affect the drainage in the area which should be considered prior to approval. Should you have any further questions, please feel free to contact me. /s/ Royal R. Reynolds, P.E. Public Health Engineer General Engineering Services .... The Health Department has indicated to us that they may require an unusual location of the cesspools based upon, and the well, based upon the property itself. There may be physical constraints. You have not gotten any Health Department approval on this property yet, right? MR. STOUTENBURGH: We can't really send an application to them with an assumed location where any location on that parcel would have to go for a variance. It's sort of one of those funny steps Southold Town Board ~ffAppeals -26- Mahdi4, 1981 (Appeal No. 2823 -Perrie Pascucci, continued:) MR. STOUTENBURGH, continued: you people give us so often because there are so many lots such as this one divided up some 15 or 20 years ago. There were no restrictions, and no one had to build on it for the rest of the time. There is no set of plans in the building department because we had no~ gotten to the point that we have ok for a variance. There are, our permit is subject to seeing those plans and that those meet the present day Federal Government Floodplain wave-action V-5, whatever it is, I can't recall right now. And so what we are looking for right now is to find out where in effect this board would take an application such as this one for the location for which we have made so that we could get to the next point of going to the rather expensive task of setting a test well, finding out once we have gotten the location from the county and then finding out if we can pass to the next stage. ACTING CHAIRMAN: So basically if we recess this hearing until such time that you got health department approval, it wouldn't help you at this time. MR. STOUTENBURGH: No. In fact it would just put an unnecessary hardship on the individual without even knowing that he was going to get a variance for the location, in effect, it may come out that the house will have to be built where they feel the septic system is going to be located, and that would be another $140 for an individual to refile with the health department. Since this is a substandard lot there is a $140 filing fee just to submit the application to them. ACTING CHAIRMAN: I think the problem, Peter, is basically the situation of what, and it's not particularly a situation which we normally deal with. Where are the surrounding cess- pools and wells for the surrounding neighbors and bearing that in mind, then we could see a placement of the house. Not know- ing that, ok, puts us in a very arduous place because then we don't know where to place the house. MR. STOUTENBURGH: And I could be wrong on this, but it was my understanding that the county would not give a certifi- cate unless the building department would locate it. Now, this is costing me time and the individual some time, but no one any real great expense, to get disapproval or approval from the County as I just mentioned, whether or not there is room on that lot for the cesspools and/or well, but that the variance that we're requesting is in effect a legitimate one and is assumed I would believe by the building department that we are going to be able to get health department approval, and that they are not asking you although I may be wrong, to give that approval for health department reasons. I still can't get an approval without the county ok-ing the proper location for it. Southold Town Board of Appeals -27- May 14, 1981 (Appeal No. 2832 - Perrie Pascucci, continued:) ACTING CHAIRMAN: Is there any possibility the County giving you some preliminary approval so that we would know exactly where it would be? MR. STOUTENBURGH: I, I'm really not sure-- SECRETARY: The health department did contact our office and this is what they recommended that you apply to them so tha~ they can tell you where to locate it. MR. STOUTENBURGH: They would under normal circumstances on a lot like this I would think the location of the wells to be at the very northern corner, ( ) if it were a viable system to be farther away from the intersection of the roads. Now in order for them to change that would go against most of the standards practices that they use. And if in effect they were to suggest that I would go up, that's something that I didn't know about, this preliminary meeting with them, but I'm ques- tioning-- I'm not questioning, I'm a bit confused I guess as to your concern as to the location of the --not that I don't appreciate your concern, but I'm not sure-- ACTING CHAIRMAN: Firstly, I'm only speaking as one person now, and I'm not trying to be redundant to you, but on a lot of this size it becomes very difficult for a position un~il you really know where the extremities of the diagonal are go- ing to be for the well and the cesspools. That's my opinion, I don't know what the other gentlemen on this board feel. Do you have any questions, Mr. Douglass? MEMBER DOUGLASS: Yes, I would like to ask something. What is the square footage of the proposed house? MR. STOUTENBURGH: I believe it's 1140, give or take a couple of feet. MEMBER DOUGLASS: In an area like you have, one-and one-half to two feet from ground water, how are you going to get your cesspool system? MR. STOUTENBURGH: Normally in a situation where you are that close to ground level they require that you are, and I'm not sure if I'm that accurate, whether it's two foot above the ground water, one foot above the ground water table, where you locate usually a five-pool system, and then it is built upon that. It would give you the same type of thing that when you are on the site and they have noticed next to Mr. Matthews' house west side, which is a dome on the ground itself, they're using a lot of areas, up like Kenny's Beach where there's very little ground water. And it's at least the standard, the type of a system that the County requests and I think it's less than six ~ feet to ground water. MEMBER DOUGLASS: When you build up like that, how are you, Southold Town Board of IAppeals -28- May-14, 1981 (Appeal No. 2832 - Perrie Pascucci, continued:) is it going to back up into the neighbors? MR. STOUTENBURGH: Do you mean the water that normally would go to the creek? MEMBER DOUGLASS: No. The sewage. MR. STOUTENBURGH: I can't see how it would back up if in effect it was contained in a unit of soil. By the same token that when the county uses it, they don't use them with the understanding that it's going to spill out of the ground. I can't think that the reverse would be true of water raised or flooding around it. I think there would probably be a require- ment as to lust how much of a volume of soil they use in order to insure that. MEMBER DOUGLASS: Is your knowledge good as to what kind of bottom you have under there? MR. STOUTENBURGH: I believe there is, I could be wrong, there is the, on the lower righthand corner of that survey, there's the test hole that was done on the property immediately along side of that which Mr. VanTuyl supplied to me with at the time of my visit to his office in getting these approved to the health department, permit. It shows the topsoil 2" of soil, clay and sand, and then the water table a possible three feet of which the location is shown above, actually I guess it's the north corner of the property there. It says it's the location of the testhole, approximately 60 feet from this site. MEMBER SAWICKI: How high is your house going to be? MR. STOUTENBURGH: The requirements which we were planning on meeting for the National Flood Insurance Program, they requested it's eight feet above mean high water mark, and we are planning on meeting those requirements at least. At the present as located on the survey approximately three foot above that requirement. MEMBER DOUGLASS: On what, concrete or pilings? MR. STOUTENBURGH: On concrete. ACTING CHAIRMAN: The only reason I suggested that you get the preliminary approval is that, if we close this hearing and the board does make a decision, you may have to come back for another variance changing the position of the house. I guess what we will do is ask if anyone else has any other testimony that they would like to shed, either pro or con on this. Mrs. Oliva? MRS. RUTH OLIVA: I'm Ruth Oliva. We do feel that the zoning board of appeals should take note of the tbcation of this lot. There are two basic problems with it as you probably know. It is Southold Town Board of Appeals -29- MaY-~ 14, 1981 (Appeal No. 2832 - Petrie Pascucci, continued:) MRS. OLIVA continued: very low-lying. In fact about six months of the year half of it sits in the water. And the problems we've had are very, very serious drainage problems right down there at the corner because of any kinds of high tides, it just floods right over. Our one question would be, how are they going to get good water, in other words without a high saline content when their one neighbor to the north does not, and I will call it their neighbor to the east does not. They both have high saline counts. Also, I have some pictures here of what it does look like during the high tides, and this is not something that happens once every couple of years. It happens a few times a year-when we have a very heavy rain there is a big puddle down there. When we have some- thing that's just slightly over high tide it is a pond of at least a foot deep. If we have two or three feet above normal, it'll be over two feet high and even the pick-up trucks do not go down there. How is an emergency truck going to go down there. I have spoken to Mr. Villa down at the County Board of Health, and I explained how low the water table was there, and he said that then they would not, they said he would have to fill six feet above that before he could put the cesspools in. Now that to me is going to create a tremendous runoff or drainage problem to the neighbors and also with the high tide is.probably going to run right into there and over into the marshtand. So we have a nice, stinking cesspool down there. My only suggestion would be a requirement perhaps to have a closed tank that would have to be periodically pumped out. I don't know whether this would be agreeable to the County Board of Health or to the applicant. I have some pictures if you would like to see them. I would like them back. This is looking from my porch and that lot is right down here. This is just looking across from the house ~ next to me, but you see how the tide, this is my house looking here~ the tide is all the way up and I'm 600 feet from that. And this is a picture just taken recently of that drain. Here is the lot here~ and here is that drain. Now all that it does is really push the water out from the marsh over into to this low-lying area here and right into that lot. So you've got a problem--you're damned if you do and you're damned if you don't. ~I want them back but you can look at them. Thank you. ACTING CHAIRMAN: Thank you. I have one other letter from Mr. and Mrs. James McLaughlin. It reads: ...Dear Mr. Grigonis: In reference to the property on the corner of Narrow River Road and Harbor Road in Orient, we are concerned about the proposed building on that lot. The lot is very low. It fills with rain water during heavy rains and with salt walt several times a year from high tides. Being so low and being such a small lot, we feel that it is likely that the cesspool will drain into the marsh across the street and then into the bay. We also Southold Town Board of Appeals -30- May~14, 1981 (Appeal No. 2832 - Petrie Pascucci, continued:) fear that if fill is put into the lot, that both fresh and salt water run off will increase in neighboring lots, where flooding is already a problem. Finally, we are concerned about the increased risk of saline content in our drinking water. This is already a problem in surrounding houses. An additional house so close to the marsh drawing on the limited fresh water supply will increase salt water intrusion in the water supply. We hope that you will deny the variance. /s/ Mr. and Mrs. James McLaughlin .... LORNA TANNEBAUM: My name is Lorna Tannebaum and I am the owner, co-owner with my husband of the property immediately to the north of this lot. Probably some of what I am going to say repeats what Ruth said and the McLaughlins said, but I've been sitting here listening and it seems to me that the assumption is that a house will be built on that lot of some sort, and I wonder although I'm not familiar enough with the building code and all the rules and regulations, but I certainly am familiar with the fact that there are lots that cannot be built on for some reason or another. There is certainly a lot of marshland in our area that cannot be built on, and I'm beginning to get the idea that the new owner of this land will be protected and my property is just going to fall apart. I also have two pictures I would like to show you which certainly show what happens at high tides. These were taken last September and they're no~ particularly, after and not particularly a violent storm. One shows the intersection. Yes, this is the lot in ques- tion. Ruth referred to it as a river. I refer to it, I mean a pond. I refer to it as a river. Two views are of our driveway, looking into the driveway and looking out. And I'm thinking as, you know, McLaughlins said, if the land is built up, contain the cesspo61s, you know, where is the runoff going to go? It's going to go on our property, and then what do we do? ACTING CHAIRMAN: Could I have the other ones back so that we can return them so that we don't get them mixed up. Return those to Mrs. Oliva. MRS. TANNEBAUM: You can have those. ACTING CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much. MRS. TANNEBAUM: The only other thing I wanted to say is, well, two things. I don't know if it matters for the record. The Darzy's no longer have any interest in that property. It is only Albert H. and Lorna Tannebaum, and the other thing is that we're hoping in about five years to retire to the house and live there for the rest of our lives perferably without a feeling like Noah's Ark in the middle of a lot. Thank you. ACTING CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Anybody else have anything to say? Yes, Peter. Southold Town Board o~ppeals -31- May~4, 1981 (Appeal No. 2832 - Perrie Pascucci, continued:) MR. STOUTENBURGH: Would it be possible to look at those photographs? ACTING CHAIRMAN: Sure. MR. STOUTENBURGH: This one drain that's been referred to goes underneath the road. MRS. OLIVA: No, it does not. It's on top. MR. STOUTENBURGH: On top of the road? MRS. OLIVA: (Statement was inaudible.) (Facing Mr. Stoutenburgh). MR. STOUTENBURGH: My one thing that I seem to be having trouble following with this is that by adding to that land means that other people's properties are going to get filled. MRS. OLIVA: It's going to act as a dike here, because normally that water goes right into that lot, but if you are going to build the lot up, you have to dike. And it's going to go more into Lorna Tannebaum's property. It's going to go further up the road. MR. STOUTENBURGH: I expect that you're assuming then the fill should be put in such a way that it would act as a dike, as opposed to-- MRS. OLIVA: It's got to somehow where you're practically just ground level there and the water's (crossing), to a depth that you're going to fill it up, it's got to have a barrier to that water. The water has to go around it somehow. MR. STOUTENBURGH: I would agree the water has to go around it, and I just have trouble seeing a flooding condition depending on how the fill is being added to this property, depending on how the County is going to request fill be added for a sewer system, at some point if enough fill was added to the entire area. There would be no water. At some point there has to be either a better condi- tion being presented -- because a runoff, it has a drain, I can't think that it's not sort of the type of thing that you can put as much water into something but if it's got to drain at a certain height, the water will never get higher. Because there's a drain for it for it to move from, when it's the height, but the road is there. Unless you actually made a dike out of a hill. Wait a minute -- is there, a variance consideration that in effect considers the flood, the new flood law or the new flood plain as is described by the Federal Government? ACTING CHAIRMAN: Yes. There's a minimum base flood elevation. MR. STOUTENBURGH: There is. And which your Board considers. ACTING CHAIRMAN: Right. MR. STOUTENBURGH: And you act upon. Southold Town Board o~Appeals -32- May-14, 1981 (Appeal No. 2832 - Perrie Pascucci, continued:) ACTING CHAIRMAN: Right. It was our understanding however that you were going to abide by this. MR. STOUTENBURGH: That's correct. I was just scheduling a clarification from me for my own purposes that, in effect, the only ting that we were really dealing on that I can see here is that it was the sideyard and the rearyard setback, which is what I had applied for and that's the way I presented my case. Thank you. ACTING CHAIRMAN: You're welcome. Does anybody else have any further questions? (None) Hearing no further questions, I'll make a motion to close the hearing and reserve decision until a later date. On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Douglass, it was RESOLVED, to close the hearinq and reserve decision in Appeal No. 2832, application of Perrie Pascucci until a later date. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Doyen, Douglass, Goeh- ringer and Sawicki. (Mr. Grigonis was absent.) APPEAL NO. 2786 - RICHARD A. and JANET SCHLUMPF. Abigail A. Wickham, Esq. appeared informally before the board requesting an interpretation of Condition No. 5 of this board's decision rendered April 2, 1981 and filed with the Town Clerk on April 30, 1981. Mrs. Wickham said that Parcel No. I is under Contract of Sale and whether or not it was the board's opinion that Condition No. 5 was to mean that the proposed improvements over the new subject right-of-way for use by Parcel II need not be improved or installed until such time as Parcel II proposes development. The board agreed that Condition No. 5 was referring only to Parcel II. Mrs. Wickham said she would in turn submit a letter to the board confirming this discussion. APPEAL NO. 2789 - DAVID L. MUDD. Abigail A. Wickham, Esq. also informally reviewed the board's decision rendered April 23, 1981 clarifying the technicalities and findings involved in this appeal. Motion was made by Mr. Douglass, seconded by Mr. Sawicki, and duly carried, to recess at this time for "Executive-Closed Session," and after which the regular meeting would reconvene. EXECUTIVE - CLOSED SESSION. Anthony Tohill, Esq., Gary Flanner Olsen, Esq. and Mrs. Deborah Edson (real estate representative) informally dis- cussed the appeal of Rose Dansker, No. 2766 which was denied 4/2/81. Southold Town Board o~-Appeals -33- May-~4, 1981 Motion was made by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Douglass, and carried, to reconvene the.regular meeting of this board. APPEAL NO. 2812 - Application of ROY C. SCHOENHAAR. By letter dated May 11, 1981 and received May 12, 1981 by our office~ the applicant's attorney, Gary Flanner Olsen, Esq. requested to withdraw the variance application "without prejudice." On motion by Mr. Douglass, seconded by Mr. Goehringer, it was RESOLVED, that the application of Roy C. Schoenhaar in Appeal No. 2812 is hereby withdrawn without pr.ejudice, as requested. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Doyen, Douglass, Goeh- ringer and Sawicki. (Mr. Grigonis was absent.) The board tentatively set Wednesday or Thursday of next week for a Special Meeting, if same is necessary. On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Douglass, it was RESOLVED, that the following new appeals be advertised and scheduled for public hearings to be held at the next regular meeting of this board, to wit, June 11, 1981, to be held at the Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, NY: 7:15 p.m. EDWARD P. BERTERO. Insufficient area. Cpt. Kidd's Estates, Mattituck. 7:30 p.m. ANNA L2 BERTERO. Insufficient area. Cpt. Kidd's Estates, Mattituck. 7:40 p.m. 7:55 p.m. HERBERT HOFFMAN (by Mrs. Adriaenssens) to construct dwelling with insufficient front and rear yard set- backs at Smith Drives, Southold. SUSAN C. TRENTALANGE. Deck~with insufficient front- yard. 90 Haywaters Road, Nassau Point, Cutchogue. 8:05 p.m. 8:15 p.m. 8:30 p.m. KEITH AND ARDEN McCAMY. Garage in sideyard area. 76375 Main Road, Greenport. FRANK J. ABBADESSA. Addition with insufficient side- yard area. 1200 Maple Lane, Greenport. MOBIL OIL CORP. Replace existing nonconforming tanks. S/w corner of Main Road & Youngs Avenue, Southold. Southold Town Board~Jf Appeals -34- Ma~ ~4,- 1981 8:45 p.m. NICHOLAS EPPOLITO. Addition with insufficient front, side and rear yard setbacks at 230 Carol Road., Sld. 8:55 p.m. PECONIC CORP. Conversion of bern to two~f~mily dwell- ing use. New Suffolk Avenue, Mattituck. 9:I5 p.m. CHARLES BOCKLET. Pool'w~th fence in front (and/or side) yard area at 1295 Robinson Lane, Peconic. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Doyen, Douglass, Goeh- ringer and Sawicki. (Mr. Grigonis was absent.) ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION: Appeal No. 2828. Application of EDWARD P. BERTERO: On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Douglass, it was '~ RESOLVED, to declare the following Negative Environmental Declaration concerning the matter of Appeal No. 2828, EDWARD P. BERTERO: ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION: Pursuant to Section 617.13 of the N.Y.S. Department of Environmental Conservation Act, Article $ of the Environmental Conservation Law, and Section 44-4 of the Southold Town Code, notice is hereby given that the Southo!d Town Board of Appeals has determined that the subject project as proposed in this appeal application is hereby classified as a Type I1 Action, not having a significant adverse effect upon the envi~t for the following reason(s): An Environmental Assessment in the Short Fo~n has been submitted which indicates that no significant adverse effects were likely to occur should this project be implemented as planned. The property or project in question is not located within 300 feet of tidal wetlands area. This declaration should not be considered a determination made for any other department or agency which may also be in- volved, nor for any other project not covered by the subject appeal application. Location of Property: 1240 Inlet Drive, Mattituck, NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-99-2-6. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Dougiass~ Goehringer~ Doyen and Sawicki. (Member Grigonis was absent.) Southold Town Boar~Jof Appeals -35- 14, 1981 ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION. APPEAL NO. 2827. APPLICATION OF ANNA L. BERTERO. On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Douglass, it was RESOLVED, to declare the following Negative Environmental Declaration concerning the matter of Appeal No. 2827 , applica- tion of Anna L. Bertero: ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION: Pursuant to Section 617.13 of the N.Y.S. Department of Environmental Conservation Act, Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law, and Section 44-4 of the Southo!d Town Code, notice is hereby given that the Southold Town Board of Appeals has determined that the subject project as proposed in this appeal application is hereby classified as a ~pe II Action, nou having a significant adverse effect upon the environment for the following reason(s): An Environmental Assessment in the Short Form has been submitted which indicates that no significant adverse effects were likely to occur should this project be implemented as planned. The property or project in question is not located within 300 feet of tidal wetlands area. This declaration should not be considered a determination made for any other department or agency which may also be in- volved, nor for any other project not covered by the subject appeal application. Location of Property: Cpt. Kidd Estates Subdivision Lots 74, 75 and 76; Inlet Drive, Mattituck, NY; county Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-99-2-8 and 14. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Douglass, Goehrinqer, Doyen and Sawicki. (MeraDer Grigonis was absent.) Southold Town Boar~ of Appeals -36- Ma~ !4, 1981 ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION. APPEAL NO. 2826. APPLICATION OF HERBERT HOFFMAN. On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Douglass, it was RESOLVED, to declare the following Negative Environmental Declaration concerning the matter of Appeal No. 2826, applica- tion of Herbert Hoffman: ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION: Pursuant to Section 617.13 of the N.Y.S. Department of Environmental Conservation Act, Article 8 of the Environmen~a! Conservation Law, and Section 44-4 of the Southo!d Town Code~ notice is hereby given that the Southold Town Board of Appeals has determined that the subject project as proposed in this appeal application is hereby classified as a Type II Action, not having a significant adverse effect upon the environment for the following reason(s): An Environmental Assessment in the Short Form has been submitted which indicates that no significant adverse effects were likely to occur should this project be ~mplemented as planned. The project in question is separated by a road more than 50 feet in width, and therefore does' not appear to be within an area affecting tidal wetlands. This declaration should not be considered a determination made for any other department or agency which may also be in- volved, nor for any other project not covered by the subject appeal application. Location of Property: Smith Drive, Southold, NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-76-2-34.1. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Douglass Goehringer, Doyen and Sawicki. (Member Grigonis was absent.~ Sou~hold Town Boar~ of Appeals -37- M~7 14, 1981 ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION. APPEAL NO. 2829. APPLICATION OF SUSAN C. TRENTALANG~. On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Douglass, it was RESOLVED, to declare the following Negative Environmental Declaration concerning the matter of Appeal No. 2829, applica- tion of Susan C. Trentalanqe: ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION: Pursuant to Section 617.13 of the N.Y.S. Department of Environmental Conservation Act, Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law, and Section 44-4 of the Southold Town Code, notice is hereby given that the Southold Town Board of Appeals has determined that the subject project as proposed in this appeal application is hereby classified as a Type II Action, not having a significant adverse effect upon the environment for the following reason(s): An Environmental Assessment in the Short Form has been submitted which indicates that no significant adverse effects were likely to occur should this project be implemented as planned. The project in quession is separated by a road more than 50 feet in width and therefore does not appear to bepwithin an ar-ea affecting tidal wetlands. This declaration should not be considered a determination made for any other department or agency which may also be in- volved, nor for any other project not covered by the subject appeal application. Location of Property: 90 Haywaters Road, Cutchogue; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-111-2-4. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Douglass Goehringer, Doyen and Sawicki. (Memb~ Grigonis was absent.l Southo!d Town Boar~ of Appeals -38- M~ 14, 1981 ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION. APPEAL NO. 2830. APPLICATION OF KEITH AND ARDEN SCO~T McCAMY. On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Douglass, it was RESOLVED, to declare the following Negative Environmental Declaration concerning the matter of Appeal No. 2830 , applica- tion of Keith and Arden Scott McCamy: ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION: Pursuant to Section 617.13 of the N.Y.S. Department of Environmental Conservation Act, Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law, and Section 44-4 of the Southo!d Town Code, notice is hereby given that the Southold Town Board of Appeals has determined that the subject project as proposed in this appeal application is hereby classified as a Type II Action, not having a significant adverse effect upon t~e environment for the following reason(s): An Environmental Assessment in the Short Form has been submitted which indicates that no significant adverse effects were likely to occur should this project be ~mptemented as planned. The property or project in question is not located within 300 feet of tidal wetlands area. This declaration should not be considered a determination made for any other department or agency which may also be in- volved, nor for any other project not covered by the subject appeal application. Location of Property: 76375 Main Road, Greenport, NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-48-1-2. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Douglass, Goehringer Doyen and Sawicki. (Member Grigonis was absent.) ' Southold Town Boar~of Appeals -39- Ma~ 14, 1981 ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION. APPEAL NO. 2831. APPLICATION OF FRANK J. ABBADESSA. On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Douglass, it was RESOLVED, to declare the following Negative Environmental Declaration concerning the matter of Appeal No. 2831 , applica- tion of Frank J. Abbadessa: ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION: Pursuant to Section 617.13 of the N.Y.S. Department of Environmental Conservation Act, Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law, and Section 44-4 of the Southo!d Town Code, notice is hereby given that the Southold Town Board of Appeals has determined that the subject project as proposed in this appeal application is hereby classified as a Type II Action, no~ having a significant adverse effect upon the environment for the following reason(s): An Environmental Assessment in the Short Form has been submitted which indicates that no significant adverse effects were likely to occur should this project be implemented as planned. The property or proj~ect in question is not located within 300 feet of tidal wetlands area. This declaration should not be considered a determination made for any other department or agency which may also be in- volved, nor for any other project not covered by the subject appeal application. Location of Property: 1200 Maple Lane and 55 Snug Harbor Road, Greenpgrt; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-35-6-1. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Douglass, Goehringer Doyen and Sawicki. (Member Grigonis was absent.) ' Southold Town Boar~ of Appeals -40- M~M 14, 1981 ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION. APPEAL NO. 2836. APPLICATION OF NICHOLAS W. IPPOLITb. On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Douglass, it was RESOLVED, to declare the following Negative Environmental Declaration concerning the matter of Appeal No. 2836 · applica- tion of Nicholas W. I~polito: ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION: Pursuant to Section 617.13 of the N.Y.S. Department of Environmental Conservation Act, Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law, and Section 44-4 of the Southo!d Town Code, notice is hereby given that the Southold Town Board of Appeals has determined that the subject project as proposed in this appeal application is hereby classified as a Type II Action, not having a significant adverse effect upon the environment for the following reason(s): An Environmental Assessment in the Short Form has been submitted which indicates tha= no significant adverse effects were likely to occur should this project be implemented as planned. The premises in question has constructed along the water~ lying edge a functional bulkhead the entire length of the property in good condition. This declaration should not be considered a determination made for any other department or agency which may also be in- volved, nor for any other project not covered by the subject appeal application. Location of Property: 230 Carol Road, Southold, NY; County Tax Map Parcel 1000-52-2-7. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Douglass, Goehringer, Doyen and Sawicki. (Membe~ Grigonis was absent.) Southold Town Boai~i of Appeals -41- Ma~i 14, 1981 ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION. APPEAL NO. 2835. APPLICATION OF PECONIC CORP. On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Douglass, it was RESOLVED, to declare the following Negative Environmental Declaration concerning the matter of Appeal No. 2835 , applica- tion of Peconic Corp.,: ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION: Pursuant to Section 617.13 of the N.Y.S. Department of Environmental Conservation Act, Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law, and Section 44-4 of the Southo!d Town Code, notice is hereby given that the Southold Town Board of Appeals has determined that the subject project as proposed in this appeal application is hereby classified as a ~pe II Action, n~t havin~ a significant adverse effect upon th~ environment for the following reason(s): An Environmental Assessment in the Short Form has been submitted which indicates that no significant adverse effects were likely to occur should this project be implemented as planned. The project in question is located more than 300 feet from tidal wetlands area. This declaration should not be considered a detezmination made for any other department or agency which may also be in- volved, nor for any other project not covered by the subject appeal application. Location of Property: S/s New Suffolk Avenue, Mattituck, NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-115-9-4. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Douglass Goehringer Doyen and Sawicki. (Member Grigonis was absent.l ' Southold Town Boara-~f Appeals -42- Ma~ ~4, 1981 ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION. APPEAL NO. 2834 APPLICATION OF CHARLES BOCKLET. On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Dougiass, it was RESOLVEDt to declare the following Negative Environmental Declaration concerning the matter of Appeal No. 2832 , applica- tion of Charles Bocklet: ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION: Pursuant to Section 617.13 of the N.Y.S. Department of Environmental Conservation Act, Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law, and Section 44-4 of the Southo!d Town Coded notice is hereby given that the Southold Town Board of Appeals has determined that the subject project as proposed in this appeal application is hereby classified as a .Type II Action, not having a significant adverse effect upon the environment for the following reason(s): An Environmental Assessment in the Short Form has been submitted which indicates that no significant adverse effects were likely to occur should this project be implemented as planned. The project in question is located between the existing dwelling and the access road, away from the wetlands area. This declaration should not be considered a determination made for any other department 'or agency which may also be in- volved, nor for any other project not covered by the subject appeal application. Location of Property: 1295 Robinson Lane,. Peconic, NY; Counny Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-98-5-2,3, and 4. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Douglass Goehringer, Doyen and Sawicki. (Member Grigonis was absent.5 Southold Town. BOard of Appeals -43- May 14, 1981 RESERVED DECISION: Appeal No.. 2816. Application of 10dysseas Pyrovolakis, 83-16 170th Street, Jamaica, NY 11432, for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Art. III, Sec. 100-31 for permission to construct dwelling with insufficient front and rear yard setbacks at 3180 Stars Road, East Marion, NY; Stars Manor Subd. Filed Map #3864, Lot 26; County Tax Map Item No. 1000-22-2-19; bounded north by Zerris, west and south by Stars Road, east by Schroeder. After investigation and personal inspection, the Board finds and determines as follows: By this appeal, appellant seeks permission to construct a new dwelling with solar access, and which would have an insufficient frontyard setback off Stars Road of 35 feet and rearyard setback of 26 feet. The premises in question has a depth of 106.23 feet at the north end, road frontage of 165.04 feet, and a rearyard length of 278.89 feet. The Board feels the positioning of the proposed dwelling is the most feasible location on this parcel. The Board finds that the relief requested is not substantial in relation to the Code requirements; that the relief requested is within the spirit of the zoning ordinance; that the variance if granted will not change the character of the neighborhood; that no adverse effect will be produced on available governmental facil- ities of any increased population; that the hardship or practical difficulty is unique; and that the interests of justice will be served by granting the requested relief. On motion by Mr. Douglass, seconded by Mr. Doyen, it was RESOLVED, that Odysseas Pyrovolakis, be granted a variance to the zoning ordinance, Art. III, Sec. 100-31 to construct dwelling with insufficient front and rear yard setbacks as applied for in Appeal No. 2816. Location of Property: 3180 Stars Road, East Marion, NY; County Tax Map Item No. 1000-22-2-19. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Doyen, Douglass, Sawicki and Goehringer. (Mr. Grigonis was absent.) Southold Town Board of Appeals -44- May 14, 1981 RESERVED DECISION: Appeal No. 2819. Application of Donald Scott, Critten's Lane, Southold, NY for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Art. III, Sec. 100-31 for permission to construct addition to dwelling with insufficient~f~ont and rear yard setbacks at the northeast corner of Beachwood Lane and Critten's Lane, Southold; bounded north by Hoffmeister; west by Oates; south by Beachwood Lane; east by Critten's Lane; County Tax Map Item No. 1000-70-11-8. After investigation and personal inspection, the Board finds as follows: By this appeal, appellant seeks permission to construct an addition, approximately 20' by 20' at the southerly corner of the existing 1½-story frame dwelling with attached garage. The setback requested off Beachwood Lane is 40' and the setback from the rear property line approximately 30'. The project proposed is consistent with the average setbacks in the neighborhood. The Board finds that the relief requested is not substantial in relation to the Code requirements; that the relief~requested is within the spirit of the zoning ordinance; that the variance if granted will not change the character of the neighborhood; that no adverse effect will be produced on available governmental facil- ities of any increased population; that the hardship or practical difficulty is unique; and that the interests of justice will be served by granting the requested relief. On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Sawicki, it was RESOLVED, that Donald Scott be granted a variance to the zoning ordinance, Art. III, Sec. 100-31 to construct addition to dwelling with insufficient front and rear yard setbacks as applied for in Appeal No. 2819. Location of Property: Northeast corner of Beachwood Lane and Critten's Lane, Southold; bounded north by Hoffmeister; west by Oates; south by Beachwood Lane; east by Critten's Lane; County Tax Map Item No. 1000-70-11-8. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Doyen, Douglass, Sawicki and Goehringer. (Mr. Grigonis was absent.) Being there was no further business to come-before the board at this time, the Acting Chairman declared the meeting closed at approximately 11:15 p.m. --Chairman Board of Pkppeals Respectfully isubmitted, Linda F. Kowalski,~. Sec~e~ry Southold Town Board~qf Appeals