HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-07/25/2002 HEAR Page 1 ,July 25, 2002 Hearings
Sonthold Town Board of Appeals
July 25. 2002
~ ~' Zoning Board of Appeals
Public Hearings
Present Were:
Gerard P. Goehringcr, Cha/rman
Lydia A, Tortora. Member
George Homing, Member
Vincent Orlando. Member
Panla Q~fmhere, Secretary
Absent was:
Ruth D. Oliva, Member
L/nda Kowalski, Board Clerk/Secretary
6:40 p.m. AppI. No. 5155 Robert B. and Mary Ann Skobilcki.
Mrs. Skoblicki: We respectfully request a Special Exception to operate a Bed and Breakfast at the new
home we purchased at 2110 Oaklaym Ave., Southold. It is our primary residence. We will stay here year
round. We will always be on the premises when we have quests. We will have two quest rooms each with a
private bath. Eventually we would hke to extend to three guest rooms each w/th a private bath. All these
rooms are on the second floor and have adequate escape routes. Over all we will only be providing short
term lodging and Breakfast to no more then 6 quests at a time. There is an extension to right of our driveway
for 3 guest vehicles. We will park our vehicles in the 2 car garage. We provided adequate space for vehicles
maaneve and exit the property. We feel that we have met all the requirements sec forth by the board. We
~ feel we have an excellent location for our business. We have spoken personally to our direct neighbors Dn
and Mrs. Kropell and Mr. & Mrs. Ruben who had no objection to our proposal. We have also spoken to and
~* ~' have received written note from Mr. Sheean,, who is under contract to purchase the property to the north of
our home. Wh/cl~ is still under consu-ucrinn. He to has no objecilons. It is our intention m provide visitors
with comfortable; high quality accommodations while assisting them hi discovering the treasures of the
north fork. Thank you very much for your considerailon of your proposal.
Chairman: You are aware that if this Board grants this permit you still have to go back to the Building
Department and apply for all of the requirements that they have under code. Their code, the building code.
Mrs. Skoblicki: I have ail those applications
Chairman: Mrs. Tortura?'
Member Tortura: The parking, #1 and 2 is the garage and 3,4 & 5 are for the quests?
Mrs. Skoblicki: Yes.
Member Tortora: You have a lovely property. I have no further questions.
Member Orlando: To follow up with Lydia, I stopped by :[he other day, there was nobody home. I did take
the liberty of walking around a little bit. The parking, I pretended I was a guess there. I have a midsize
SUV. It was a little hard pulling out of there. I nosed in and I couldn't back up to far without hitting the
house and trying to assume there was another car in front of me. Maybe the other board members want to
take a look at that. The second quesilon is have you by any chance spoken to the Southold School District?
Mrs. Skoblicki: I wrote a Ietter to Dr. Gallager, the Superintendent when we sent our our letters to the
properties that touched us.
rPage 2 -luly 25, 2002 Hearings
Southold Town Board of Appeais
Member Orlando: So Dr. Gallager was notified. That is my concern being so close to an elementary school
district
Mr. Skoblicki: We sent out five certified letters, Southold School D/strict, 2 builders with the construction
going on across the stree;, and the ones to the north, south and east of us.
Member Orlando: As long as you notified the school. I have no other questions.
Chulrman: We usually reserve the right to review the plan and we have done this actually from a prior
Southokl application. It appears that some of the houses that we deal w/th in the nature of these special
permits in the hamlet of Southoldi W'e usually reserve the right for the addition of within 6 months of
granting the permk to revievf parking plan and possible add another parking space [f needed. If you see that
in tkis decision, I am malting you aware of it.
Mrs Skobhcki: I just wanted m mention that initially we are only prepared ;o open two rooms. There is
more than adequate parking for 2 cars.
Ch~trman: It would be the third one later.
Mrs. Skoblicki: There would have to be a construction phase where I would have to go through the permit
process, before I consider a third room.
Member Orlando: I goes om on a main road and I tried to nose out. Because ffyou can't fit, then you end up
parking on the road. We don't park on the road. That was my concern.
Member Homing: Are you open for business for a season or year round.
Mr. Skoblicki: If there is any business year-round I guess we would attempt to be open. 1[ am nor going to
close doors and leave town. It is our primary residence.
Member Homing: You intend to mn it throughout the year as a B&B?
Mrs. Skoblicki: Yes.
Chairman: Thank you for your presentation. Is there anybody else who would like to speak in favur of this
application? Anybody like to speak against the application? Seeing no hands, 1 make a motion in closing the
heating.
SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION
6:46 p.m. Appl. No. 5142 - Kenneth Dimon.
Chairman: Mr. Dimon, I was over at your property. Do you just want to give me an idea of what was added
in that garage area, wh/ch is the nature of this application.
Mr. Dimon: Yes, itwas the leantoo and on other port w/th the double doors.
Chairman: I am guessing it is that fight there.
Member Tortora: I am too. For point of clarification, because our survey doesn't indicate where the variance
is required. So to get it into the record, could you show us on the map.
Page 3 - July 25, 2002 Hearings
Santhold Town Board of Appeals
Mr. Dimo~a: That is it. We encrouch about 4 or 5 inches to the 3'.
Member Tortora: That is what we quess-timated. The encroachment is/n the southwest side of the property
on what is identifiedas the flame garage, ,10 X 16'2''. O.K. we are set.
Chairman: That/s oaly used for storage purposes?
Mr Dhnon: Yes.
Chairman: You Member Tortoral are fmishad questiouing Mr. Dimon?
Member Tortora: Yes
Chairman: Mr. Homing?
Member Homing: No questions.
Chairman: Mr. Orlando?
Member Orlando: Two questions, I am glad you dofft have any dogs, because I did take the hberty_ of
walking back there. The original garage seems much older. The extension was built, how many years ago?
Mr. Dimon: The extension was built in 1995_
Member Orlando: The mason you are coming for this?
Mr. Dimon: Because I sold the house and I want to get a C.O. for the garage.
Chairman: It is 2.3' instead of 3'.
Member Orlando: O.K. No other questions,
Mr. Dimon: I didn't own the house, My farther built addition for his frame storage. He had E.K. Water
fi.ames in Greanport. He built that for that. I didn't get the house until 2000. He bu/lt that when he owned it.
Member Tortora: You inherited the problem.
Mr Dimon: I iaherited the problem, is right.
Member Tortora: Could you just tell us very briefly why granting you this variance would not create any
harm to the neighborhood.
Mr Dimon: The apphcation speaks for itself and we are talking of 5 or 6". There ~s no harm to the
environmem or anybody else in the area or they would have come in and had their say about it.
Member Tortora: O.K.
Chairraan: You have spoken to the neighbors?
Mr. Dimon: Yes.
Chairman: And having r~ved there or ar least the family had lived there for a long period of time, you now
the neighbors well.
Page4 July 25, 2002 Hearings
~Southold Town Board of Appeals
Mr. Dimen: Yes sir
Chan'ma~ Is there anybody else who would hke ro speak for or against this application. Seeing no hands, I
will make a motion in Closing the hearing ....
SEE MINUTIES FOR RESOLUTION
6:51 p.m. Appl. No. 5144 - Wayne and She/la Dinizio
Chairman: You are building a garage?
Mr. Dinizio: Correct,
Chairman.' The side of the garage faces Linda Road which/s a dirt road?
Mr. Din/zio: Well, 50' paved and the rest dirt.
Chairman: You encroach on that s/de yard, because you are adding it to the house?
Mr. Dinizio: Right.
CMirman: This is a one story garage?
Mr. Dimzio: It is going to be the same size as the house.
Chairman: So the cape code aspect will continue all the way through?
Mr. Dinizio: Right.
Chairman: Mr. Homing any questions of Mr. Dinizio?
Member Homing: No I really don't. The plan looks good.
Chairman: Mr, Orlando?
Member Orlando: In the garage, do you plan on having a lof~ up top for storage or are you going to leave it
open?
Mr. Dinizio: Just open rafter storage.
Member Orlando: In your drawing, when I visited the sit, I was curious, the garage goes how far. To the
side fence.
Mr. Dinizio: The side fence you are talking about?
Member Orlando: Yes. By the locust trees.
Mr. Dinizin: That side fence from what I understand is my property line. )[ am still back a good 20'.
Member Orlando: O.K. That is the property line. I was concerned about your one neighbor on that side. He
faces your garage then. The locust trees will create a nice screening for hixa. That is going to stay there.
Mr. Dinizio: Yes.
Page 5 July 25, 2002 Heafing~
Southold Town Board of Alypeals
Member Orlando: No other questions.
Member Tortora: What is the h~tght of the garage.
Mr. Din/ho: I beheve it is 20'. Someth/ng like that.
Member Tortora: There is not going to be any kind of upstairs to it? It is simply going to be open.
Mr. Din/zio: Open.
Member Tortora: There is a shed there, Ls that going to be gone?
Mr. Dinizio: t am hop/rig so.
Member Tortora: The reason why I am asking is where the shed is. it would nm adjacent to the garage.
Mr. Dinizio: From the shed to where the actuall garage is going to end. I believe there is about 10' path way
between the two.
Member Tortora: So you are leaving the shed?
Mr. Dinizio: As of right now, yes.
Member Tortora: It ts going to be a litlle crowded in there with the shed and the garage. You will have 8'2"
,xSth the shed and then another 24' with the garage.
Chairman: Anything else. Is the shed able to be moved?
Mr. Dinizio: Yes it is able to be moved. I was thinking of moving it to the back of the garage itself.
Chairman: That is good.
Member Toitora: The reason I am saying is that it would give the appearance there of overcrowding in that
area. You are corn/rig very close to the property line as it is. On your drawing, it doesn't show the shed. If
you put the shed in there, I know what ir would look like. My inclination would to condition the approval on
moving the shed south of the garage so that it is not ~vithin the side. Linda Road is improved and it is going
to and up as a 50' right-of-way. If you would have no objection, I would like to see that as a condition.
Mr. Dinizio: O.K.
Member Orlando: Does that fence nm parrell to the fence.
Mr. D/rfizio: The shed is on the east side all the way up to the fence.
Chairman: Is there anybody else who would like to speak in favor or against this application? Seeing no
hands, I make a motion in closing the hearing...
SEE MINIfrES FOR RESOLUTION
***
6:58 p.m. Appl. No.5147 Fred and Donna Fragola.
Mr. Fragola: You requested 6 copies of the photo's.
Chairman: Thank you. What would you like to tell us.
Page 6 - July 25, 2002 Hearings
Southold Tow~ Board of Appeals
Mr. Fragola: We are looking to build a certain style house. I have a copy that I submitted in the beginning.
The DEC has a 50' buffer and 75' I have to stay away from the water. Fordlmm Cannal. It puts the house in a
situation that we really don't have the necessary clearance from the road. Basically, what we are looking m
do is the corner of the property, we would require a variance for that. I don't know if you have a drawing (~f
the house.
Cha/rman: Yes.
Mr. Fragola: This is the style house that my wife and I have picked out. It pretty much services the needs of
my wife, my daughter and I. It is what we are looking to do.
Chairman: This is 35' from Gull Pond Lane, right?
Mr. Fmgola: It is appears to be 35 ar one point and the corner I believe is 36.
Chairman: O.K. I noticed that in the plan of the house that it is squared off across the back of the house, so
that...
Mr. Fragola: It is tuff when you look at it vs. the water, thc 75' distance. We put it on a set of charts and
moved it around. This is the only way we can make this thing work, with the water.
Chairman: Right. The unique part about this one is the fact that you are not closing up your side yards. That
is good.
Mr. Fragola: Do you have the drawhag where our septic system is? Based on the topo, that is the highest
point. That is where we have our septic system.
Member Torcora: That 75' mark is to where?
Cha/rman: Probably the bnlldaeadi
Mr. Fragola: Let me show you. My property ends here. This 75' is the closest point to the water. It makes
different whose property it is, it/s the water lhae.
Member Tortora: This was the cut offzone and the no building zone?
Mr. Fragola: That is right. It is a basic 3 bedroom house and 1 am try/rig m get one area that is my study that
over looks the water. That is the beauty about behag on the water.
Chairman: The question I had Mr. Fragola is the veranda, is it an open deck area?
M2r. Fragola: In the rear. If yon take look. it sits on top ora balcony, underneath w/Il be a stone patio. The
DEC is malting us do, is they want us to put up a fence separating the buffer area. I discussed it w/th Chuck
Hamilton with the DEC and Rober~ Herman from Eh-Consultants. We are trying to see if we could put a
stone wall and keep it as natural as possible. The house would have the same thing in mind. I am trying to
keel: it low mahatenance and everything looks like it is natural as far as the vegetation vs. the overall look of
the area.
Chairman: The reason why I was interested in that is because we are not, if the board is so haclined to grant
this front yard variance, we are really not w/th the idea ha granting a second variance in the furore for a deck
area. That is the reason why...
Mr. Fragola: I don't think you can do anytl~ag with a deck area. Because of the 75' distance. I think stone is
the only way I can do that, to keep everything natural. I don't want ~o deal with the DEC in any other way.
Page 7 - July 25. 2002 Hearings
Sottthold Town Board of Appeals
Chairman: Mr. Orlando?
Member Orlando: Did you have your lot fI~gged for wet3ands.
Mr. Fragola: In the very beginning we did.
Member Orlando: l'he fronl yard is getting pr~ty heavy with phragmites. I war wondering if that was
flagged as wetland vegetation in the fi'out.
Mr. Emgula: No, not at all. The only area they have is next to Helen (neighbor). I can show you the D~C
fiffonnat~on.,I~tb/r~ the last 5 to l0 we are going to end up ha~ng a rock section there. They don~t want us
to tie into lhe p~agmites.
Member Tortora: The permit that you got from the Trustees which was last November, is the house in the
identical, position? Is it the identical map that we are looking at that the l'mstees approved?
Mr. Fragola: No, that is why we are here for the variance. We are pushing over that 4_5' area.
Member Tortora: Ire question is, is the survey that we are looking ar, is that the same survey that the
Trustees gave their wetland permit based on.
Mr. Fragola: I would have to double check. I believe it is. I am not quite sure. Letme look at it.
Member Tortora: They gave there approval last November and it was amended December 5th and then
again April 3rd.
Mr. Fragola: Maybe you can clarify something, 1 think the issues of the Trustees as I understood it, war the
75' distance. That is why we stayed on that criteria, nor to encroach on the 75'. They are pushing us forward
here.
Member Tortora: You are right. The reason why I am asking ~s sometimes we see two different maps. Then
we say well we didn't know they where going to put it there.
Mr. Fragola: We are not within that 75'. I am not sure what you are arldng me. The house has changed.
Chainnan: Uniquely the Trustees, you would yield jurisdiction ro the Trustees without the bulkhead. But
now with the construction of the bulkhead, it flips over to us. We don't have an application before us
because you comply with the 75'. Therefore, you are only here for a firont yard setback.
Mr. Fragola: That is correct. I haven't done anything more with an architec. There is point in drawing
anything, if I don't know what I have to do.
Chairman: O.K.
Member Orlando: How many square foot is the house you are proposing?
Mr. Fragola: Approximately 2500 sq. ft.
Member Hora/ng: Are yon asserting that the granting of the variance of lets say 5' on your front yard
setback, that would be the miinmum amomat that you really need?
Mr. Fragola: Yes, it actually comes to less then 5'.
Page 8 - July 25; 2002 Hearings
Southold Town Board of Appeals
Chairman: O.K. Is there anybody else who would like ro speak for or against this application? Seeing no
hands, I make a motion in closing the hearing...
SE]~ iVlINIUTES ]?OR RESOLUTION
7:10 p.m. Appl~ No. 5138 Nancy Brush.
Mr. Brush: I am James Brush.
Cha/rman: I had the distract p~eaanre of seeing you that one Saturday morumg and- touring your very race
piece xvf propci~y, I have no specific questions/I reviewec[ the eleYatiolxs fictors with y'oa and the reasnning
why you are placing the pool in its specific location.
Mr. Brush: We have chosen what you call the side yard in order to avoid building in our rear yard which
slopes quite drastically. We are a/so trying to stay as far away from the wetlands as poss~ole.
Chairman: The s/ze of the pool is?
Mr. Brash: 20 X40.
Cha/rman: Is that a gunite pool or a liner pool?
Mr. Brush: Right now it is vinyl.
Chairmam O,K. Mr. Homing, any questions of Mr. Brush?
Member Homing: What do you do for filtering and such. Is there a noise produced that would be offensive
to the neighbors with the raninng of the filter motor?
Mr. Brush: All my neighbors are on 3 and 4 acre lots. We can't see each other.
Member Homing: So they would not be hearing pumps or anythSmg running?
Mr. Brush: It is very secluded.
Chairman: Anything else George?
Mr. Homing: No.
Chairman: Mr. Orlando.
Member Orlando: The stakes at your property is that the pool size or is that..
Mr. Brash: That is the exact pool size.
Member Orlando: Do you have plans as most people do for brickin~ or decking around it or...?
Mr. Brash: The only patio that would be around it would be moving more in towards my s~de yard, not...
Member Orlando: That is why I am asking. You have a tough grading job to do there. You are going to
have retainin~ walls no matter how you do it, on one side or another.
Page 9 - July 25:2002 Hearings
$outhold Town Board of Appehls
Mr. Brash: When you stand there and look at the 2 stakes front to end. they are almost at the same exact
height. It is the center where it is low. There will be minimal grade work. I have been assured that by the
pool coatractor ah-early.
Member Orlando: The spores that are coming out. are they going to be off site or are you going to spread
them?
Mr. Brash: Everything is going to stay there.
Member Orlando: You are going to build it up.
Mr. Brush: A foot. The pool is nol going to be more than a foot at the lo,vest elevation right there. Them
MI/be steps from that patio going up to our deck area. The level of the pool is going te be within a foot of
where you saw the stakes. We can't have it sticking out ofthe grozmd, because thei~ the wetland side would
be huge.
Membe~ Orlando: You have a very challe~ging property to put a pool in.
Mr. Brush: I don~t want a major consrrucnon project. We already got our wetland permits and there are no
conditions.
Member Orlando: No other questions.
Chdm-nan: Mrs. Tortora?
Member Tortora: No.
Chairman: Is there anybody else who would like to speak in favor or against this application? Seeing no
hands. I will make a motion closing the heating.
SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION
***
7:14 p.m. Appl. No. 5141 -William Araneo.
Mr. Araneo: Will/am Araneo.
Cha/tman: We noticed from your survey that your house is scuwed a httle more towards the fight than it is
to the center of the lot. I assume that is the reason why you are here.
Mr. Araneo: Correct,
Chairman: Is there any anticipation of enclosing this deck at any time.
Mr. Araneo: Not byme, no.
Chairman: O.K. We shall start with Mrs. Tortora?
Member Tortora: I am trying to think of some. I have visited the site and actually can't thiak of any
questions.
Chairman: Mr. Orlando?
Member Orlando: When was that deck built?
~Page 10 -July 25. 2002 Hearings
$outhold Town Board of Appeals
Mr. Araneo: Approxirnately 6 or 7 years ago.
Member Orlando: About 957
Mr. Araneo: Approximately.
Member Orlando: I happen ro see little footprints fit the concrete w/th the date fit there and I am assuming
that they where done at the same time
Mr. Araneo: Time flies.
.Member Orlando: Anc~ the reason for the C.O. for the deck, is that you are sel/~g?
Mr. Araneo: No I am not. I j~at figured it is time To get it legal. Except responsibihty and go through the
process to make ~t legal.
~ffember Orlando: So this is self inflicted?
Member Tortora: Just ro get it on the record, what is the size of the deck
Mr. Araneo: It is 32 x 14. I guess as I was told by the employee in the office, it is 20~ that is in contention. I
guess it is 8' x 14'.
Member Tortom: We could cut off that part.
Mr. Araneo: Yes.
Member Homing: The deck was built around 95 withont a permit?
Mr. Araneo: Correct.
Member Homing: By a contractor or a home owner?
Mr. Araneo: It was a personal friend that wanted to do be a favor. Unfortunately it was one of those things.
Member Homing: No consideration for zoning at that time?
Mr. Araneo: It was my ow~a error. I misinterpreted the fitformation and I except responsibility for that. I am
going to try and correct that right now.
Member Homing: Thank you sir.
Mr. Araneo: I just wanted to show you an anial as far as the neighborhood. The pictores of houses on the
block. Roughly, half of them do have decks. I don't think it will change the character of the neighborhood.
My immediate neighbor is new. We had a long discussion and he was fine.
Member Tortora: We thank you for coming in and wanfmg to legalize it. It is actually a rarity. Most people
only come in if they are selling it.
Chairman: Phank you, Mr. Araneo. Is there anybody else like to speak for or against ~his application?
Seeing uo hands, I make a motion closing the hearing...
SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION
l)age 11 - July 25, 2002 Heanngs
Southold l'own Board of Appeals
7:20 p.m. Appl. No. 5140 Andrzj amd Renata Kopala.
Chairman: Is there anyone h~e to speak on behaff of or against tb/s application? O.K. we will recess it for
.about 20 minutes. Mr. & Mrs, Kopala waked ir~ Hearing opened.
Chamnan: We noticed that, I was over romght ro look at your lot and the flags that you have placed in
where the renms court is to be placed, Is there something you would like to comment about it? It pretty
much uses up the majority of the yard that you have.
Mrs. Kopala: Yes.
Chairman: What is the size of the fence that you are antimpating at this point?
Mr. Kopala: Usually with a tenis court it is about 8 or 10' high. Some people do 8 and some people do 10.
Member Tortora: We would have m know. In the notice of disapproval it says 9', but if we are considering a
variance becaase the code says 4' and 6 1/2 '. We would have to know what we are giving a variance for.
Mr. Kopala: 8'. I think that 8' would be good.
Chairman: Is this a clay court?
Mr. Kopala: Yes, this would be a clay court.
Chamnan: Mr. Kopala what is the setback from L'Hommedeau Lane?
£
Mr. Kopala: I think it is 14* from the street.
Member Tor~ora: We need to now the d/stance from here to here and from here to here.
Mr. Kopala: 5' here, 5' here, 20~ here and think probably 5' here.
Chairman: Do you want ro measure that and get back to us? That is the actual edge of the road. What we
need you to do is measure from here, in other wards take an imaginary line going here. From here to here.
Mr. Kopala: O.K.
Chairman: You can go home and do that and come back and tell us. So that we know what we have and we
can put that into the record
Mr. Kopala: O.K. Question, You mean from here to the street?
Chairman: No from here to your property i/ne.
Mr. Kopala: O.K.
Chairman: The best way ro do that is probably lay a strin~ from here to here and measure from here to h~e.
This drawn in and it is not done by a surveyor. You drew this in.
Member Homing: You are a ten-mis buft?
Mr. Kopala: I watch the matches and I play. It is my favorite sport.
Member Homing: How iong have you been resident?
~age 12 - July 25. 2002 l:Ieari~gs
South_old Town Board of Appeals
Mr. Kopala: I have been in this Country 16 years and I have had American passport two years.
Member Homing: I noticed that you bought this house a year and a half ago, is that correct?
Mr. Kopala: 6 months, 7 months.
Member Homing: I am curious, that where you, considenng any needs for a tennis court when you bought
this piece ofprcrperty that can barely hold one?
Mr, Kopala: No.
Member Homing: Six months ago you had no idea thru you wanted a tennis court?
Mr. Kopala: Everything is different because when we...
Mrs. Kopaia: Can I answer tlds question? It was very difficult ro buy property in Sonthold. It was like
occasion for us. There were two properties on the market. We chose this propervy. And it was like a piece of
land. You couldn't do anything. We didn't think about it.
Member Homing: Manzi Homes bu/lt this. Did you cnntract with them or did they built.
Mrs. Kopala: Yes. The offered us property with. house. We didn't want to put house close to the street. It
was already done.
Member Homing: It is not necessarily the locahon that is the most compelling factor, I don't believe. My
also. The lot is excessive for the size of the On the board
colleagues
can
speak
coverage
parcel.
my
years
on
I have seen rarely if ever grant such an increase on the lot coverage.
Mrs. Kopala: We brought this property and the house is in line with other houses. We wanted to do
something with this properxy. We are nor putting a swmXming pool. We don't like to swim. My husband is
playing, I am playing. Also we know that there big parr is tennis court, you need space for the ball to move.
Member Homing: You are saying that you would be using this on a daily basis within the family because
tennis is one of your thrills of life that you enjoy.
Mrs. Kopala: Yes. Everyday we go m play termis. Sometimes we fine it is bizzy.
Mr. Kopala: Sonrhold temfis court is very bizzy. We find it hard to use any courts.
Member Homing: One final question, do you have an estimate of what this construction will ran?
Mrs. Kopala: It will be around 10.000. or 8,000.
Mr. Kopala: It depends, oar friend gave us an estimate.
Member Homing: You want a court that is going to be good qmality and not falling apart.
Chairman: Is there any possibility of making this any smaller?
Member Orlando: What is the Zzze of the tennis court?
Mr. Kopala: Tennis coves, when you get the ball you must go back.
Page 13 - July 25, 2002 Hear'rags
8outhold Town Board of Appeals
Member Orlando: Right, we understand that. What is your guess?
Mr. ICopala: About...
Member Tortm:a: The survey said 51 X 105'.
Member Orlandoz Do you lkink it is 20 X 80?
Mr. Kopala: Maybe 20 X 80. I am r~at sure. I can go home and get that information.
Mr. Rychllk: Matthew Ryeltlik. The court itself is 105 x 51. A regulation cctort is ~20 X {50.
Member Orlando: What is the playing area.
Mr. Rychlik: 80 X 40.
Member Orlando: Would you be opposed to some of the fencing that is on the street side to be decorated
w~th the green rack?
Mrs. Kopala: We could de that.
Member Tm:tara: One of the things that concerns me is that the s~ze maybe minimum necessary for you ro
play, but the bottom line is this tennis court is going to occupy with the house 32% of lot coverage. It is
going ro be very close ro the road. It is going to be, it is kind of an old saying, yes you want a big tennis
court, but you dofft have a lot Iarge c~nough ro accommodate it. What do we do here. What I am asking you
is can you cut it back, particularly the length. That 105, to get it off of L~ommedieu Lane.
Mrs. Kopala: There is like 14 1/2'.
Member Tortora: That is to the right-of-way. That is not how far you are from the.., yom: property is not 14'.
As Mr. Horsing mentioned, we just don't grant that 14nd of lot coverage, period. I appreciate everything you
want to do. but what you want to do is put a very large tenms court on a very small lot. What we are going
to try to do is make it possible for you to have your dream, which is to play tennis, but at the same rime
protect some kind of residantial quality of the neighberhood. We have to try and strike some balance here.
What can you give up on the 105' length that will make it less long?
Chairman: We don't need you discuss that right at this second
Member Tartars: You have to give us the distance to the property line
Mr. Kopala: It is very close to the road_ the property line. It is nice private road. If you see a house with
fermis comzs, it is more valuable. (Not audible) make a nice cl/mate for the nekghborhood ....
Member Tortora: If you build a 25000 sq. ft. house that would be more valuable too_ k is also a question of
loss of space overcrowding and quality of life. Which is something the people in Southold value very
dearly. I will repeat what I said before. This board does not grant that kind of lot coverage. We just don't.
Please seriously consider what I am asking you. Which is to go back and measure, talk among yourselves
and think what is the minknam that we could enjoy. We do not want m no~ gran~ you permission to have s
tennis court. 11~at is uot the objective. You are here for three variances. You are asking not for one but for
three. The side yard, the lot coverage and the fence height. So work with us on this.
Mr. Rychlik: The court is 40 X 80, but the clay area is going to be like dht behind line ....which is good for
play too. Basically it is not touching, 20' behind tennis court line will be dirt
Page I4 - July 25, 2002 Hearings
Southold Town Board of Appeals
Chmrman: The problem is, is that the fence creates the overall max/mum of lot coverage. In other words we
are telling you that a fermis court is a srruarum. Regardless of the fact that it has no roof on it, it is still a
structure under our code. It is used as a specific devise just as a swimming pool is. ]'hat is what 1Vh'.
f;Ioming was eluding to before. The concern we have is what we mention. I~have one question. What is the
dJfferancein ~oise between the clay court and say an asphalt court in re£¢rence to the propensity of the bails
Trilling the court itsel£ Is it less on a clay cour~ than it is on a...?
Mr. Kopala: Yes, because the ball doesn't bounce. It almost slides. I talked to my neighbors, they both say
we have no problem with me going out and playing.
Mrs. Kupala: Also it is Iight. It is not like chemical. It is natural, it is good for the environment.
Chairman: Would you do me a favor and go home and me~sure that for us and come back here and give us
that information. We ~ ill farther discuss this.
Member Homing. I have one more question. Is it possible that you could entertain the thought oftuming the
court and reposifioinng it? Would it fit in back of the house along the Bunchuck and other property? Could
it fit in there some how? Be feasible and then your yard area would along L'Hommediea Lane because the
ems court would be rocked into that back comer. I know it would be close to the house at that point. But
is it possible.
Chairman: Good idea Thank you for bringing that up George. We are going to recess this to the Iasl
regulary scheduled meeting. We at-e going to tell you that that is going to be within a half hour or so. Please
come back by 8:15, 8:20 or sc I am making that motion.
SEE MINUTES For Resolution
7:46 p.m. Appl. No. 5173 - Russell W. Meyer
Mr. Meyer: Russell Meyer.
Chairman: Good eveumg. You have indicated to us that you want to construct a second story which is in ar
one point 42' from Great Pond and 29' from the east property line.
Mr. Meyer: That is correct.
Member Tortora: It ~ a second story and a deck.
B/Ir. Meyer: Yes. that is correct. We are decking the mum par~ of the house. My farther past away a year
ago. My mother moved here with us and we just need more space. I have lived there for 5 years now. It is a
two bedroom house now and we just need a larger place. I want to put in a couple extra rooms upstairs.
Chahanan: So we are going to go with this 42 and 29, is that correct. That is etch in stone. That is not a
sarcastic statement to you. I am just saying. I know there has been some changes between the building
department and back and forth. That 42 and 29 is good.
Mr. Meyer:Yes.
Chairman: George, do have any questions of Mr. Meyer?
Member Homing: Not really, although as it says in the notice of disapproval, the building was pre-existing
was there already with a 50' setback_ Which makes it not compliant already. The deck would be open to the
sky, s/r?
Page 15 July 25.2002 Hearings
:Southold Town Board of Appeals
Mr. Meyer: Yea it will be a double deck actually. As it is there is a deck 8' from the existing structure and
not roof al ali. There is a second deck, a balcony on rap.
Member Homing: The whole thing pressure treated timber. The rain is going to drip down through the
balcony down through the other area?
Mr. Meyer: The Board of Trustees has already mandated to us what we need to do is but drywells oa all the
rain gutters that we have. The house is going to become aluminum sided as well.
Member Homing: And your need for this deck is?
Mr. Meyer:. Basically it is just a ~o/cer way of//ving. I have always planned a deck out there over looking the
lake. It certainty no bigger, [ have to big bushes that will come out. The deck will extend 6"be£ore that. I am
going to dig out the shrubs and put them towards the side of the house. It is going to take up about the same
space of the skrubs.
Member Homing: What kind of excavation will be required other then removal of those shrubs?
Mr. Meyer. Just minimal per piling.
Member Homing: Thank you.
Chairman: Mr. Orlando?
Member Orlando: No questions.
Chairman: Mrs. Tortora?
Member Tortora: The width of the deck is 8'?
Mr. Meyer: Yes.
Chalrmma: And the length of it is?
Mr. Meyer: 24' offthe side of the house.
Chairman: O.K. 8 X 24. The only diference that you show there is the steps going down, right.
Mr. Meyer: Yes.
Member Tortora: I understand the need for the second story and I certainly understand the need for more
room. You are already to close to the Wetland area. I mu sorry to see that you would go closer.
Mr. Meyer: My mother is in a wheelchair. Her availability to go our side the house is small ro none. She
goes out only when we have to take her to the Doctor. This deck would allow her to at least get out and see
and get some air a little bit. That is its real function in life. She is invalid. She is in a wheelchair.
Member Tortora: I now understand.
Mr. Meyer: Thank you.
Chairman: We thank you for the presentation. Is there anybody else who would like to speak for or against
this application? Seimg no hands, I make a motion in closing tlds hearing...
Page 16 -July 25, 2002 Hearings
Sonthold Town Board of Appeals
SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION
7:51 P.M. Appl, No. 5139 - Vincent and Diarm Carv'elli.
Mr. Grossman: My name is Adam Grossmam I am the Attorney for the applicants. In addition to myself the
appI/cants are here tiffs evening as well as the architect. There ere a few things I just want to the Board.
unlegs yin* had any questions you wanted to start in with? What we are dealing with here is an application
for renovation of an existing 4wellkg, k fact the building department approved constmctinn of most of the
work with exception of certain items that are apperenlzly oat side of the scope of what is permitted. It is a
little bit, confdsi~g~bee, anSe there are severa! ,d/fferem items that we are gong to lry and go through as
Si~/plx a~ i can.. B~fore I do that, I just wanted to ment/on also, that in conu~ation with this apl~Iigat~og thore
wa~ ~b~l~ 21 yea~s agio, a varlm~ace for renevatSon. It should be in your £fle. That was in .~act ~/Tprove~'with a
p~Im' res~r~fion wkie'tx Was a restriction on 17 1/2' og the west, and east bounderies oi thi~ R~P~Y.
~'~I~ is hi phy h,ere because a cou?Ie of the additions that?here onto the structure that I am talIdug about
~exc~x~d.that 17 112'. In hdditipn to that I l~now that, I knosv there is ~dditkm related to lot eo~¥er~ag¢.o~}the
prc~erty ha-~ing ~o do with the appli~cation on the pool. I know the Board is also previously Im~e/had some
disc/tssion abouttbis. I understand also that there are copies of a deed that ~ the Board.members have. The
~ itself actua~ly says, specifies ltla! the rifle includes to the high water mark to the property. I ~ttmd
the~e is some difference of up/dion as to whether that in fact is proper bas/,s/or calculation o~ot eoverage
or ~M~e~r the bulkhead is proper calculation. It is my clients position and mh~e, that we stick with what the
deed says. The high water mark should be the basis of that calculation.
Chairman: What is the difference. Do you have difference between those two, Mr. Grossman?
Mr. Grossman: That is a good question. I don't believe the ercifftect does. I can just ask.
Mr. Bers: David Bers.
Chairman: We don't need this at this minute. But one of the board members does need it. If you want ro do
some calculations throughout the immediate presentation.
Mr. Bets: O.K.
Chairman: Mr. Grossman I just want m say to you that I have looked at tiffs house both fi:om the ~vater and
from the land. Two instances from the water. I am familiar with the house. I am ready for you to tell me
what areas that the building department was not happy with.
Mr. Grossman: Absolutely. I will go through them one ar a time. Also I want to ment/on to the board
members, the survey that I am actually looking at is dated June 6, 2002. I understand there is at least one
previous survey in the file that doesn't actually show these particular items. I will start fi:om the water side
of the property. There is an existing deck on the property that we are looldug to replace with a deck that is
somewhat 3imilar in size with some minor differences. One portion of the deck goes further away fi:om the
property line. The other distinction is that the proposed new deck is going to be a covered deck. It is going
to be in the nature of a porch then a deck.
Chairman: Is this the one that is depicted as 21 X 40?
Mr. Grossman: I have a deck that is I2 X 40.
Chairman: Yes, I am reading it up side down
Mr. Grossman: 21 is the distance from the...
Page 17 - July 25, 2002 Hearings
Sonthold Town Board of Appeals
Member Tortora: So it is not going to be a deck it is going to be a porch?
Mr. Grossman: It is going to be a porch. That is the first item we are talking about. Evary/Jaing ~ am talldng
~bont are items that~have not been completed as of yeT. The renovation of the existing structure has been
completed to the best of my knowledge. GoSng now the next xtem are the two dormers that are going to be
"bnitt~ One on the east and one west. They are slightly encroaching on thal 17 1/2'~ This is on what is
proposed as the second story.
Chairman: This is facing the bay.
Mr. Bars: That is not actually correct. They are encroaclling in the 30' setback. As the drawing shows they
arc encrolaching within the existing building code by 6'3".
Mr. Grossman: My mistake. I apologize.
Chainnarr Are these dormers facing the bay?
Mr. Bets: They are facing the water, yes. There is one in the center which doesn't encroach on the 30'
setbaclc
Chairman: This is the reason why that the roof lines are of different color? Because some of the shingles
bare been replaced and some have not been replaced.
Mr, Grossman: Yes.
Chairman: So you refurbished the ex/sting dormer that is on the house and the two new ones are the ones
tha/you are applying for?
Mr. Grossman: .Actually the are two dormers in center of the property that were erected. That were granted
bythe building department. The other two were not granted because they sit inside the normal 30' setback.
Charimar O.K. How big are those dormers?
Mr. Grossman: The dormers are each 12' side. There setback is 6'3" from the side eves of the house.
Chairman: O.K. Thank you.
Mr. Grossman: In addition to the 2 dormers and the deck that would actually be a covered porch there are
on both sides, east and west on the edges of the existing structure, there are proposed additions. One on the
west side is a proposed rebuilt stoop and window bay. It is actually going to be replacing an existing stoop.
It is a little bit longer in length and it is reflected on the survey. That also I believe is an encroachment on
the 17' side. Is that correct David?
Mr. Bers: Yes. tt is not additionally on the 17.
Mr. Grossman: It is actually reducing the encroachment. It is going slightly less close to the boundary line
of what is already there.
Member Tortora: What is already there is v/olation of the original permit. Is that correct? Let start of and
clear the muddy ak here a little bit. The pex~nit that was issued for the prior applicant, one of the conditions
of that permit was the side yards be maintained at 17 1/2', is dial correct?
Mr. Orossman: Correct.
Page,~l 8 - July 25, 2002 Hearings
Southold Town Board of Appeals
Member Tortora: That is nor what is there now. is it? That is not what you are proposing then? What you
are proposing is to further encroach on what was created legally. I just want that on the record now.
Mr. Grossman: I understand thal and I don't dispute the fact that it is very clear in the 1981 vanartce of that
17 1/2'. Hbwever, what we ere talking about with this particular local/on ss a reduction.
Member Tonora: A reduction ~f what is illegal?
Mr. Grossman: You could put it that way, yes. On the other side of the property there is a proposed rebinlt
stoop and shower enclosure. This is also dealing with that 17 1/2'. What we are doing as really looking to
flnprove on what is there. I think it is really the same issue. Two more left I will be done as qu/ckly as I can.
I appreciate the boards~ pa~iants
Chahauaru You may want to just tell us how much that encroaches into those side yard areas. It doesn't
really say that.
Mr, Bers:! believe it does reflect on the June 6, 2002 survey what the differences are on each side.
Chairman: O.K. Go ahead. (looking at correct survey)
Mr. Bets: The 3 numbers ~hat axe on that are 17' 2" proper setback from the base house. The second number
is there is existing stoop construction there, whose setback is 13'2". The proposed is 11'2" The existing
stoop is 4' and we are requesting 6'.
Mr. Grossman: In addition m that on whal is the northerly side of the structure I believe it is the kitchen?
Mr. Bets: Tb/s is the garage extension~ The limits of that garage extension are the ex/sting setbacks. It
doesn't extend adthtianally into the side yard or front yard.
Mr. Grossman: The last item is the pool. I think the real issue with the pool is the lot coverage. I think.
There may be other issues this board has a concern about. Primarily my understanding is that is the major
concern of the board. For the purposes of the concerns of my clients, we are inst looking to be able to have
a racer residence. A residence that is similar to other residences in the neighborhood. There are renovating
trying to make it nicer and make it a little bit better. That is our purpose in what we are trying to do. We
believe thal the re]/ef that we are requesting as not substantial in nature and it is m character ora concerned
commuinty and fits the area variance criteria. However. we are interested in more comments on tins and ke
there any questions or concerns that we might be able to address. I also have some additienal photo's that
were taken of neighboring properties, if I can add them to the recorc.
Chamuan: I just need to ask Mr. Bers a question. Mr. Bars. on the west side o£the house where you have
that i2~4" and 13'2". there is an 8'1" what is that.
Member Orlando: ] thi~k that is supposed to be 18.
Mr. Bers: Which is the setback to the house.
Mr. Carvelli: [ can I just say something in general. The extension on the house, we tried to maintain the
setbacks that were granted by the previous variance. Such as the extension of the garage and keeping the
height of the roof similar. We are requesting the pool in the front yard. Some of the photo~s that [ have
included I am trying to show that the front yard of the houses on the beach are kind of used au ur/litafian and
are enhanced yards. It is not unusual situation in the front yard or in the side yard.
Chairman: The pool is not in any way going to be enclosed in the future9
Page 19 - July 25, 2002 Hearings
Southold Town Board of Appeals
Mr. Carvelh: We are proposing a fence that is req~tred by law.
Chairmart: O.K. The 2 domars on the east and west side facing the water, are the only 2 dormers that are
the nature o£th/s appl/,cation?
Mr, Crrossman: Yes. The other two where approved and conformhig.
Member Homing: Ihe pool, the equipmenT, the filtering, the pumping ali this, where ~s that equlpmem
going to be?
Mr. Carvelli: The equlpmera will be on the east face of the property. Toward the northeast comer of the
property.
Member Homing: Any neighbor going to be concerned about any volume of noise.
Mr. Carvelli: We are locating to stay as far as the neighbors property as possible.
Member Homing: How close is the nearest house would you esumate>
Mr. Grossman: It is actually marked on th/s plan. The one story frame dwelling. They are actually quit close
to the water hi front, so we located it on the northeast comer. It will be a vinyl pool. The pavLng around the
pooI will be minimal required. It will be mostly grassy area. It is not gomg to be a large paved area around
the pool.
Member Homing: Will the pumps and everything be below grade or will you have some sort of shed
enclosing the equipment?
Mr. Grossman: We would have that below grade. We want to keel: the lawn as clear as possible.
Member Horn/rig: Thank you.
Ch~rmarc We have requested in instances of this nature that the fixtures that are related to the pool be kept
in. them is no way that you can put them in a building that there is not noise eminating from. but in some
type of structure that I/mits the mount of noise. We are just making you aware of it at this point.
Member Homing: It is a concern.
Chairman: Vince are you ready?
Member Orlando: No questions.
Chairman: Mrs. Tortora?
Member Tortora: Lets talk about lot coverage. The original notice of disapproval that came in had you at
22% lot coverage and that was based on the fact tlmt they were raking the lot above water as lot area. Which
is correct. Lands under water are not calculated in lot coverage. Not m my experience. I'hen it is my
understanding that you want m the building deparrmem and you said look you have a deed and our deed
says that we own to the high water mark_ Therefore. lot coverage should be based on the underwater land.
You cony/riced them of that. I mn not convinced. In the seven years I have been on this board I have never
seen lot coverage taken on underwater land.
Member Orlando: High water is not underwater. High water is...
Member Homing: The maxinarm height of the tide coming m.
Page 26 - Yuiy 25. 2002 ~Ieatings
Southold Town Board of Appeals
.... Member Tortora: It is mean?
Mr. Grossman: Yes, the mean or average high water mark. That would be how we would calculate it.
Member Homing: I think that wou/d be appropriate.
Member Tortora: We don't measure front yards from the mean high water mark. We don't. I am a little
confused about this. Lr~ all honesty, I never ever heard of somehow lands tmderwate count. Other wise you
could build, have a lot that {s half under,rater and your lot coverage
Mr. Grossmaa: Lunderstand yom- concerns, but what it is woFdg fi'om my perspective, it is unusual for me to
see a deed that ~icmally specifie~ to the high v, mter marI~ but there it is. in the dded.
Member Tortora: There are lots of them. We have seen.
Chairman: I think the whole issue hem Mr. Grossman is the question is. is there a beach at low tide?
Mr. Grossman: There is a broad beach there at the high water mark. If the line of bulkhead which seems m
be some sort of an arbitrary point from the property and is not described ar all in the deed or any other
description in the property. They say the high water mark to mean the mark above water as the land area.
Chagman: There is a 2% factor involved? 22 as opposed to 19.875321. Which we are going re say is close
to 20%, but under
Member Tortom: It is more than that. It went from 22 to 17.
Mr. Carvelli: At this location where the bulkhead is, there is not water at the bulkhead at that point. There is
beach quite a bit beyond. It is not were the water is.
Mr. Grossman: The ordy other thought I had on this. other times in my career when I have dealt with legal
issues on mun/cipalities, I don't whether the town attorney's office has dealt with this issue at ail, ffthere is
pmcedance on this.
Chairman: We have take 4 hours and 37 rninutes of testimony on the difference between shingles on a house
and efta Rouse as it precedence to 19.8% or 20.006. I assure you it didn't involve to the bulkhead or to the
property line, but we have probably researched every possible indiv/dual situation including 4.8 miles of
around water front an Robins Island of which they have riparian rights to 100' ali the way around except for
the cove. WRich has 1000' of riparian rights under. In my particular case, it is not a mine l;otht, but it is a
tectmical point. I don't know where you want to go with tiffs Mrs. Tonora?
Member Tortora: It would be the first time in the "years that I have been on the board that we have ever
calculated lot coverage or excepted lot coverage calculated in this manor.
Member Homing: I think we have to except the way the building departmant...
Member Tortora: No we don't. We can reverse, modify, affirm.
Member Homing: The difference is not extreme, is it Lydia?
Member Tortora: 16.49 to 22 something, 22+ or -.
(,[ Member Homing: It is s611 within our guidelines in a way.
Page 21 - July 25. 2002 Hearings
Sunthold Town Board of Appeals
Chalm~an: I just want to say this for the record. So far as I am concerned everything that exist on Peconic
Bay from the Laurel I/ne re and past this property, if not to the Norris Estate./s ali calculated to the kigh
water mark.
Member Tortora: I am sure it is. the deeds are. N~ the lot coverage fi.om pr/or. Underwater land.
Chairman: Is there anything else you would like to say.
Mr. Grossman: No. I think I am finished with my testimony. Thank you.
Chairman: Is there anyone else like to speak infavor of this appl/cador~
Mr, Axberg: Arthur A,xberg, neighbon First of all I think what they are dulng is a great job. We are the
neighbors, it looks, beatififl and it is a great improvement oYer 0~e previous owner. Our property is also
deeded ~o the high water mark. At high fide we have a beach beyond the bulkhead. 'Dxey have a beach
beyond the bulkhead. That is certainly part of your property. I would think that should be considered. It is
not uuder water. It ~s allows above water. We think they are doing a great job.
Chairman: Thank you sir. Anybody else ii]ce to speak infavur?
Mr. Wamback: My name is Norman Wamback. I am also a neighbor of the Carvelti's. I have been there
since 1936 and when those lots were laid out in this private community called Camp Mineola in 1922. the
homes were originally built on the beach. It was all sand. The property did go down to ~he high water mark.
The bull&eads were built only as retMnirtg walls initially, so we can plant grass. My idea of the property is
all the way down as the deed states.
Chairman: Thank you.
Mr. Grossman: Can I submit the additional photos.
Member Homing: Can I ask one more question? Your client then in terms of paying land taxes pays ;or
everything that is continuously above water? Also pays for anything that is below water whan it is at the
mean high tide area? Are they paying taxes on land that is constantly under wster as well?
Mr. Grossman: My guess is. I am giving you my legal interpretation, is that based on the mean high water
mark. they are in fact paying taxes on property right up to the point where the mean high water mark is
located. That is what the deed says. I believe that is what they are paying ;or in there taxes.
Member Horning: So then the deed that you folks have all described is actually not owned by your client.
The beach that is visible when the tide goes out?
Member Orlando: Half of it is.
Mr. Grossman: Right up to the mean lngh water mark. Below that is out ofjur/sdiction.
Member Homing: O.K. Tl'mnk you. I just wanted to clar/fy that
Chairman: Anybody else? Any other questions from board members? Hearing no further comment l make a
motion closing the hearing...
SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION
Recess from earlier, reopened:
8:35 p.m. Appl. No. 5140 Kopala.
Page 22 --July 25, 2002 Hearings
Southold Town Board of Appeals
Chairman: At what point can you still build a teimis court or utiI/ze a tennis court were the board comes an
agreement of 3 members. We are missing, a member tonight, I should mention to yon that Mrs. OIiYa is in
Cal/fomia, deal/ng with some fam/ly issues. We are missing a board member. So those are issues thar~ we
are go/ng ro be dealing with. Lets see what happens, We are aware. We would detTmitely require sereeziing
as Mr. Orlando has mentioned. Particularly on L'ttommedieu. We could require screcming on the 5' mark on
the opposite side. At the Bnnehuek mad others prope~y. You can't mm t/tis around? It will not fit betw~m
hh~ho~se and the...
Mrs. Kopala: Yes. And what I can tell you is it will be very close to the house and we have steps iii the
back. We have high_ basement. Also we located the court in that area because there is a garden tSom the
i~oighbors side and there is a stre6t, The ball vrill not tilt the windows and w/llnot distroy anytlgttg. It is
open area That is why.
Chairman: I understand.
Mrs. Kopala: I can give you a copy.
Chairman: O.K, Is them anybody else that wants to comment on this particular application, which is appeal
#5140, which,is a nacre of a tennis court. Seeing no hands, any further questions from any board members.
Hearing no further quest/ohs. I make a motion closing the hearing.
SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION
Respectfully submitted by
Jill M. Doherty