Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5381 Ar' 4 t a APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS .0• �C�lFF®�t� a - Southold Town Hall Lydia A. Tortora, Chairwoman � ��` 53095 Main Road Gerard P. Goehringer ; e = g P.O. Box 1179 % t Southold,New York 11971-0959 George Horning ; Ruth D. Oliva N.4 0 �. ZBA Fax(631)765-9064 Vincent Orlando = ED 1,6 del Telephone(631)765-1809 http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS RECEIVED TOWN OF SOUTHOLD FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION OCT 3 2003 21Sp,21 MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 11 2003treZ Of/ Appi. No. 5381 - Michael Pisacano "` 7 Southold ows Clerk Property Location: 1457 Cox Neck Road, Mattituck; Parcel 1000-113-7-19.11. SEQRA DETERMINATION: The Zoning Board of Appeals has visited the property under consideration in this application and determines that this review falls under the Type II category of the State's List of Actions, without an adverse effect on the environment if the project is implemented as planned. Findings of Fact PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: The applicant's survey dated April 30, 2002, prepared by Joseph A. Ingegno, L.S. shows the property is vacant, with 51.31 ft. frontage along the west side of Cox Neck Road in Mattituck, and with a total land area of 72,974 sq. ft. (inclusive of a lengthy 50 ft. wide right-of-way). The property is located in the R-80 Low-Density Residential Zone District. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Building Department's November 7, 2002 Notice of Disapproval, amended November 8, 2002, citing Section 100-24(A) in its denial of a building permit application to construct a new single-family dwelling. The basis of the Notice of Disapproval is that this 73,616 sq. ft. area is not permitted in the R-80 District because it is not a recognized lot by any of the following four code standards: 1) The identical lot shall be created by deed recorded in the Suffolk County Clerk's office on or before 6-30-83, and the lot conformed to the minimum lot requirements set forth in Bulk Schedule; or 2) Lot was approved by the Southold Town Planning Board, or 3) Lot is shown on a subdivision map approved by the Southold Town Board prior to 6-30-83, or 4) Lot is approved/recognized by formal action of the Board of Appeals prior to 6-30-83. It is noted that the applicant's surveyor confirms the property to be 72,974.44 sq. ft. in size, rather than the Building In`spector's reference of 73,616 sq. ft. APPLICANT'S ORIGINAL REQUEST: On November 13, 2002, applicant applied under Section 100-26 of the Zoning Code for a Lot Waiver, our File #5264. The Lot Waiver request was based on the Building Inspector's November 7; 2002 Notice'of Disapproval, amended November 8, 2002. Public Hearings were held on February 20, 2003 and April 3, 2003, and June 5, 2003, at which time the hearing was canceled, in order that steps may be followed to advertise the amendment by the applicant filed on May 23, 2003, and for the Notices required by applicant under Chapter 58 of the Town Code. • Page 2—September 11,2003' Appl. No.5381 —Michael Pisacano 113-7-19.11 at Mattituck APPLICANT'S AMENDED REQUEST: The May 23, 2003 amended application #5381 is a request for Reversal of the Building Inspector's November 7, 2002 Notice of Disapproval, amended November 8, 2002 based on Section 100-24(A), in which applicant's request for a building permit to construct a single family dwelling on property consisting of 72,974 sq. ft. was denied. The basis of the Notice of Disapproval remained the same, stating that this 73,616 sq. ft. area is not permitted in the R-80 District because it is not a recognized lot by any of the following four code standards: 1) The identical lot shall be created by deed recorded in the Suffolk County Clerk's office on or before 6-30-83, and the lot conformed to the minimum lot requirements set forth in Bulk Schedule; or 2) Lot was approved by the Southold Town Planning Board, or 3) Lot is shown on a subdivision map approved by the Southold Town Board prior to 6-30-83, or 4) Lot is approved/recognized by formal action of the Board of Appeals prior to 6-30-83. After Notices as provided by Chapter 58 of the Town Code, the Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on July 10, 2003, at which time written and oral evidence were presented. Based upon all testimony, documentation, personal inspection of the property, and other evidence, the Zoning Board finds the following facts to be true and relevant: MOTION OFFERED: In considering all of the above factors and applying the balancing test under New York Town Law 267-b, motion was offered by Member Oliva, to APPROVE Michael Pisacano's application to reverse the Building Inspector's determination. Chairwoman Tortora called for a second to the motion. Member Goehringer abstained. Member Horning was absent. There was no second to the motion, and the Motion was LOST. Therefore, in accordance with Town Law, Section 267-a(13), the Appeal of Michael Pisacano is denied by default. _ PO I I Lydia ortora, Chairwoman —Approved for Filing 10/3 /03 I i , FORM NO. 3 NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL DATE: November 7, 2002 AMENDED: November 8, 2002 TO: Michael Pisacano PO Box 1931 Southold, NY 11971 Please take notice that your application dated November 7, 2002 For permit for construction of a single family dwelling at Location of property 1457 Cox Neck Road, Mattituck County Tax Map No. 1000 - Section 113 Block 7 Lot 19.11 Is returned herewith and disapproved on the following grounds: The proposed construction, on this non-conforming 73,616 square foot parcel in the Residential R-80 District, is not permitted pursuant to Article II, Section 100-24A, "Lot Recognition." "A.A lot created by deed or town approval shall be recognized by the town if any one(1) of the following standards apply and if the lots have not merged:" (1) The identical lot was created by deed recorded in the Suffolk County Clerk's office on or before June 30, 1983, and the lot conformed to the minimum lot requirement(s) set forth in Bulk Schedule AAEN as of the date of lot creation. (2) The lot(s) in question is/are approved by the Southold Town Planning Board. (3) The lot(s) in question is/are shown on a subdivision map approved by the Southold Town Board prior to June 30, 1983. (4) The lot(s) in question is/are approved and/or recognized by formal action of the Board of Appeals prior to June 30, 1983. The above referenced lot does not meet any of the above requirements and is, therefore not a recognized lot. (--- Thisuefice f dis, 1 was amended for further clarification. uthoiized Signature Note to Applicant: Any change or deviation to the above referenced application, may require further review by the Southold Town Building Department. SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS SPECIAL MEETING TRANSCRIP Pg,F HEARINGS ' :HELD JULY 10,2003 (Prepared by Jessica Boger) Present were: Chairwoman Lydia A. Tortora Member Vincent Orlando Member Gerard P. Goehringer T� • I Member Ruth D. Oliva Clerk Paula Quintieri OCT 2 ® 2003 Absent were: 3 Member George Homing c = PUBLIC HEARINGS: • 7:09 p.m. Appl. No. 5381 — MICHAEL PISACANO. Location of Property: 1457 Cox Neck Road, Mattituck; Parcel 1000-113-07-19.11: This is an Appeal,requesting a Reversal of the Building Inspector's amended November 8, 2002 Notice of Disapproval, based on Section 100-24(A) for construction of a single family dwelling. The basis of the Notice of Disapproval is that this 73,616 sq. ft. area is not permitted in the R-80 District because it is not a recognized lot by any of the following four code standards: 1) The identical lot shall be created by deed recorded in the Suffolk County Clerk's office on or before 6-30-83, and the lot conformed to the minimum lot requirements set forth in Bulk Schedule; or 2) Lot was approved by the Southold Town Planning Board, or 3) Lot is shown on a subdivision map approved by the Southold Town Board prior to 6-30-83, or 4) Lot is approved/recognized by formal action of the Board of Appeals prior to 6-30- 83. CHAIRWOMAN: Is someone here who would like to speak on behalf of the applicant? PATRICIA MOORE, ESQ: Originally I did not represent Mr. Pisacano. I had represented the prior owners, the Chudiaks. But Mr. Pisacano recently retained me to take on because I'm familiar with the case. What I've done is if you take the first piece of paper that I gave, I submitted a packet to you, which is in addition to everything else that you already have in your file. What I did is I took a tax map and that tax map has colored lines on it. What I then did is a historical history of the subdivisions of those properties. And what I identified with... 7-10-03 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing MEMBER ORLANDO: Oh, color coordinated. MS. MOORE: I tell you, I did my homework. And yes, arts and crafts at my office today. What I did is I identified the colors next to the subdivisions, or as they are known. And that way you can follow gong. To begin with, this piece of property originally, you can have one house on one piece of property, obviously. You have this property that originally had the potential to be developed as one lot. Then, let me start off with Milowski setoff. March of'84 the Planning Board (PB) created 19 .8 and, let me make sure I have the right one, Milowski, typo, I'm sorry, 20, 19.18. That's the southerly piece that is adjacent to the ROW. That lot, when it was approved, also got 280A approval from the ZBA. Your appeal #3243, that appeal was due to the fact that this lot was being served by the ROW. And they got that approval. So that's in '84. Then in '85, Simicich, Chudiak had originally owned this whole area. Chudiak had sold to Simicich, a large piece of property. That's the piece on the north. And that's the, that's highlighted in yellow. That yellow highlight, and I attached the subdivision map of Simicich with the resolution approving the subdivision of Simicich. And you can see that that piece surrounds in part, the subject property. So the PB had created the, had split off in a 5 lot subdivision. 5 lots, I believe. No Simicich, somebody is saying 4.4, I believe in this case it was 5. You're right, 4, 4 lot subdivision. I give you credit, credit is due. 4 lot subdivision. Lot #1 of the Simicich subdivision, that will be discussed in a moment because that becomes subdivided again. But the Simicich subdivision had a covenant, or the PB had imposed a covenant as you can see from the PB resolution that this property cannot be further subdivided. The applicant filed a covenant and thereafter, in '99, they addressed this property again. But let me go on in chronology. In '85 Chudiak makes an agreement with Wells, Becker, Zabicky, and is it Wanat? Yes, now it's shown on my map as Milowski. Excuse me, you said you were... CHAIRWOMAN: We have to have a very clean record here. So please do not address any of the speakers. Please address the chair and state your name for the record. I'm sorry,but we need to have a very, clear, concise,record. MS. MOORE: Thank you. I'm taking this from the surveys that I've had in my file. And the subdivision maps that I can see. Now there's been exchanges or sales through that time, so my, I show Wanat in one map and I showed Milowski on another. And I understand they are related. So thay may or may not be the case. But that's what I have based on the information that I could gather. In any case, you have the pieces that in December of'85, the PB took action on the applications. Each of these, as I mentioned the last time I was here, the lot line'applications were independent applications. Each had to present a map. Each had to present a filing fee. And each had to be considered on it's own. What the PB did was they imposed a covenant on the approval that was the subject of their review that they said when the deed was conveyed from Chudiak to the potential purchaser of the parcel, whether it be Wells, Becker, Zabicky, or Wanat, that there would be a covenant that the two parcels would merge. That was done. The Wanat piece, and the Wells piece were merged, and the conveyance took place. And as you know, the Page 2 of 26 7-10-03 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing Becker and the Zabicky piece did not get done. There was no covenant on the property. We did title searches obviously, Mr. Pisacano, he was represented by Paul Caminiti. There was a title report done at the time. There was no covenant with respect to preventing the sale of that property. It would have been somewhat unusual to place a covenant on property that until the action takes place because all of you have faced lot line changes, are familiar with lot line changes. You take a piece of property and you, in some municipalities, they don't even require PB action. They are boundary line agreements. You are giving some land from one piece to the other. And there is an exchange there. That's what occurred. And in this instance, the PB said, no, no, no, because I gave you the letter last time, which was Amelie Depetris had represented Chudiak said, listen, we're just doing boundary line agreements, agreements between neighbors. Do I have to come into the PB? And the PB said, yes you do have to come in and we are going to bless each of the transactions that take place. Well by doing that, they took action. They took action in this property and they created the additional sized lots on the Wells and the Milowski piece, excuse me, the Wanat piece. They took action on those two pieces making them more conforming. And that was appropriate, that was fine. CHAIRWOMAN: You are referring to 1918 as the Wanat piece? Or the Milowski piece? MS. MOORE: No, Milowski is 1918. 19.8, I show on my survey as Wanat. Oh, Milowski used to be a Wanat or Wanat sold or, well, they are all local. They are related, so they'll probably clarify the record. CHAIRWOMAN: I have the records here. MS. MOORE: You do because I could not get from the PB, who was the owner. CHAIRWOMAN: I have records going back to March 19, 1984 from the PB. That record indicates that lot 19.18 belonged to Wanat at that time. And the lot that you have listed as Wanat is in fact, the owner is Milowski. MS. MOORE: I thought that was the case all along. Then I pulled out a survey from Joe Angegno, and he had now or formally of Wanat. That actually caused some confusion for me today. And I called my client and I said "Wanat, Milowski" and she believes that the Wanat and Milowski family were related in some way. CHAIRWOMAN: That may be but... MS. MOORE: For your purposes... CHAIRWOMAN: Our records are quite clear because the ZBA granted 280A access to the Milowski piece. MS. MOORE: Is that 19.8? Page 3 of 26 7-10-03 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing CHAIRWOMAN: 19.8, yes. MS. MOORE: Okay, because your decision didn't have a tax map number that, I didn't find it, so... CHAIRWOMAN: It did have a map... MS. MOORE: Good, I didn't have the map. Thank you. Please correct my record to reflect that what I show as Wanat is Milowski, and what is shown as Milowski is Wanat. I stand corrected. I'm sorry. I was trying to piece the jigsaw puzzle and clarifying who owns what. In any case the end result is the same. We ended up with a merger of the lot line changes, 2 parcels to the south. And the 280A went to Milowski. And you have that from your records. What I also found is as I was doing research in this area that as you recall, my mentioning the Simicich subdivision up on the north, that created somewhat the westerly boundary of the subject property. That piece, that Simicich subdivision ended up getting subdivided again. And this, this upsets me because the PB had interfered with our development of this piece. And meanwhile, the Simicich property, in 1997, January '97, Artie Foster came in and got subdivision approval for the Simicich piece, lot 1. It's not showing on our, on the SC tax maps. The photocopy I made was of the most recent SC tax map. But the subdivision I've attached so that you would see that there's a record of it, I don't know what the, whether the county hasn't recognized some deeds, or they never did the deeds ultimately, but Artie Foster got a 2-lot subdivision where no lots are supposed to be further created. And as an inducement to the PB to allow it, he actually created a drainage area that is showing on the subdivision map as a 20K, almost 21K sq. ft. drainage area which is right next to Cox Neck Road. So their position that, you know, here you have a case where a covenant is filed of no further subdivision and they subdivide. And they treat us unequally with a condition that we not, can't develop this piece, meanwhile there's no covenant filed. So there's unequal treatment here to say the least. I think the record is pretty clear that the code which says that a lot is to be recognized through PB, if it's created by PB action. Here you have a lot that was part of, like many other farm lots in the area that's balances of pieces that get conveyed out over time. You are looking at an area of Chudiak that he owned from the `40's and `50's, 60's because a farmer in this area. Over time, pieces got carved out, and then the very final project that he was ever involved in was the handshake deal between these property owners to give them additional land. Take this property and give them additional land. Fortunately, he left behind a large enough piece of property that when Mr. Pisacano went to put a building envelope on it and to get Health Department (HD) approval for it, he meets all of the criteria he, through the board of review, he actually, and the neighbors had an opportunity, once again, to voice their opinion. The board of review granted their approval because they too said they got the memo from the PB, as you did, saying "well, we never intended to have this property developed, we expected that all of it was going to be conveyed out to the adjacent owner". But again, no covenants, it was just hearsay essentially. There's not even a transcript of records. So Mr. Pisacano has endured a great deal of stress and aggravation through this whole thing. He was under contract with us for at least 8 months. I think we got close to a year of just Page 4 of 26 i 7-10-03 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing getting all the approvals in place. The HD, we had, the Chudiaks had to sign covenants, HD standard covenants. We had HD that was going in the mail, we were assured it was going in the mail, and he closed. And then low and behold after he had closed within, I would say within a week or two weeks, he's notified by the HD, you know, it's getting a little hot around here. We are going to put it on for a board of review so there is a record of our deliberations, and why we're coming to the decision we're coming to. So, and then the saga continues obviously with the town and here we are. So if you have questions, I can go back to my file. CHAIRWOMAN: Do the board members have any questions? MEMBER ORLANDO: Was the HD specific on what they spoke about in the Board of Review? What they denied, or? MS. MOORE: Well, what they did is the HD with lot line changes, they consider them subdivisions, development plans. And so the HD goes back to their '81 map and look at the dimensions of the properties in their '81 map. And if your property doesn't match the '81 map, they ask questions, how did this lot get created? This doesn't, well not created, but how did the dimensions change? Why is this not looking the same as the tax map that we are looking at from '81? Obviously this had changed because of the pieces that had been conveyed out to Wanat and to Wells. So what they looked at as a survey from Pisacano was a smaller piece than the original map that was in '81. So the reason for going to the Board of Review (BOR) was we need to get, we have to give you development approval. And the only way you can, a subdivision requires the owners of the properties to join in. These are all split up and there are no common owners. So the application to the HD was based on a record. And they said let's put it on for a hearing with the BOR, you present all of your data, all of the information, then we will waive what needs to be waived, give variances where it's needed, but give you an approval through the BOR because the regulatory division, the engineers,just look at do you meet the 100' setback, do you do this, do you do that? We did all that, that's why they were prepared to give us to give us the permit. But when the issue of Mr. Wells and I guess some other people, including the PB when they sent that memo, when they saw that memo from the PB they said, wait a second, what's going on here? This doesn't match. There are no covenants. We don't see anything. This doesn't match what our records indicate. So to protect themselves and to create a record that then, you know, we can count on as well, we did it as a BOR hearing and we got it. MEMBER OLIVA: Pat, it just seems to me, though, this lot, Mr. Pisacano is trying to buy, or has bought. MS. MOORE: No,he owns it now. MEMBER OLIVA: He owns it now, but it's almost a lot in limbo because it's never been formally presented as a lot. It's just something that was left over that never, the whole transaction... Page 5 of 26 • 7-10-03 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing MS. MOORE: I know what you are saying. MEMBER OLIVA: Property owners just didn't go through. So it's just like hanging there. MS. MOORE: If you take a piece of property that's existing, because you have a pre- existing, you have, lots that are created prior to '83 by deed, okay, we recognize, because that's what was done back then. There's lots of them in town, they finally, the code created a provision for them. If you have a piece of property, and you've got it there, if the PB takes a little chip of it, you know, and you end up cutting off a corner, and then through another lot line change, you cut off the other corner, the PB has acted. Because what they've done is when they are taking the piece from here, they are treating the balance of the piece. You can't look at it in a vacuum. You look at the whole. So what the PB, and my argument is, you can't, yes the lot used to be like this, but you PB, you approved each of the pieces that cut back the lot through separate, independent public hearing, the whole process, the whole subdivision process. So a lot line change takes on the same procedural requirements as a full subdivision, as a major or a minor subdivision. You have to make the application. You have to notice it. You have to, you know, get a final approval. And then you submit actually in the lot line change, the final step of the process is that you give them deed showing, you know, the merger of the two pieces, and then the chairman signs off, okay, you've merged it, okay, I'll sign off on it. I know kind of the problem we are having is-that if this was a 100 acre piece, you wouldn't be asking me that question. You know, because you chip away here and you chip away there, the - fact that's it's 1.6 or 1.7 doesn't change the fact that the lot originally was an existing legal lot. And that the PB chipping away at it doesn't nullify it's original status as a lot on the property, excuse me, as a lot in the Town of Southold. That's inconsistent. Why would anybody do a lot line change, if after the lot line change, you're considered to have sterilized the piece that you've participated in. That just doesn't make sense. Even minor subdivisions, the idea is you are piecing away to create another, you know, here you have, here you have the big piece. You are going to piece away and create 2 of these so they can put a house on each of them. That's the standard subdivision. A lot line change is a much different creature. It's just a boundary line agreement. And as I said, in the old days, I just looked at one today where, geez, the procedures to go through a simple boundary line agreement are just, are so tedious that you wonder why anybody would do it. But, you know, it's done nonetheless. CHAIRWOMAN: Let's see if anyone in the audience has anything to say. Is there anyone in the audience who would like to speak for or against the applicant? Please state your name for the record. THEODORE WELLS: My name is Theodore Wells. I spoke the last time. But that's what you were asking about, Vinny, about the Board of Health (BOH). And Chris is going to get up in a little bit and talk about this. And she's going to give you some numbers. And you're going to read that real careful and find out what was submitted to them for an application. Now just on the BOH alone, about a year or so ago, they came in my backyard, backed up and started to drop a well, 5" casing, in the corner of my Page 6 of 26 7-10-03 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing property and a corner of this property. So I went out and I asked him. He says "oh, we're putting in a well here". I said, "really"? I see you know where all the cesspools are. "Oh yeah, we know where all the cesspools are". I happen to know the 2 guys that work for Kreger real good. They are good friends of mine. I said "well you better get your tape measurer out, you'd better check it". So he gets out, he gets his tape measurer, and gets on the phone. Gets on the phone to his guy, Kreger. He says to Kreger, "what are we going to do, we ain't nowhere's near this thing, there's cesspools here". He says "drill it, drop it, we're in a hurry, get it done". Case closed. When they dropped the well there was water on Cox Neck Road. In there says if there was no water, if there was water it had to be hooked up to that property. But now there's a well in there that was already dropped. But there was water in Cox Neck Road because it runs right in front of my house. That was put in there. But when Chris gets up, she's going to give you numbers that you are going to see on there. When they submitted that, it was submitted with a whole portion of these lots that were subdivided subdivision on it. That's the BOH. The other thing that was brought about, Artie Foster. Artie Foster was the last one to build a house in that little subdivision behind us. He had a little over 2 acres of property. When he belonged to one of the boards down here, he decided, well got little connections. He said to the town, I'll tell you what I'll do, "if you let me have 2 acres to build one more house for myself, I'll give you that property in the front for drainage for Cox Neck Road. So the town made him a deal, a pretty good deal. They got free property, right where they wanted it where the drainage would go and they could put a sump in if they ever had to in the near future. That's what happened in that deal. But he still had to have 2 acres to build that last house on, in that little subdivision. Originally it was 4, then it went to 5 because Artie sneaked another one in, on 2 acres. We have a problem back where we are because of it being a big hole. And when it rains, and water comes down there, it's terrible. As soon as a house goes up, they aren't going to let that water run in that house. They are going to bank it. When they bank it, where does the water go? Because when a subdivision, when Artie Foster put it in, it was a big hole that ran all the way across there. So he filled it in and put a drain pipe under there, which is behind Hilliker's house that runs off the farm field there. Now we have, now we have just the water coming our way. It comes down past Kevin, my mother-in-law Wanat, and so forth down that road, and comes in there. It washes out. If I didn't keep the ROW filled in, we could not use that ROW. So we keep filling it in, keep filling it in, so we can get through. If the trees are taken out, any of those trees are taken out, that's even worse yet, because now the root system is gone. Just take it into consideration. And I didn't know that you could build on a ROW, but I see they are using all the property as this building lot because there's less than 3/4's of an acre that the house is actually going on. So I mean, take this into consideration. And as far as Wanat's concerned, I'm the one related to Wanat, not Kevin Milowski. I'd like to be related to Kevin, but I'm not. Unfortunately that's the way it goes. CHAIRWOMAN: Is there anyone in the audience who would like to speak for or against the applicant? MS. MOORE: Can I address what he said, or do I save everything for the end? Page 7 of 26 , 7-10-03 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing CHAIRWOMAN: Let's save everything for the end. CHRIS HILLIKER: My name is Chris Hilliker, my property abuts Michael's property. Just a couple of things I'd like to say. Yes, the letter we got in the mail is incorrect regarding the Milowski/Wanat change of properties. So that notification was incorrect. Starting in April of 1984, Mr. Chudiak sold some property to Kevin Milowski and his wife. 2-acre zoning was already in effect at that point in time. In May 1985, William Chudiak advises the PB that he has a long standing agreement with properties fronting the west side of Cox Neck Road, Zabicky, Becker, Wells, and Wanat. He requests authorization conveyance land to the adjacent parcels without formal application as Pat said. The PB directed him to make 4 formal applications in order for the PB to take action on the lot line changes. He gets legal representation. None of this was done haphazardly, all according to the law and informative. Mr. DePetris sends a letter on October 1, 1985 to the PB stating in accordance with your letter August 14, 1985, I enclose herewith 4 applications for lot line changes. Fee is incurred there. We understand that when approved, there will be a requirement that a covenant be filed to the effect that each of the parcels will merge with continuous parcel to the east which fronts on Cox Neck Road. And we will assume that the approval will be made conditional upon such filing and the covenants will be filed once the approval has been given. November 7th, 1985, once again, from Mr. DePetris to the PB, and this is regarding the covenants also. This particular point of interest is regarding the covenants which run with the land, which I believe is pertinent with this particular situation. In accordance with our telephone conversation today, the following is the language of the covenant which we intend to insert in any deed made by the Chudiaks to the owner of the adjacent part. And we understand that any approval by the PB of the lot line changes will be subject to the requirement that the deeds, which convey the Chudiak property contain this covenant. This covenant is subject to the following C&R's which shall run with the land. The parcel hereby conveyed shall merge with premises of the guarantee contiguous thereto on the east and the 2 parcels shall there upon be deemed on parcel for purpose of the zoning ordinance of the Town of Southold. Just to continue on, only 1 residence together with accessory structures may be constructed and maintained upon the said 2 parcels which are merged into 1 parcel. Just try to speed this up a little bit,just a little information on covenants. It's a party binding itself to the existence of a present state of facts as represented or to the future performance of some act. So it doesn't seem like there's a particular limitation on when the promise is to be kept. All land use covenants shall run with the land and continue in perpetuity unless modified or terminated in accordance with applicable law. Nothing was ever changed or modified after those covenants and lot line changes were preformed. Let me just go to this now. Now this is from the PB to Mr. DePetris. Mr. Chudiak's attorney regarding the Zabicky property December 17, 1985. Resolved that the PB approves the lot line change to add 25K sq. ft. from the property of Chukiak to the property now or formally of Zabicky located at Mattituck, subject to the following conditions. No. 1 that the property of Chudiak be conveyed to and merged with the contiguous house lot to the east now or formally of Zabicky that only one residence together with accessory structures may be constructed maintained upon 2 parcels which will become merged into one. That the above covenants and restrictions be included in the deed and on the survey map for the lot line changes. When we are in Page 8 of 26 7-10-03 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing receipt of the amended surveys as requested in condition No. 3,the chairman will endorse the approval on the survey. Please forward 6 copies of the survey. And I would just like to note that there is a map on file from December 13, 1985. CHAIRWOMAN: That's the map, Mrs. Hilliker,that the ZBA has in our files. MS. HILLIKER: I would just like to point out that it does show the lot line changes from Chukiak to Zabicky, Chudiak to Becker, Chudiak to Wells, and Chudiak to Wanat. And it says 2 of those particular people on that lot on those changes. And it also has a notation at the top that the map of property of William Chudiak. And it says the property of Chudiak will be conveyed to and merged with the contiguous house lots to the east, that were formally of Wells, Wanat, Becker, and Zabicky. Only one residence together with accessory structures may be constructed and maintained upon the 2 parcels which would be merged into one. That is on file. That is all I have to say about the covenants and the lot line changes. Shortly after all that was done, the other parcel, which did become Tallwood Lane, that was sold to Mr. Simicich, and he further subdivided it. And those are parcels No. 19.10, 19.29, 19.28, 19.27, 19.15 and 19.17. Again the 2-acre zoning was in effect in that point in time. This was Mr. Chudiak's final chance to leave enough property inclusive in this lot, 19.11 to meet the known requirements. And again, this reinforces his original promise and covenant, which is already dually noted. He was maintaining the warrantee of these 4 parcels to have some sort of a buffer for the future. I'd like to also just state that the PB, HD, local attorneys have all stated their opposition to this becoming a building parcel. From the PB August 13, 2001 from Valerie Scopaz, there is a notation that she does discuss the matter with the PB at it's worksession Monday, August, 6. Two of the members present were on the board during 1985. And they emphasize that the intent of the lot line applications was to merge land and expand size of existing lots, not to create new building lots. The record indicates that the subject lot on this memo, 19.11, was intended to be merged with 2 adjoining lots and not to be retained for sale as a building lot at some future date. August 22, 2001 from Wickham, Wickham, & Bressler addressing the Building Department (BD) tax lot 19.11 was supposed to have been added to tax lots 15&16 per PB lot line changes approval on December 16, 1985, Chudiak to Zabicky and Chudiak to Becker. At that same meeting, merges Chudiak to Wells and Chudiak to Wanat were also approved. And those transfers were made now tax lots 19.18 and 19.19. The PB approval has prohibited construction of a residence on 19.11 since it was added to the 2 lots which already contained residences. And moreover the property is R80 zoned. November 8, 2002, from the BD to the ZBA, there is no recorded deed of this property on record with the SC Clerk's Office. The PB has previously stated that the lot is not a recognized lot. The property is not shown on an approved subdivision map. There is no record of a ZBA decision regarding this property. Once again from the town planner to the chairman and members of the ZBA dated January 2, 2003. The PB has reviewed this memo and file and has told Mr. Pisacano that the lot line amendments were done with the intent of reducing nonconformity of existing lots, and not to create a new building lot. Once again from the office of the town planner, the date is January 7th, 2003 and this is to the acting chairman of the HD, Health Services, rather. The attached material is prepared for the PB on August 13, 2001. The PB wishes to go on record as opposing any variances on this property. PB office, April 1St, 2003 Page 9 of 26 7-10-03 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing from Bennett Orlowski to Linda and the members of the ZBA. The PB did not authorize the creation of this parcel as a separate building lot. The PB, by request of the owner, intended to allow the property owner to sell his property in 4 separate parcels to adjacent property owners for the purpose of merging with pre-existing lots. And once again, the notification from ZBA, BD's denial, BD's Notice of Disapproval (NOD) for construction of a single-family dwelling. The basis of the NOD is that the parcel is not permitted in the R80 district because it is not recognized by lot, by any one of the 4 code standards. None of them. So there's quite a lot of opposition there. Just to get back to the HD hearing or whatever you want to call that. A lot of false information was submitted to the HD, one being a letter from Pat Moore stating that the property was over 2 acres in size. That's dated March 13, 2002, in response to your notice dated March 8th, 2002 please be advised that the subject property is over 2 acres in size. And on the following page, the Chudiak parcel made the improved adjacent parcels larger and retained the subject 2 parcels which comply with your requirements, and, again, Chudiak's 2-acre parcel. That's incorrect information. I happened to be at that HD hearing, and there was also some additional improper information submitted. If you would look at findings and facts, which is No. 8, and it stipulates lots 19.10, 19.11, 19.18 and 19.19, those, one of those particular lots is mine. So if you were to look at one of those 4 lots that were presented to the HD, it made it look like the Wanat property, the Wells property, my particular property, and Mr. Pisacano's property, they were calling somewhat of a subdivision. Well yes, Wells, Wanat, and myself had houses on them. So if you were to think that this other parcel was the 4th parcel of the subdivision, of course you would say that particular parcel should be able to have a house on it. That was improper information. And just to go back a little bit further that the 1981 SC maps obviously you couldn't use those maps because they were addressing improper properties there. And nothing should be able to be grandfathered because of that. So actually I think the HD hearing should not be admissible at all even though they did have the foresight to put the onus back on the town for your final approval. Okay, I'm almost done. Basically, we have a very substandard lot here. It's protected by owner infused covenants which are still intact. It's less than 2 acres in size, and if you subtract the ROW, it makes the building envelope even smaller than the total ownership package. We have everything on record from the PB, the BD, local attorneys and unanimous neighborhood coalition all agreeing and prohibiting this new building lot. So I'd really just like to thank you for your cooperation and conclude that a decision to deny these appeals is proper. Thank you. CHAIRWOMAN: Thank you. Is there... MS. MOORE: I do have to respond to one thing because the HD is so, I have to clarify for the board while it's fresh in my mind. The HD actually never had a record of the Simicich subdivision. So they actually incorporated the Hilliker lot, which is her property, she was there. Actually put it on the map themselves and incorporate it into the decision making. And gave her, essentially grandfathered her development plan. Somehow, well the subdivision was approved in '85. Their maps are from '81. And as you know, there was a period of time in the `80's that HD, while they required filing of minor subdivision maps, the PB did not direct people to do that. They weren't aware of that requirement. So there are many subdivisions in the Town of Southold that are Page 10 of 26 qn 7-10-03 - Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing particularly in the `80's between I would say, well '81 is the magic date because that's when the HD looks at their map. But through like '86 or '87, I've had numerous applications where in '85 in particular the PB was not aware of the minor subdivisions having to get HD approval. So that's why the Hilliker property ended up being part of the discussion because they had no record of that lot either. And wondered where that had been created. That was Simicich's subdivision. Chudiak had nothing to do with it. But, Pisacano, in a sense, this proceeding that Mr. Pisacano went through actually benefited Mrs. Hilliker because the HD incorporated and recognized her property. She already had a house. I don't know how she got a building permit with, and the health, essentially the HD had no record of it. And that created a problem at the hearing. Aside from that,you have the decision and we do have the approval. CHAIRWOMAN: I just want to make, you have HD approval, but I do want to note that the HD also says it's a legal status of a lot within the town's jurisdiction. MS. MOORE: I understand. They didn't want to touch that issue. CHAIRWOMAN: They are not in power to. Is there anyone in the audience who would like to speak for or against the applicant? KEVIN MILOWSKI: I just have a few words. I'm Kevin Milowski. The one that we were mixed up on the lots here. MS. MOORE: Sony about that. MR. MILOWSKI: That's okay. We are all local, but we're not all related. Back in '84 is when I bought my lot from Chudiak. And it was called a set-off then. I guess there was 28 acres. I was the first one to get a piece of property. That's when the ROW was created which Mr. Pisacano was including in his building lot. For 18 years I've been maintaining that. That's how I get to my property,back and forth. When I bought my lot back then it was, times were tough too, but I had to buy, I approached the town. I had to buy 2 acres. I couldn't buy less. At that point in time Chudiak had 28 acres. And all I wanted was a 1/2 acre to build a house. But, you know, I had to buy a 2 acre lot to build. So I just don't think it's fair, in that case, that these smaller lots can be incorporated, which were just lot line changes to begin with anyway. CHAIRWOMAN: Mr. Milowski, while you are here, I did go through the record, the file from the prior zoning board of approval for your 280A access to your parcel. And when I went through the file, I came across 2 maps. One appears to be the SC tax map that would be around 1984. It's very interesting because that map does not show the Pisacano piece at all. In fact it doesn't show, it shows that piece as being part of what was lot 12, which was what Mr. Milowski's piece was originally set off from. It was all part of lot 12. Yes, I have it all here if you'd like a copy for your records. I'm going to make copies for the file,but at any rate... MS. MOORE: What year was that? Page 11 of 26 7-10-03 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing CHAIRWOMAN: This was 1984 when Mr. Milowski applied to the ZBA for 280A access. And this was the county tax map at the time. And I even have a copy of the letter from the PB indicating what lot it was. So it's very interesting that the county tax map, at that time, showed that the, what you are describing as the Pisacano piece as being part of lot 12. That's one thing. And the other thing is I did go back and carefully look at the file as to what exactly the board had approved when they approved Mr. Milowski's ROW. And as indicated on the file, the board approved access to his property and clearly put a restriction in the decision saying that any further subdivision on that road would require that the applicant come back to the board for 280A access. I had not seen the map or what the board had approved. So I thought well, part of what the board had approved might have bordered on the Pisacano piece. I does not, the board only approved 312'. It's written on the decision. It's shown on the map. In what appears to be 40' into the Milowski piece. So I'll submit all that for your review, but the bottom line is that the 280A access the board approved for the Milowski piece did not go up to, extend to Mr. Pisacano's piece. I just wanted to let you know that for the record. MS. MOORE: You understand that 280A is only required if it's a ROW. If you have fee title, it's not required. So as far as Pisacano's piece, Chudiak owned the road, and owned the piece. So there is no... CHAIRWOMAN: It's a ROW. MS. MOORE: No, I beg to differ. 280A town law is strictly for access over an unimproved ROW. Where you have fee title it takes you to the road, to a road, to a public road, it's not 280A. So a flagged lot, for example, does not get 280A because it has fee title to a public road. So when I discussed this and I presented it to the board the last time, and I explained that when Valerie made a point of saying, oh, you know you need a 280A for any further review. Well, there is no other, the Pisacano piece has fee title to Cox Neck. That is as of right, an access. There is no permission required from anyone. You get a building permit. If Milowski, on the other hand had a ROW over Chudiak, and therefore that's why 280A was required. Town law 280A says if you don't have access to a public road... CHAIRWOMAN: Access to a street... MS. MOORE: Title to a public road... CHAIRWOMAN: Well, actually, it says access to a public road. MEMBER OLIVA: Yes. CHAIRWOMAN: 280A does not talk about fee title. The word fee title doesn't appear in 280A access. And ... Page 12 of 26 7-10-03 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing MS. MOORE: I respectfully disagree that as a matter of law, 280A is applicable only for ROW's. That's my understanding of the case law, that's my understanding of the statute, and that's the way the BD has 100% applied this for the last, since 280A was in place. When you have a flagged lot, for example, the Pisacano piece is a flagged lot. A flag lot does not require 280A, as you know, you don't have flagged lots coming before you. Flagged lots have fee title. They have to have adequate access onto a public road. So the fact that you have a ROW is not the issue. The fact is whether or not you have access. CHAIRWOMAN: So you're saying that because he owns the road, that he does not need 280A access? MS. MOORE: Absolutely. CHAIRWOMAN: Well, I'll tell you, we'll have to check with legal council about that. MS. MOORE: Go right ahead. CHAIRWOMAN: No, we have had a number of them where the owners have owned the road and have applied to 280A, so they'll have to check it. MS. MOORE: It may be that you don't have some jobs that you otherwise have. CHAIRWOMAN: That would be wonderful. MS. MOORE: Look at lot lines, look at flagged lots. That's probably the clearest example of when you do or don't have 280A requirements. CHAIRWOMAN: I do want to note, though, that that was a condition in the decision. In the ZBA decision. That if there were any further development on that road, that it would require review by the ZBA. MS. MOORE: No. It said if there was any other, the 280, the ZBA would not have jurisdiction. You cannot impose jurisdiction. It's the condition of 280A is presumably if you have the jurisdiction to hear that case. You would not have jurisdiction to hear that case. First of all, it was Milowski and not as a covenant on the property. So if you want to impose a condition to have somebody come back and ask for permission from the board to do whatever, you better put it as a covenant. But nonetheless, there would have been no jurisdiction. When you get a building permit, you would get a building permit outright. You would not require 280A. So if that's where you are leaning... CHAIRWOMAN: As I said, we'll have to ask the town attorney. MS. MOORE: Please do because it's a legal issue... MR. MILOWSKI: That did go before the ZBA board for that... Page 13 of 26 7-10-03 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing MS. MOORE: Exactly, for Milowski, yes, for you. Exactly. It shows that the setoff in '84, that was one of the first ones. And apparently Chudiak owned what, 22 acres, the balance of the piece. MR. MILOWSKI: I think it was like 28 acres actually. CHAIRWOMAN: Okay, we'll get that issue cleared up. It's just that the old maps... MS. MOORE: I don't think that's actually, the tax map may have been, the tax map used may have been not in print. It just doesn't look right. Although in '84, that was probably one of the first. If you'd go back to my history, '84 was the first of the subdivisions, then you go Simicich is a separate piece. MR. MILOWSKI: I have a copy of my original survey, I don't know if you would like that, or,it has the ROW on it also. CHAIRWOMAN: Does it? MR. MILOWSKI: Yes. MS. MOORE: We don't dispute that Mr. Milowski has a ROW. Absolutely. He has a deeded ROW. CHAIRWOMAN: It's pretty much the same map as I have. Thank you. MS. MOORE: For the record, I think you and I talked. Someone had called me about the, it was Wells, okay. Mr. Wells professed that he was speaking, I guess, that you had talked and there was a concern about you losing your ROW or us blocking it... MR. MILOWSKI: No that can't be done. Because that's in my deed, that's always... MS. MOORE: I don't know anything about that, but anyway, there's no dispute that he has a ROW. CHAIRWOMAN: Is there anyone in the audience who would like to speak for or against the applicant? • MR. MILOWSKI: I just, one other question, can I address Mr. Pisacano? Is the lot for sale? CHAIRWOMAN: You can ask me, and I'll ask him. MR. MILOWSKI: Because during this whole time, I guess even before Mr. Pisacano bought it, since I live right there, everybody that was coming in from real estates always seemed, I felt like I was the real estate. I had somebody come last Saturday saying they were looking for the lot that's for sale. And from what Mr. Pisacano paid for it, they said Page 14 of 26 7-10-03 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing the price has increased considerably with all permits in tact. I said, you know, I didn't think that was... MR. PISACANO: There's a lot of people I didn't contact yet to let them know it was off the market. MR. MILOWSKI: Oh okay, because they were there, and I was like, I just told them, I don't want to have to deal with this again. That's all. MIKE PISACANO: Just a couple of things, Mike Pisacano, I was wondering if any of it matters about the contours of the land or where the well was put, because I don't think that's relevant. Because whether or not I'd have to hook up to public water or not, doesn't matter where the well is on the property. I mean, I can drop a well anywhere. As far as Mr. Foster got any favors done, I wouldn't mind one myself, if the town does that. The contours, the HD is requiring me to get a topographical survey done, of the property as far as the drainage. So where the house and the septic system is located, it wouldn't effect, I mean they want to look at this before they will issue the permit itself. They have approved the board of review, but the permit itself, they want to look at the contours of the land to make sure it won't interrupt with any drainage. They did locate the house in an area and the septic system on high ground. I don't believe the grading of the land will change one bit as far as once the house is put there. And the water will go exactly where it's going right now. And it's not going to change. It's going to go into the ground. They did test wells, test samples, soil samples, and there is sufficient sand. So I don't think the drainage is going to be a problem. And that's about it. I mean I don't know if that's going to effect any decision on whether it's a lot or not. I don't think that really has to do with anything that's going on here as far as whether it's a lot or not. It doesn't matter where the well is located. It doesn't matter. If I have to get town water, I'd be willing to. I don't think it's an issue. CHAIRWOMAN: You bought it as a spec lot then? MR. PISACANO: Excuse me? CHAIRWOMAN: It's a spec lot for you? MR. PISACANO: I can't hear you. CHAIRWOMAN: It's a spec lot? MR. PISACANO: It wasn't. I didn't have intentions of that in the beginning, but I really wouldn't want to be there right now. I don't think I'd be welcome. I don't think they want anyone else really living there other their own little families. CHAIRWOMAN: Thank you very much. Does anyone have any other questions of Mr. Pisacano? Board members, do you have any other specific questions? The C&R's were never filed with the county of Suffolk, is that correct? Page 15 of 26 7-10-03 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing MS. MOORE: Which covenants are you talking about? CHAIRWOMAN: The no further... MS. MOORE: The merger covenants? CHAIRWOMAN: Yes. MS. MOORE: What they did is and we still have the same procedure with the PB today. You get the lot line change approval. Then you do a deed. You have to do 2 deeds, one deed from let's say here it was Chudiak to Wells. And then a 2nd deed, a confirmation deed. You get covenants, you record the covenants. In this instance actually each of the deeds had the covenant language as part of the deed. So it wasn't covenants and restrictions as we sometimes see independently of the deed. They were covenants imposed on the deed of conveyance. So Wells, when the deed came from Chudiak, conveyance deed to Wells, that deed has a language that the PB imposed. So they did comply with the condition of the lot line change. You know that a person can come in and ask for a variance from you. And they can choose not to build. Then nothing happens. If you don't build,you don't have any reason to have a variance. CHAIRWOMAN: I guess the difficult hurdle that I'm having and some of the other board members are having is that we go to the issue of if the lot was created by the PB. And in this case, no, was this particular lot created? MS. MOORE: But... CHAIRWOMAN: Excuse me. MS. MOORE: Go ahead. CHAIRWOMAN: Was this particular lot created? No it wasn't. Is this the original lot lines that were created and recognized by the PB? No, they are not. Now... MS. MOORE: Wait, wait,wait. Let me correct that because... CHARWOMAN: Excuse me, excuse me. I would like to finish. MS. MOORE: Alright. CHARWOMAN: I gave you tremendous courtesy when you made a presentation... MS. MOORE: You're right. I'm sorry. CHAIRWOMAN: I didn't interrupt you, please give me the same courtesy. They are not the same original lot lines. Whether Sally didn't sell to Bill, or Bill didn't go through Page 16 of 26 7-10-03 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing with John, or John didn't go through with Harry in the transactions that were supposed to take place. The question before us was this lot created by the PB? That is the question. MS. MOORE: Okay. May I? Sorry. CHAIRWOMAN: The lots that we are looking at, it was not. Now you could very justifiably argue that the remaining lots that the other people have were not created by the PB either,which means that they would have unimproved lots. And that maybe the case. MS. MOORE: So everybody here, including the people sitting are going to have sterilized property? CHAIRWOMAN: The ones that did not go ahead and purchase that. Except that there is, the other thing that is interesting here is yes, I did go through the title search. I went through the title search when we first had the first round of hearings on this. And throughout the title search on this piece of property, it refers this lot is in part of XYZ lot. Part of this lot, part of that lot, part of this lot. The title search is not clean back to 1983 by any means. MS. MOORE: No, no, no. I have to start over. Out here we have farm pieces. You have an acreage, here you have Chudiak with 28 acres. The creation of lots, would I have loved Chudiak to have when Becker and the other couldn't sell, that they had done a deed and just conveyed to themselves the balance of the piece so I'd have a clean deed to point to. The BD asked me, do you have a deed that shows this dimension? Because if you do, you're grandfathered. That's it, we're done. No, because it was a farm parcel. This was a farmer. And the way that the lot was created was by subsequent subdivisions taking away from the whole. And you will look throughout, in particular, you have some of the large farm parcels. You won't find a deed for 28 acres, you won't find a deed for 10 acres. You might find a deed for one of the parcels of the subdivision because the farmer says, okay, we've subdivided or prior to, I guess whenever we recognized that the subdivision was done by deed. There was an old way, in the 70's that they did not come in for subdivision. That the farmers used to parcel out the deed... CHAIRWOMAN: I'm aware of all of that. MS. MOORE: But what you are saying is that this is not a lot created by the PB. Of course it is because you couldn't have gotten to this without approval of the lot line changes. Think of this as a 100 acre piece. And the balance of the pieces, you don't have, you kind of think outside the box. When it comes to title the reason they say, part of this,part of that, is because the title companies when they do a title search will look for the last deed of record. If that last deed of record has a schedule A that includes more than that piece that you're presenting to them, they'll say it's that parcel plus more because the last deed of record may be one from 1957 when the farmer owned 100 acres and that's the last deed of record. There's no obligation in law or in the town code to force an owner to do a deed. There's no legal requirement in real property law that forces a person to do a deed. So you can have parcels that have never, that you know, were Page 17 of 26 7-10-03 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing deeded originally from it's original acquisition in the 20's that are still showing as the original conveyance and it's outp'arcels. Essentially it's the balance of what was left behind as other pieces were conveyed out. That's what happened here. You had a piece that Mr. Milowski says, "geez, Mr. Chudiak used to own 28 acres out here". He then cut a piece away to Simicich. Simicich must have had at least 10-15 acres to do a 4 lot subdivision. That piece, that deed, went to Simicich, just like the deed that went to Milowski. That deed went to, you know a deed for the piece that Milowski owns went to Milowski. Chudiak never had other deeds to follow through. He owned the whole thing. He was still the owner of the property. Under real property law, the fact that you don't do conveyance deed doesn't mean that you've given up what you already own. You kind of, you know, let's look a big picture and as you take, you know you cut slithers away from that big picture. You still own the picture, you still have the underlying, overall dimensions of what you had before. CHAIRWOMAN: I understand that. MS. MOORE: It's frustrating to me because I wish I could solve it. CHAIRWOMAN: I don't understand that when the mergers did not take place, that Mr. Chudiak did not come back to the PB and say "look, the covenants and restrictions that go with this piece cannot hold because..." MS. MOORE: I'm sorry, there are no covenants and restrictions for the pieces that did not get conveyed. CHAIRWOMAN: Excuse me. MS. MOORE: It's just frustrating because you have to read the language. CHAIRWOMAN: Excuse me. The pieces that did not get conveyed when he saw that they were not getting conveyed, why didn't he come back to the town and say"look, they are not going to be conveyed. I'm going to be left with this piece, the Pisacano piece." Why didn't he seek to try to legalize it? MS. MOORE: No, let's not say legalize it because you're coming to a conclusion I think is not correct. You want to have it left essentially, you want to have it recognized post lot line changes. That's what you are saying. And just like the PB should have done what they wanted, which is impose a covenant. They should have done, instead of 4 separate lot line changes, had they done this as 1 lot line change approval that incorporated the 4 aspects of it, then yes, you would not have been able to do 1 without doing the 4. And the fact that they screwed up, they're blaming Chudiak and Pisacano. I'm sorry, you know, real property law and the code and zoning laws run against the drafter, run against the board that screws up. It's not to, the real property rights of the individual aren't eliminated because, you know, wishful thinking. Well geez, we wish we could have done, you know,just like you say, wouldn't it have been nice if Chudiak had come back and said to the PB, "well Becker can't buy because he's sick and Zabicky is no longer Page 18 of 26 7-10-03 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing there. I want to keep this to myself and this is the piece I'm going to have." That would have been wonderful, but that wasn't required. That would have made our jobs a lot easier. It would have made my job, my job would have been made easier if Chudiak had just done a deed way back at one point in time prior to '83. But I can't... CHAIRWOMAN: I'd like to kind of wrap this up. One thing, we keep talking about this lot that's 1.7. It's actually 37,500 sq. ft.? MS. MOORE: I'd have to look at the survey. MEMBER ORLANDO: That's correct. MS. MOORE: I use the assessors record, or the tax map. CHAIRWOMAN: The survey has the lot size right on it. Mr. Orlando? MEMBER ORLANDO: No other questions. CHAIRWOMAN: Ms. Oliva? MEMBER OLIVA: No questions. CHAIRWOMAN: Is there anyone in the audience who would like to speak for or against the applicant? MR. MILOWSKI: Just one thing, I think the Pisacano lot and all the lot line changes that were behind. When I bought my piece of property I was the first one, I believe that was a separate piece of property. It wasn't of the 28 acres. It was behind those houses, the lot line changes that they did. That was like a separate, because when I bought, you know, mine, Mr. Chudiak just said "take whatever 2 acres you want". But the ROW comes to where my property starts. So that was all, behind those houses, that was a separate piece in there. And I think all 4 lots together wasn't big enough to build a house on. That's why I was offered a chunk of the whole thing where I am now, you know, to take 2 acres. Because that wasn't even a 2 acre piece, that was there. CHAIRWOMAN: Thank you very much Mr. Milowski. I'm going to make a motion to close the hearing and reserve decision. PLEASE SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION Page 19 of 26 SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS TRANSCRIPT OF HEARINGS JUNE 5, 2003 SPECIAL MEETING (Prepared by Jessica Boger) Present were: Chairwoman Lydia A. Tortora Member Vincent Orlando (recused at 7:05 pm)- Member Gerard P. Goehringer Member Ruth D. Oliva Clerk-Typist Paula Quintieri Absent was: Member George Horning(Fishers Island) PUBLIC HEARINGS: 6:30 p.m. Madeline Droege #5186. (continued from 4/17/03) Request for a Variance under Sections 100-33C, 100-30A.4, 100-31C, based on the Building Department's April 26, 2002 Notice of Disapproval stating that the proposed structure is not a permitted use, and that it does not meet the code's height limitation or minimum setback provisions. = Applicant proposes an accessory wind turbine structure at less than 50 feet from the front property line and at a height greater than the code limitation of 18 feet, at 885 Petty's Drive, Orient; Parcel 1000-14.-2-24. (See Minutes for Resolution regarding request of both Daniel C. Ross, Esq. and Patricia Moore, Esq. in letter 6/5/03 for postponement to September 11, 2003). 6:45 p.m. App. No. 5264—MICHAEL PISACANO. The applicant has filed a request for a Lot Waiver under Section 100-24A based on the November 7, 2002 (amended 11-8- 02) Building Department's Notice of Disapproval for construction of a single family dwelling. The basis of the Notice of Disapproval is that this 73,616 sq. ft. parcel is not permitted in the R-80 District because it is not a recognized lot by any of the four code standards, under: 1) The identical lot shall be created by deed recorded in the Suffolk County Clerk's office on or before 6-30-83, and the lot conformed to the minimum lot requirements set forth in Bulk Schedule; 2) Lot was approved by the Southold Town Planning Board, or 3) Lot is shown on a subdivision map approved by the Southold Town Board prior to 6-30-83, or 4) Lot is approved/recognized by formal action of the Board of Appeals prior to 6-30-83. Location of Property: 1457 Cox Neck Rd., Mattituck; Parcel 1000-113-07-19.11. (See Minutes for Resolution to advertise Appl. No. 5361 for July 10, 2003, canceling the hearing for this evening) 7:05 p.m. Mary Zupa #5266 — (continued from 3/20/03) Applicant requests Variances under Sections 100-24B and 100-32, based on the Building Department's October 30, 2002 Notice of Disapproval for construction of a single family dwelling. The reasons stated in the Notice of Disapproval are: 1) the construction of a single family dwelling on Page 10 April 3, 2003 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing ***** 7:17 p.m. MICHAEL PISACANO #5264—(continued from 2/20/03) The applicant has filed a request for a lot Waiver under-Section 100-24A based on the November 7, 2002 (amended 11-8-02)Building Department's Notice of Disapproval for construction of a single family dwelling. The basis of the Notice of Disapproval is that this 73,616 sq. ft. parcel is not permitted in the R-80 District because it is not a recognized lot by any of the four code standards,under: 1) The identical lot shall be created by deed recorded in the Suffolk County Clerk's office on or before 6-30-83, and the lot of conformed to the minimum lot requirements set forth in Bulk Schedule; 2)Lot is approved/recognized by the Southold Town Planning Board, or 3) Lot is shown on a subdivision map approved by the Southold Town Board prior to 6-30-83, or 4) Lot is approved/recognized by formal action of the Board of Appeals prior to 6-30-83. Location of Property: 1457 Cox Neck Rd., Mattituck; Parcel 113-07-19.11 CHAIRWOMAN: Is someone here who would like to speak on behalf of the application? PATRICIA MOORE, ESQ: Good evening I am here because I had represented the Chudiaks from the beginning and I'm very familiar with the property. Mr. Pisacano had been represented by Paul Caminiti, but unfortunately he's in Florida I felt in all fairness I should present the case and the whole process is an unfortunate circumstance that I think requires your help in seeking justice here. What I did is I put together first and foremost the first page is the applicable law that I think the Building Inspector had cited and I highlighted for you I think straight out why we believe this property was a single and separate lot that could be built on. Lot recognition says the town shall recognize a lot that is approved by the PB. This lot would not be here if not for the PB the second page I recite the chronology of events and I know I've had a chance to review your transcript from the prior hearing where I couldn't be here I was out of state and I understand it's a very confusing history. I'll start out in May of 1985 Chudiak approaches the PB and by letter says he had an agreement a long standing agreement with Mr. Zabicky, Becker, Well, and Wanat that at some point in time he would if he developed the property he would give them more land and he would do by way of the process would be boundary line agreements. The lot line changes have never been a very well codified section of our Town Code and if you read the section of the code it seems to imply that it's an informal process nevertheless, the PB when Amele Dipetris who represented him at the time approached the PB, the PB said no we want you to do it formally we want you to do it as 4 formal applications to the PB. He did that. He came in with 4 separate PB applications the file I believe you have access to so it's obvious the lot line changes were accomplished and one of the issues that came up through Val's memo was the fact that somehow or another this parcel was sterilized by the action of the lot line changes and I attach a November 6, 1985 letter from Amele Dipetris regarding the language that was agreed to be placed in covenants and that language was in fact placed in the covenants. The lot line modification let's take the first one,the one I know was done Wells. Wells was approved the Wells deed or the deed from Chudiak to Wells placed a covenant on that deed which said hey we are going to take the property,we are going to treat it as one and the one house is the development of this property. So it was a merger of the 2 just as had been planned and just as he had agreed to. There was no language in that covenant that even Page 10 of 34 Page 11 April 3, 2003 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing implies that the balance of the property was going to be sterilized. There is just no reading even if you turn the pages upsidedown and backwards, there is no way of reading it into the language of the covenant. So as far as the balance of the property goes there is no restriction with respect to the balance of the property. I get on to the next specific date that on Dec. 16 the PB granted the separate resolution for the lot line changes and what was occurring here was for example the Wells property 12500 sq. ft. of vacant land from Chudiak to Wells was conveyed again as a boundary line agreement. Well's property went from being a '/ acre improved on Cox Neck to a little over a %2 acre on Cox Neck. It was a no brainer it made sense. The same occurred with the Wanat piece, Wells and Wanat actually completed the transfer and the properties are the way the lot line changes were approved and that's the way the property is today. To imply that what's left wasn't created by PB action just defies logic. How else are they going to do it, they did it by separate application they did it by specific application to think the PB had no knowledge of this or had no intention of this occurring, that may be fine and good but we don't operate in the zoning code by intention. It's done by code, it's done by covenants. If you intend to do something that is not otherwise permitted in our zoning code you damn well better be careful to put it in writing and put it as a covenant because future attorneys like me and Paul Caminiti will look at the file well of course this property is a single and separate lot that was created by the PB. With respect to the Becker and Dibicki property, those 2 parcels never were completed. Ms. Becker I think from the transcript as I remember made mention of the fact that her father may have become ill couldn't consummate the transfer Dibicki was no longer a title owner his title changed hands in '82,but he didn't tell anybody about it. This Siderakis was the new owner and somehow or another Val makes a point of the fact that there was a letter in the file from Siderakis that he was ready, willing and able to close. That's very nice but that would have left a half acre parcel behind. The Chudiaks realize wait a second, I can't sell this piece and leave myself such a small piece I have nothing left to do with it. That didn't make sense. So they retained the parcel. The parcel was specifically identified parcel with a tax map number they have been paying taxes ever since. It's always been taxed it's always been recognized by the town. In fact when I got involved in it with both daughters,Mr. Chudiak unfortunately is ill. The 2 daughters are here and I started with them what feels like a very long time ago in about 2001 the first day as soon as I got a chance to review the zoning code I met with Ed Forrester and I sat down with Ed we went over all the documents and Ed had the same opinion that we all came to just about every lawyer that looked at this file came to the same conclusion that this is a buildable parcel it's what's remaining after PB action. Exhibit B is an affidavit by Ed Forrester who very kindly stepped to the plate courageously because it may it goes against Val but we had a meeting with Val and we sat dumbfounded by some of the points and some of the comments and the beliefs/conclusions Val was coming to. It didn't make sense to us we thought well as a matter of law the BD makes the decision of whether or not one gets a permit not the planner and certainly not somebody who's telling you well that's not what the PB intended and we're looking at her and saying that may be fine and good but you don't leave behind a 1.7 acre parcel and expect it to be sterilized property rights due process a constitutional rights of property owners there are certain basic principles which are land ownership. You don't create a parkland for your neighbors 1.7 acres is not a parkland and Ms. Becker last time she was here pointed out why would we buy the property when we get it for nothing. That memo that Val put in the file if you notice it's a memo to the file. Did she bother sending me a copy certainly not because she knew how I said I disagreed with her Page 11 of 34 ' Page 12 April 3, 2003 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing did not send it to Paul Caminiti to my knowledge certainly it wasn't something we were all aware of it came up when Mr. Pisacano was ready to get approval from the Health Dept. He was days away in fact we had signed covenants for the property for Health Dept. purposes standard covenants. The Health Dept. was just about ready to stamp the map when the memo appears and the Health Dept. thinks it's too much of a hot potato and they send it over to the Board of Review. The Board had their hearing and has come to a decision the decision is attached as Exhibit C the decision pretty much accepts our arguments with respect to how the lot is created, recognizes zoning issues, but as far as HD issues we exceed any of the HD requirements so we certainly are entitled to HD and now he's going to be getting it. With respect to the memo I make point by point I have point 1-5 but my these are the points when I reviewed the memo by Val just some of the issues do not make sense. One issue she says is you can't have this property as 280A and they use you as an excuse that this lot could not be developed because of 280A. This is road frontage property it faces Cox Neck it is subject to a ROW we have not effected anyone's ROW. The only reason Miloski needed 280A is because they are getting access over a ROW. We own to the road. The Chudiak property takes the larger piece, the rectangular piece and fete title is taken all the way to the road so there is no 280A issue here an no requirement under 280A one of the other issues you raised is the fact that this property should have been sterilized just doesn't make sense. The parcel the lot line changes we're making other lots more conforming than they were. It made sense to grant boundary line agreements giving these property owners land. The fact that the piece that remains thank goodness it's a larger piece of property and they had the thought to retain sufficient land or I'd be here discussing with you a much smaller piece of property. The fact that Siderakis was interested in buying the land I pointed out before that was 3 years later and again leaving behind assuming that property would have been sold to Siderakis what then she made no discussion did not address the issue of the fact that Becker would have been left and then what with Becker that piece would have been sterilized at the benefit of who our client would continue to pay taxes on that property and Becker would have never been obligated to buy it there's no obligation there it just doesn't make sense. As far as point 4 is that the Chudiak piece, imagine this you have a piece of property that you could put a house on it Chudiak's piece could have a house on it today. You're not creating additional lots. You still have the Chudiak piece with the potential of one house and you have boundary line agreements you have lot line changes giving those very small parcels extra land. You're not increasing the density there it's the same number you still count the same number of heads at the table same number of houses at the table you're not there's no effect there and I've already mentioned the fact that how this memo came about and how upsetting it was to find a memo where it's being used against you with no opportunity to respond in a unilateral veto of the development of this property and finally Ed Forrester's affidavit which speaks for itself and recognizes the fact that the building inspector would have just made the decision when Val was making her decision that this property could not be developed Ed Forrester said of course and we proceeded under that conclusion and Mr. Pisacano as well it only started getting bounced back and forth after he came in to request to start looking into a building permit. CHAIRWOMAN: When the intended merger of the lots did not occur why didn't Mr. Chudiak simply go back to the PB and ask for an amended plan? Why did he instead proceed to put the house on the market for sale knowing full well that the PB had intended Page 12 of 34 Page 13 April 3, 2003 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing these to merge by action by deed by record by everything else assuming that something happened along the way. MS. MOORE: Let me answer. Because each application was independent individual application there were 4 applications by Val's own memo she admits there were 4 separate applications the fact that you could see them on a map doesn't change the fact that they asked for 4 independent applications. Could the PB said yes to one and no to the rest absolutely they would have had that right because each of them had to stand alone. And what happened was each the PB when you do a lot line change the completion of a lot line change is the deed that gets sent to the PB through the Assessors office or wherever recognizing the merging of the 2 parcels that's where the covenant would have been applicable- not to the balance of the property it's to the deed that goes from the Chudiak piece over to the other owner in every instance of a lot line change. That's the piece that gets conveyed and it's a recognized action, you're doing a boundary line in some towns it's called a boundary line agreement it can be in many cases it's not formal action of the PB at all it can be done informally between adjoining property owners. CHAIRWOMAN: We have Chudiak to Wells. We have Chudiak to Zabicky, Chudiak to Wanat, Chudiak to Becker and some of those just took place and- MS. MOORE: Keep in mind, it's done by PB action. The section of the code says if the PB acts you don't just create lots out of thin air in the Town of Southold they are either by PB action or by conveyances and what's left. CHAIRWOMAN: So these lots were created by the PB action and they were subject to certain conditions. Conditions that they merge. The merger took place on some of the lots on 15 & 16- MS. MOORE: Keep in mind that not every application for example you have several variance applications that may or may not ever get built. The fact that you ask for and get permission to do it doesn't force you to implement whatever relief you've requested. In this instance it wasn't Chudiak that said oh you know forget it I don't want to do any of this it was the property owners who said we can't do it right now we can't do this we can't do that. Those that could, it got transferred. Those were Wells and Wanat those 2 got completed that was the balance of it to pretend that lot does not exist it doesn't make sense. CHAIRWOMAN: Is your request for recognition? MS. MOORE: I believe that's what the building inspector cited. CHAIRWOMAN: Very seriously, what is the application for because we have an application for a waiver of merger. MS. MOORE: But the NOD says recognition of the lot and your notice I just read says lot , recognition. Page 13 of 34 Page 14 April 3, 2003 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing CHAIRWOMAN: I know that. Our application is for a waiver of merger. MS. MOORE: I didn't do it, Mr. Pisacano made the whatever application I think he's gone to the next step which is exceptions the non conforming lot has a minimum lot size of 40000 sq. ft. it doesn't merge so I don't know where I didn't get involved in that I know for a fact that what the BI directed and what your own notice says and I think that's an accurate. CHAIRWOMAN: The NOD I'm just saying if you take a look at the application in the file is for a lot waiver. MS. MOORE: That's the way he interpreted it, not my interpretation. CHAIRWOMAN: Application for waiver under Section 126 - that's what we have in the file. MS. MOORE: I guess you notice properly then because the notice you have I read - I can't answer your internal paperwork I can only answer with what I think is the relevant section and what the relief should be granted. CHAIRWOMAN: Relief under 124? MS. MOORE: 124 I think is the applicable section that the lot was created by the PB and therefore should be a recognized lot. It's single and separate and now has all abilities to be developed except for the BD directed us here. CHAIRWOMAN: That's why it's so difficult to understand because yes lots were created by the PB. The configuration of this lot was not. MS. MOORE: How else would it have been created? It's not by deed. CHAIRWOMAN: The lot in question was created by the PB as part of 2 other lots. MS. MOORE: Yes,but it's done by the PB. The language doesn't give much except that it's done this or that way it's approved by the PB by virtue of here you have a piece of property you take a piece from here and you take a piece from here pretend it doesn't exist-you can't do that-the PB has created this configuration. CHAIRWOMAN: The PB has created lots, I agree with that. Did they create this lot, no. We are going to have problems with this because I'm not sure that this does not require an action by the PB to undo what's been done. I'm not sure at all that this would fall under this exemption in any way shape or form because the PB did not create this lot that is before us today. MS. MOORE: I respectfully disagree because the PB took separate action on each of those lot line changes they most certainly did. The fact that they did not intend in they say this but that is not what is written, that is not what is said and that's not what the code says. The fact Page 14 of 34 Page 15 April 3, 2003 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing that they were sloppy and they came up with you know you have 2 board members who still remember well that's not the way zoning works, it's not to penalize a property owner for what is left behind from PB action that is completely against all zoning principals that I'm aware of. You can't treat people in this town that way. You cannot treat people that way and let my just say before we even started here Frank Murphy who was the broker for the Chudiaks at that time contacted and sent a letter and I just spoke to him today because I didn't remember this he said I sent letters to all of the adjoining property owners offering them this property and nobody wanted it. I know Frank Murphy asked me about sending letters and he remembers sending letters. CHAIRWOMAN: Is there anyone else in the audience who would like to speak for or against the application? TED WELLS: Just to get on the record, my name is Ted Wells I live at 1575 Cox Neck Road I've been there for 40 years. My property is adjoining to this. I'm one of the guys who got the lot line change. I know more about this than anybody because I'm the guy that did the legwork for Mr. Chudiak setting up these lot line changes because he was too busy he was farming he said you want this property you people you got to do this so when I had to go to plan it took me a year and a half with the PB to get to buy this property because it went into M80 which is 2 acres and there wasn't 2 acres left in this strip which was 125x500' long. He says to me-you want it, you take the whole thing if you want it I come to the PB he says you're not going to put a house there, there's enough houses we want to leave it open because you've got a natural water drainage for 136 acre farm that's on the side of it because when you put the 2 acre zoning in and started building houses up in the back from the first part he knocked off it blocked off with Artie Foster built a road, the water couldn't run like it's natural run to the big hole in the bottom of Cox Neck Road that blocked it off so now all the water comes down by us and it goes into a big hole on the back end of this property and when I say a big hole, a big hole so a year and a half they made us put restrictions in that we couldn't build a house on this property in any shape or form it was never to come back as a lot,but then what happened was Mr. Becker died and I was friendly with Mr. Chudiak like family every day I used to see him work with him and all that stuff so we have a good rapport so it's not that I don't know him because I do real good and then what happened, Mr. Becker died and while that was going on he had it surveyed before he died because there was a copy of Mr. Becker's survey because he was buying the property- CHAIRWOMAN: Mr. Becker was the one that was supposed to merge? MR. WELLS: Right but he died one night ambulance came and got him,he gave me the keys he told me lock up my house they are taking me because his wife had died a year prior to that and I locked the house up he died 2 or 3 days later. Meanwhile he already had that surveyed because he was buying it his strip and of course Zabicky had sold it to Sicerakas so when I went to Sicerakis and said hey do you want to buy the property he said yes I want to buy the property and at that time those pieces $3K a piece so when it started slowing down, Mr. Chudiak said to me I got to get rid of that property, I don't want to pay taxes on it no more see what you can do, I'll sell it to you for the same price. Page 15 of 34 Page 16 April 3, 2003 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing CHAIRWOMAN: This was when they didn't merge? MR. WELLS: Right but as soon as this started when Mr. Becker died and so forth he says to me so I went back to the PB from scratch one and said listen he wants to sell me that 300'x125'which is less than 3/4's of an acre and that's the piece that Mr. Pisacano's got. And the PB said you're more than welcome to buy it but you have to come back and you're going to have to do the same thing. It's going to be a lot line change to your property line and it's going to run that way but I'm going to tell you right now it has restrictions on it. You're not going to build a house on it. I though maybe I could build a house for my daughter there. No way shape or form I got thrown out of here twice. So I give up on it, we bought a piece of property in Laurel and built a house for her. Then about 3 years ago I was approached again the 2 daughters come to me and I know them and they said listen we have to sell the property because Dad we didn't expect him to live that long and he's up in his 90's now and he needs the money and I got along with Bill Chudiak like that so I said I knew I couldn't build on it so I gave her an offer, I figure I'll buy the damn thing and let the neighbors look at it. I know I can't build on it just leave it there, let the neighbors look at it I got all good neighbors and like I say, I've got all good neighbors and like I say I've been here for 40 years well that wasn't good enough I guess because I heard it was up for sale for$100K so I understand Frank Murphy got involved. Well Frank Murphy made some telephone calls. He didn't send letters,he called because the neighbors I have, we talk and he called up and said to them Mr. Sideraks because he got a hold of me and said if you want that piece you can have that piece behind you but it's going to cost you$50K which is 200' wide by 125' deep. CHAIRWOMAN: This was his part of the merge? MR. WELLS: Yes. You want we he can have it for$50K because he was going to sell the property he called Carol Becker and said if you want the property it's going to cost you$20K so he figured he'd get $70K out of the thing so all the neighbors know that they can't build on it and to pay that kind of money on a piece of property that you can't build on it just don't make sense and I know I've been going through this since 1986 because I'm the one that brought Mr. Chukiak down and sat right there on those 2 chairs and when Mr. Orlowski said stand up and he stood up with them and said you understand that when you made these changes, these lot line changes with the covenants you agree with it and he did so it was signed, sealed and delivered at that time. That's going back like I say I know all this I had to have a key map made with a natural water runoff showing how much water would run down there Van Tyle had to do it at that time so I can't see how it can come back as a building lot with a house now I told the girls when they wanted to sell it I says sell it I don't care someone is going to buy it, let them buy it but they can't build a house on it because if that's going to be reversed by the PB I want the covenant in my property to come out and my mother in law wants hers out and Kevin Milowski wants to split his acre off because he's got an acre on the other side but he had to buy 2 acres from Mr. Chudiak to be able to build his house right across the street from this. So everybody around had to buy 2 acres back in 1985 and 86 to build a house now you have less than Ws of an acre and it's going up as a building lot. I can't see how. I just can't see how. Like I say I know this property situation from the word go and I can't say anything bad,but I'm just saying if he bought this property knowing he couldn't Page 16 of 34 Page 17 April 3, 2003 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing get a building permit, then he shouldn't have bought it. If you didn't know that, I feel for you, I really do. CHAIRWOMAN: Mr. Wells, address us. MR. WELLS: Sony. Everybody in this.town including Frank Murphy knew that you were not going to get a building permit hinged to this when you bought that when you went to closing. CHAIRWOMAN: Mr. Orlando has a question. MEMBER ORLANDO: You made a comment about a 1/2 hour ago when you were talking that when you went to the PB they said you could not build on the back parcels, do you have any documentation or letters from that? MR. WELLS: I would have to get the minutes from when they did all that. I also had a meeting with the same group on August 13, 2001 one week before they did with the PB and the Town Attorney, Ed Forrester, and the rest of them and we spent 2 %2 hours in there and that's what they came up with the same thing the Building Inspector he picked this book up and said I'll issue a building permit. Well he can issue a building permit for anything. How does he know if he didn't see where the house is going to be? How do you issue a building permit? CHAIRWOMAN: Wait a minute, there's something conflicting let me just get this straight- you had a meeting with the Town Attorney, who else? MR. WELLS: Valerie Scopaz I think you should have a copy in your file that memo - Ed Forrester and they had somebody in there taking notes. I don't know their name. CHAIRWOMAN: What's the date on that? MR. WELLS: That's August 13, 2001. MS. MOORE: For the record, nobody from our side or Mr. Pisacano's side was invited. MR. WELLS: This is a meeting that I called and asked to find out when it was offered to me by the 2 daughters when I made the offer and they didn't say no they didn't say yes, then I had a meeting with them figuring I would try this one more time and if they give me a hint that I could get a building permit then I could go back to Barbara Chudiak and said look, I'll give you more money because I know then I could have built on it the same thing you did. The real problem here is you had a meeting with August 13, 2001 that doesn't jive with I mean it jives with what the PB says,but it doesn't go with what the affidavit from Mr. Forrester. MS. MOORE: I had a meeting but I never knew about this meeting that he had with the people he's talking about. Page 17 of 34 Page 18 April 3, 2003 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing MR. WELLS: The property was offered to me first. CHAIRWOMAN: There's no record of this that we have? MR. WELLS: It should be in there, yes. _It's a PB town of Southold memo in file Aug. 13, 2001, Chudiak property located on west side Cox Neck Rd. Matt. MS. MOORE: Is that the meeting with Valerie Scopaz? And she didn't list you as being there? It's not your fault, it's just inappropriate for them not to included the owners of the property, the attorney or the owner of the property at that meeting. MR. WELLS: I just asked if I could get a building permit. MS. MOORE: Not your fault, nothing to do with you. MR. WELLS: I know this family, I've known them for 40 years, I've never- CHAIRWOMAN: So this meeting was 1 week before the memo from the Town Planner? MR. WELLS: Yes a week before them. MEMBER ORLANDO: By your request? MR. WELLS: Yes I called and asked if I could have a meeting with the PB and a Building Inspector to find out if I could get a building permit because Barbara and Joan both come to me and said look we are going to sell the property- We approached you to tell you we were going to sell it. CHAIRWOMAN: Order. Okay I just wanted to get the facts of that straight. MEMBER OLIVA: August 13th, the town attorney, the building inspector and the planners said you could not build on that lot? MR. WELLS: They said if you want anything you'd have to go to the ZBA. CHAIRWOMAN: Was Mr. Forrester at that meeting? MR. WELLS: Yes. CHAIRWOMAN: Maybe we'll subpoena all of them here because there's something wrong and we're not going to sit here and tiddlywinks around and try to figure out what it is. Page 18 of 34 Page 19 April 3, 2003 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing MR. WELLS: I tried to get here last time for the last meeting but I was stuck there under doctor's care and I'm only here now because we had a death in the family and I had to fly up for it. Just on the record that's why we weren't here. CHAIRWOMAN: Is there anyone else in the audience who would like to speak for or against the application? __ RITA WELLS: My name is Rita Wells, Ted is my husband. I would just like to say that last fall I received a phone call from Mr. Pisacano and he wanted to talk to my husband and I said I'm sorry he isn't here can I take a message and he said well, he probably doesn't want to talk to me anyway just tell him and you also not to tell anybody that the piece of land is not a buildable lot because it is and I said oh and he said I've got all the permits I need to build a house on that little piece of property and I said from the Town of Southold, he said don't you worry about it I've got all the permits I need and I said from the Town of Southold and he said I can build a chicken house back there and I said I don't think you're agriculturally zoned for that do you recall I'm just saying I didn't think when he said his lawyers would be coming after us if we told any more people that the place was not buildable I didn't appreciate that. I just thought you'd like to hear that. CHAIRWOMAN: Is there anyone else in the audience who would like to speak for or against the application? BARBARA CHUDIAK: My name is Barabara Chudiak my father owns the property and unfortunately what Mr. Wells is not accurate. My sister and I knowing he would cause us trouble went to him and told him we were planning to sell this property we are putting it on the market I resent what he's saying my father about buying those lots and my mother was very ill. I always lived in Manhattan by the time I came home the property was sold to Wells because he was pursuing my father and my mother signed a document when she had a brain tumor so that's the situation on Mr. Wells but I just let it go and said what goes around comes around. Mr. Wells when I lived in Manhattan his daughter was calling me because they wanted to buy the property for$10K that's all he wanted to pay and he was pursuing my father and my father gave him my phone number in Manhattan and he was calling me and I said the property is not for sale and he wanted it for$10K and that's been going on for years unfortunately my father had a severe stroke this past Monday or I would have brought him with me. This is not right what's going on and I resent this. He was very good to Wells and the neighbors and what they are doing now is not right. He was very kind to them and he would not be giving something away or doing what he's saying. I resent him putting words in my father's mouth. It's not right and I resent I wasn't here when this 1st transaction took place because believe me I would not have let it go through. My father's old and he was old then and very disoriented and people took advantage and it's not right. CHAIRWOMAN: Is there anyone else in the audience who would like to speak for or against the application? CHRIS HELLIGER: I'm Chris Helliger my property abuts Mr. Pisacano's property. I addressed you last time. I'm probably going to repeat myself on a lot of topics. The first one Page 19 of 34 Page 20 April 3, 2003 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing being the paper history on the property that the PB recognized and has in the file testimony of 2 PB members did have knowledge of the owner intent to be that of merging with existing and not for sale as building lot in future. An updated version of that is the August 13th memo and on the 2"d page the last paragraph if you wanted to read that it would reiterate that. Mr. Chudiak certainly owned a lot of property the majority of it being all to the west of that little strip of homes on Cox Neck Road and had many options to incorporate this particular piece of property in future sales which he did not and you'll be able to see that with the dates. The 1st piece of property that he chopped off if you will for residential was the Milowski property that being 19.8 on the map. Last time I didn't have the map to give you the proper numbering. At that point and time he certainly could of encompassed this piece of property on there he did not instead he make specific plans to have the covenants written up and submitted and approved apparently to the PB and I'm sure zoning approval by lawyers and PB are all taken into consideration upon that. That was after the Milowski property was subdivided then the particular piece of property where my husband and I now own was a large parcel which was subdivided into 19.10, 19.28 I believe that says, 19.27, 19.15 and 19.17. I'm not sure what the total acreage was there but once again this particular piece of property certainly could have been encompassed there also when this was sold and it wasn't done. I mean that particular subdivision mandated all those particular people on Tallwood Lane to the 2 acre subdivision. I would just like to point out on the map my property in particular encompassed that portion of the ROW and eliminated it because Nudak's who are 13&14 had ROW at the new Tallwood access so proposed ROW there was never a ROW so anyway that was my main point. He certainly had options to change his mind never did away with the covenants - left it as is subdivided that surrounding property to the 2 acre mandated zoning and we were left with that particular substandard building lot yes because it was obviously maintaining the standards for the original covenants which were on file. I think that pretty much covers that aspect of it I just did have a question of the proposed ROW because the 2 people being Wells and Wanat that did have their property lines merged with that particular property have always had access on the back end of those mergings and so that ROW can never be eliminated so they can always have access to those back entranceways so that also is a reason for the ROW not to merge with parcel 19.11 and then if there is a question after all of this the terrain as Mr. Wells has said I don't know if you've walked it but it is really several feet below grade it provides a natural drainage for the surrounding unchanged topography and I think altering the elevation in any way there would be a destructive diversion of that I don't know if you know Cox Neck at all but it has a severe drainage problem as it is so if you would just consider all these problems I just brought up and everything that's on file the neighbors would appreciate it we're all representing all the names on file there for the people who could not be here tonight and we would appreciate your decision in our favor. MS. WELLS: I just want to say that Ms. Hilliger said my father had to opportunity to sell this before you have to understand my father is a farmer and he's not a businessman nor an educated person and for the past 25 years he has macular degeneration so he has really not been able to see or really understand a lot of things so I did want to bring that up. She said he had the opportunity to be able to sell that, he couldn't. He wasn't aware of what could be done. Page 20 of 34 Page 21 April 3, 2003 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing MS. MOORE: Just 2 points with regard to the property if you look at the overall tax map you can see that this parcel remains and it's.bisected on the east and west by ROW's. So it's a natural logical break in the property to say that the property as Ms. Chudiak would somehow be attached to something else it's cut up by the ROW's one to Milowski and one to the north so that's not quite accurate. I want to read I was recently at the appellate division with respect to a Southold case and the case is Iannone vs. the PB that case started out it's a supreme court case that dealt with the PB's imposition on covenants on property and their covenants on no further subdivision. The supreme court, the lower court found that the PB had no authority in the law to place those kind of covenants on it. The town obviously objected to that conclusion by the lower court and went to the appellate division and I was there arguing that case the interesting thing was this was my clients piece of property was one where there was no covenant placed on the property that prevented it from being further subdivided even though the PB intended that case to be applicable but from the subdivision maps and the only place that the condition could be found on it by was reviewing in thoroughly in the PB file you might find mention of covenants that should have been submitted that were never submitted in our case there were covenants I'm going to read my next point I'll read the covenant language but the appellate division quizzed and I'm waiting to find out what the decision finally holds but the quizzed the attorney for the PB and said how is anybody to know about a restriction essentially sterilizing a piece of property if there is no covenant on the property making it clear that it is the ultimate intention and I submit to you that's why I attached exhibit A because this clearly shows what the intention was between the parties and this was a letter to Ms. Schultz and the way the language of the covenant and all the deeds read is the parcel thereby conveyed shall merge with premises of the grantee contiguous there to on the east and the 2 parcels shall thereupon be deemed one parcel for the purpose of zoning ordinance for the Town of Southold so under present provisions of the zoning ordinance only one residence together with accessory structures may be constructed and maintained upon said 2 parcels which are being merged into one. That does not apply to anything other than lot line change the individual lot line change that parcel and that conveyance that covenant is a restriction on the deed when that conveyance is done. That is not intended or ever assumed or any reading of it whatsoever could come to the conclusion that the balance of the property has that condition, that covenant on there. It may be the intention it was poorly done if that was the intention because that is clearly not from the language of the deeds or the language of the conditions on the lot modifications so Mrs. Tortora you asked about the application of that covenant look at the language it speaks for itself which is the I can give you the copy of both deeds, I'll get them for you and I'll send them to you both the language of the Wanat deed and the Wells deed have this language as a condition. The balance of the property has no such covenant so as far as restricting a property owner as to intentions or conditions, if it's not as a covenant on the property it is not binding, it is not appropriate. CHAIRWOMAN: It's maintained that it was a setoff agreement with those properties. MS. MOORE: We are talking about 2 different things. There was originally a setoff she confuses things. There was a setoff from the parcel on the east that was between Cox Neck and the ROW and the west end. That was a setoff. That setoff which you actually looked at through a 280A application the balance of that lot. There was no such restriction as far as no Page 21 of 34 Page 22 April 3, 2003 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing further subdivision or anything else on the piece that remained. There was nothing about it. It was a standard setoff. She argued that well your own conditions of 280A therefore you couldn't build on this because your decision said any further action or any further development would require 280A that's not true 280A is only applicable if you're over a ROW it's not if you have fee title to the road so I think she's grasping for straws trying to come up with rationale for finding that this property is sterilized but it's not applicable so Milowski setoff has no application here and the covenants which is I think then she gets onto another issue with respect to the covenant language in the deeds they were implemented when the transfers took place when they actually completed the lot merger the lot line change and that sale took place there was to be a covenant on the deed of that conveyance which is the standard the way it's done today there's generally no covenants- CHAIRWOMAN: So you're saying because it didn't take place the covenant is not valid? MS. MOORE: Of course. CHAIRWOMAN: Well if it didn't take place and the covenant is not valid then I still don't understand and maybe I'm missing something and maybe we need to consult with legal council why you wouldn't go back to the PB. Why are you here? MS. MOORE: Because the PB took applications for lot line changes. They took the Wanat application, they took the Wells application, they took the other 2 applications,but they chose not to act again I come to you for an area variance I may choose not to act on the variance, I may ask for 5 variances from you on one time and only implement 3 of the 5. CHAIRWOMAN: But why aren't you before the PB? MS. MOORE: Because they don't have jurisdiction here. It's an issue of creation of the lot. How is the lot created. The lot was created by the PB by actions that they took on the other pieces. It's what's left it's a balance of a piece of property. CHAIRWOMAN: That's a stretch in my mind. MS. MOORE: I'm sorry, talk to your town attorney as far as every attorney that I've referred this to and said please am I missing something here? They said no this is what's left when you take pieces you have a piece and you take off another. What's left? CHAIRWOMAN: I must be missing something because all I see is that the PB did these setoffs 2 of them occurred 2 of them didn't and you're saying because 2 didn't that this lot which wasn't even a lot when they did the setoff- MS. MOORE: Yes it was. It was a lot you have the lot that started out as take away 1/2 acre it was a 1/2 acre larger because they each got a % acre extra on their lot line modification so you started out with a large lot, you took and I've done multiple lot line changes from one application where you have several, maybe you can educate them- Page 22 of 34 Page 23 April 3, 2003 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing CHAIRWOMAN: Everybody's excited, let's not get excited. This lot you're asking us to a) recognize a lot that wasn't created by the PB because the PB created merged lots okay that didn't happen so this parcel ended up even if you ignore the PB and go right to lot recognition this lot did not appear this way in 1983 did it? MS. MOORE: Yes. CHAIRWOMAN: Part of it was Wells so it couldn't have appeared the same way. Isn't that correct? MS. MOORE: Maybe I'm not following you but I have to get- CHAIRWOMAN: This lot as it looks today did not look this way in 1983 did it? MS. MOORE: Pre lot line changes or post? CHAIRWOMAN: Pre. MS. MOORE: No of course not it was the result of the remainder of lot line changes. It was a boundary line agreement it could have been from this side to this side. CHAIRWOMAN: You're saying except this lot line change, yes that's valid because these didn't occur don't accept that one, that's not valid. MS. MOORE: I'm not saying accept these and don't accept these, I'm saying each of these were independent acts that the PB took on. Had they done it as a comprehensive lot modification, they should not have done it as 4 independent lot line changes. Even today they get greedy because each one is a separate application with a separate hearing separate notice the whole thing and they take each one, one by one not as a subdivision would take all the lots on a subdivision map and look at them all together. They take each lot line change as a separate application and when they did that they took the Wanat piece okay it's done we are taking this piece here you go you've got 3 pieces of paper we got Wanat is done from the bottom. Well's is done we've approved 2 more for this but it doesn't get implemented for personal reasons they just don't get done but it doesn't mean that this doesn't exist. It just doesn't make sense. Put yourself in the shoes of a property owner when you do a lot modification with your neighbor,maybe I'm just missing it here. CHAIRWOMAN: Do you have any questions? MEMBER ORLANDO: I agree with I think we need to get everyone here from the last meeting in August to determine what happened because the same people said 2 different things a week apart. CHAIRWOMAN: We just got this memo tonight and we're going to have to review it and go back over it and meet with council on it. I would suggest that if the application is for lot Page 23 of 34 1 - Page 24 April 3, 2003 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing recognition that you submit a revised application so the application is not for a waiver of merger. MR. PISACANO: The ZBA gave me an application to fill out for this purpose. CHAIRWOMAN: Because I asked and they said that's what you filled out. MR. PISACANO: That's what I was told to ask for from the MS. MOORE: Well it's been noticed properly so the paperwork can come in to you cleaned up. CHAIRWOMAN: Right now we actually do not have an application saying what you are requesting. MS. MOORE: Well you do actually my memo essentially tells you what it is the correct application is. I'll have him fill in the blanks. MR. PISACANO: If I did not purchase this property, the Chudiaks would be left with an unbuildable lot that they can get no money for whatsoever. It's ridiculous. MS. MOORE: And we are talking about 1.7 Acres. MEMBER ORLANDO: They are all landlocked parcels. MR. PISACANO: As far as the drainage goes, the HD has approved me, the soil samples everything is good, they've approved it they've recognized it there's lawyers on the Board of Review. CHAIRWOMAN: Don't say that they did not recognize this lot. MS. MOORE: They left the zoning issue to the town- it's out of their jurisdiction. There are not lots of this size that are out there that are unbuildable that are sterilized. MEMBER ORLANDO: There are lots out there in the world landlocked that happened as a result of things. I actually saw a tax map of a lot upstate in NY that has a landlocked piece. MS. MOORE: But this is not a landlocked piece. MEMBER ORLANDO: I'm just answering Mr. Pisacano's question. I wasn't here at the last meeting,but I have a question are you building a house there for yourself? MR. PISACANO: I honestly probably couldn't put up with the neighbors. At this point I would probably build a house for somebody or sell it or if they'd like to buy it be my guest. I put all my money into this I have no money left. Page 24 of 34 Page 25 April 3, 2003 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing CHAIRWOMAN: How much did you pay for the lot? MR. PISACANO: $80K. MS. MOORE: This was not sold as an unbuildable parcel. CHAIRWOMAN: I'm saying that's a buy. MR. PISACANO: I have a deed. I have a single and separate- it's a building lot. MS. MOORE: When we went to market in 2001 the market really escalated we gave them time to get permits and- MR. PISACANO: And Michael Verity said he would issue a building permit once I got the permits. But them it seemed like everyone was worried about Ms. Schlickim who I believe was Mr. Wells attorney I don't know but the PB was- MS. MOORE: Everybody's covering their butt and sending it over to you. MR. PISACANO: I've gotten the run around for 9 months and it's a lot of money to have tied up. CHAIRWOMAN: It's a lot of money, I'm not unsympathetic to you on the other hand the board cannot really create lots and that's the issue we need to discuss and resolve and so let's -we're not going to resolve it tonight. MS. MOORE: You may have an answer from the Town Attorney sooner. CHAIRWOMAN: You're very optimistic. MS. MOORE: I'm going to harass him. MR. PISACANO: There was no problem with this piece of property when I approached him. MEMBER ORLANDO: That seems to be the problem it sounds like he gave Mr. Wells and them one answer and you another. MR. PISACANO: I ran around for 9 months. CHAIRWOMAN: The Board Secretary had to run out but otherwise we'll have to re- advertise. MS. MOORE: No, no we don't want to re-advertise. Page 25 of 34 Page 26 April 3, 2003 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing CHAIRWOMAN: Let's try May 1st. We'll adjourn it to May 1st and get her to get a time on it. Are you planning on submitting anything else? MS. MOORE: You asked for the revised application form. I don't know until I know what you need or what you come up with. Understand I'm not being paid, I don't represent him, I'm here because in fairness this is an untenable situation I feel there's justice in this world and- MR. PISACANO: At the last meeting you asked me to explain how the lot was created I just felt that was all explained to you and it seemed like that was the only thing you needed to know, how it was created. CHAIRWOMAN: We got into names and it wasn't until we started to get information about numbers of the lots that we could put things together because everyone was talking about Milowski and Wanat and so and so but you have to understand we are looking at a tax map and we haven't got a clue what you are talking about. We want to subpoena the Town Attorney, the Planner, and the Code Enforcement Officer because of the conflicting- MR. PISACANO: That would be your own personal meeting? CHAIRWOMAN: No it will be a public meeting. MEMBER ORLANDO: That's the objective of the next meeting to settle out what they were saying. MR. PISACANO: They have been giving me the run around. That's why I'm here. MEMBER OLIVA: Well they will be under oath. MR. PISACANO: CHAIRWOMAN: We understand but right now we have 2 conflicting testimonies on who said what. MS. MOORE: You have an affidavit from Ed so- CHAIRWOMAN: And we have statements from the PB that are totally contrary to what Ed said and we have statements from the neighbors that are totally contrary to what Ed and so and so and so and so said. MR. PISACANO: Whenever the next meeting is I want it to be resolved that day. MEMBER ORLANDO: If they are put in a corner they will have to tell. It is what it is. CHAIRWOMAN: It's going to be adjourned to June 5th 6:30pm. Page 26 of 34 ri EnEII/ 4\e-) SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS APR ® � 20 TRANSCRIPT OF HEARINGS 03 HELD FEBRUARY 20, 2003 �9NING BOARD of APPEALS (Prepared by Jessica Boger) Present were: Chairwoman Lydia A. Tortora Member Gerard P.'Goehringer Member George Horning Member Ruth D. Oliva Board Secretary Linda Kowalski PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1:00 p.m. App.No. 5264—MICHAEL PISACANO. The applicant has filed a request for a Lot Waiver under Section 100-24A based on the November 7, 2002 (amended 11-8-02) Building Department's Notice of Disapproval for construction of a single family dwelling. The basis of the Notice of Disapproval is that this 73,616 sq. ft. parcel is not permitted in the R-80 District because it is not a recognized lot by any of the four code standards,under: 1)The identical lot shall be created by deed recorded in the Suffolk County Clerk's office on or before 6-30-83, and the lot conformed to the minimum lot requirements set forth in Bulk Schedule; 2) Lot was approved by the Southold Town Planning Board, or 3) Lot is shown on a subdivision map approved by the Southold Town Board prior to 6-30-83, or 4) Lot is approved/recognized by formal action of the Board of Appeals prior to 6-30-83. Location of Property: 1457 Cox Neck Rd., Mattituck; Parcel 113-07-19.11. CHAIRWOMAN: Is someone here who would like to speak on behalf of the application? MICHAEL PISACANO: I'm just going to read this. My name is Michael Pisacano. I reside on Nakomis Road in Southold. I'm requesting a variance for a building permit be issued for property located on Cox Neck Lane in Mattituck 113-7-19.11 which I purchased on August 27, 2002 from William Chudiak. The property consists of 1.7 acres which is larger than 4 of the 7 surrounding parcels attached to the property. I have in my possession a deed, a variance search, a survey, a tax map also prior to purchasing the property I had a water test done which proved water a test hole dug which proves the property has sufficient drainage. When I applied for the Health Dept. approvals they had indicated to me that I would need to submit C&R's for a well and also a hookup to public water when it became available which I have complied with. The property was sold to me by a realtor who is well respected in the area and indicated that it was a buildable lot. Due to extended research and compliance with various issues with health department and SCWA my time to obtain health department permits could not be extended. I was faced with a decision to close on the property immediately or chance losing it. Since it appeared clear at the time and my single and separate search did not indicate the property was merged with any surrounding parcels I decided to close title. However, shortly after closing I t I Page 2 February 20, 2003 Southold Town Board of Appeals Regular Meeting Public Hearing received word the department of health would not grant my approvals due to the property being the subject of a town planning board decision which indicated that the property had been merged with adjacent properties and was not to be built upon due to lot line modifications. I feel this decision was not sufficiently researched and prematurely enforced seeing two of the lot line changes never took place. In an effort to rectify the situation I approach the building and planning departments as well as the town attorney where I felt they indicated some optimism. However this is where I began to be bounced back and forth from dept. to dept. for about 8 weeks without any straight or clear answers. I've put my life savings into the property and it has cost me well over$10K in interest without being able to get a straight answer. I have many unpaid bills and I am 4 months behind in my rent. My family members have helped me financially and I have made promises to them and others hoping that the decisions of the health dept. and the ZBA would be in my favor and I might be able to pay them back. If I cannot rectify the situation to my benefit I must start to consider the possibility of filing for chapter 7. I really don't want it to come to that. I'm awaiting decision in writing from the health dept. and I am told that it will be arriving shortly in the mail and I did get a heads up from them that it looks like it's going to go through. I would greatly appreciate a decision from the board today if at all possible. I really can't afford for this to go on any longer. Thank you. MEMBER GOEHRINGER: I need to make a public statement. It was brought to my attention that it appears that Mr. Pisacano I don't know if you know me, I'm Gerry Goehringer I'd spoken to you on the phone that the firm that you bought the lot from my license is held by them. I have to tell you that I have no interest in this one way or another. I just don't know at this time if I should continue on this hearing or not I have not discussed it with council. What I may do at this point is get up from the dais go sit in the audience and I'll be part but I will discuss this with council. CHAIRWOMAN: I'm not, let's start off at the beginning and try to make sense of this because it is confusing. I read through the file and I have to admit I haven't got a clue as to what's going on. Let's try to follow me. You filed out an application for a waiver of merger, correct? MR. PISACANO: Right. CHAIRWOMAN: And then in your opening statement you said this is for a variance. MR. PISACANO: No there was a variance search which was done showing that the lot was single and separate according to the title search I had done. Basically the Planning Dept. had created this lot. They are saying it's an R80 zone well this lot is larger than like I said, it's the 4th largest lot in the area out of 7 lots so it's not like it to me I would consider it a pre-existing lot because it was basically made by the Planning Dept. who pretty much created this. CHAIRWOMAN: When was the lot created? MR. PISACANO: By deed or? CHAIRWOMAN: By the Planning Board. Page 2 of 10 J , r Page 3 February 20, 2003 Southold Town Board of Appeals Regular Meeting Public Hearing MR. PISICANO: Well the Chudiak's own a large piece of property which they you know shaved off pieces of property throughout the years but for this to become under the R80 which I guess is the reason for this I mean the Planning dept. created it. The Planning Dept. also decided these lots would not be built upon if they mergedtwith the lots in front of them which they never did. CHAIRWOMAN: When was the lot created by the Planning Board? MR. PISACANO: I'm not sure when this all took place. I mean I have it I just have to look. CHAIRWOMAN: You are this is a lot that was created by the Planning Board with conditions on the lot which were never fulfilled? MR. PISACANO: Right. Well there was 4 lots on Cox Neck Lane behind that was a large piece of property 2 of them took title to the pieces behind them 2 of them never did. So the Planning Board making their decision I though was premature because they didn't think it out if these people never acquired the parcels behind them. CHAIRWOMAN: Let me try to verbalize it first. They created there were 4 lots that were created by the Planning Board. MR. PISACANO: Two of them were never created. Can I just show you on here? CHAIRWOMAN: Certainly. We have the maps we just don't have any reference as to what they are. That's our problem. Let's start to identify these by the tax map numbers because throughout the file there's reference to Wannits and Milowskis and people that doesn't tell us what the tax numbers are and when you are reading through this you're saying well which lot is that? I have a tax map here. Do you have a copy of the tax map so we can both follow the same things here? You are the owner of lot 19.11, correct? MR. PISACANO: Yes. CHAIRWOMAN: Now the Planning Board and I believe we are talking about what is labeled as in the file has been identified as a lot line change and the date on this is November 18th I don't have the rest of map there. Does anyone have reference it's the Rodrick VanTyle map. Do you have a date on that sir? Because it's not showing up it says Nov 18 but the rest of the date is not on here so we don't know when that occurred. MR. PISACANO: The splits for Mr. Wells and Wannit were done in March of 1985. CHAIRWOMAN: If this is the Planning Board map that was the subject of a lot line change, it's very difficult to read but the most important thing is the date which is not on the map. We really need that date on the Van Tyle map that the so called Planning Board- Page 3 of 10 , I Page 4 February 20, 2003 Southold Town Board of Appeals Regular Meeting Public Hearing MR. PISACANO: I see the map you have but I don't have the date. Would it be on the tax card? I mean the property the bulk of the property they've owned for 30 years or more. CHAIRWOMAN: There are a couple of dates on here November 19 we don't know what and then map amended it's very faded it could be December 3, 1985. So what I'm trying to find out is when did the Planning Board create these lots? MR. PISACANO: I don't have the answer to that in front of me. I'm probably going to go back to the 50's which this lot was part of. CHAIRWOMAN: I know but the it's difficult because the lots that we see on and it's very difficult to read this copy of don't the lot numbers on the map of this so called lot line change or approval of the Planning Board- , MR. PISACANO: December 16, 1985. CHAIRWOMAN: Don't give numbers of the lots we have nothing to match them up with what we have now and apparently from what this map shows lot 16 was supposed to be part of lot 19 and lot 15 am I calling it so far? MR. PISACANO: Right,which never took place. CHAIRWOMAN: So that never took place. And after that time how did the lot get sold if the Planning Board had already made a determination that your lot would be merged with these other 2 lots? MR. PISACANO: That was done back in 1985 and it's been I don't know how many years since and the owners of the homes in front of it never did acquire it that's why I'm saying their decision seemed a little premature to make a decision like that when they weren't sure the properties were merged. CHAIRWOMAN: When did this lot 19.11, when was it first a described lot with meets and bounds that we see now. When was the first date of that? In other words I want to go to a deed that shows me meets and bounds of a described parcel 19.11 when would be the first date of that? MR. PISICANO: This one William Chudiak to William Chudiak 10-19-99 recorded liber page I guess that's I don't know when it went back to - I don't know what I'm trying to find out. CHAIRWOMAN: I don't know either, if you don't know, I don't know. • MR. PISACANO: As far as I'm concerned it's a pre-existing lot. It's been there forever since they've owned it, Planning Board carved pieces off it and that's how it was left. How they can determine it's in an R-80 zone after they shrunk it down to 1.7 acres I don't have the answer to that. That's why I'm saying I don't think they did the right thing by making this decision because Page 4 of 10 Page 5 February 20, 2003 Southold Town Board of Appeals Regular Meeting Public Hearing now Chudiak did not sell the 2 parcels that this would have been at one time and got the money for it,therefore they shouldn't get stuck with an un-buildable lot. If it's in a R-80 zone,that's basically what we are trying to decide? CHAIRWOMAN: Let me try to follow it because it's very confusing. MR. PISACANO: It's not as confusing as it looks. CHAIRWOMAN: Let's go back to the Planning Board created these lots in 1985. Half of your lot was supposed to be-let's go to the tax map the northern half of your lot when they created this subdivision was to be merged with lot 15. MR. PISACANO: Correct. CHAIRWOMAN: The southern part of your lot was to be merged with lot 16. Right? MR. PISACANO: Yes. CHAIRWOMAN: That never took place. That's a big blank. That never happened but that was the conditions of their approval and so at that time, I don't know whether there were described parcels for lot 15 going back to your lot and lot 16 going back to your lot or not. MR. PISACANO: They never took titles of them, they never purchased them for whatever reason. CHAIRWOMAN: Then you come along in 1998 or was it 1999? MR. PISACANO: That's just when the variance search went back. I bought it in October or September I believe I closed on it. CHAIRWOMAN: And that's the first time a deed describing a-that's the first time that this lot was described in a deed would be 1999? MR. PISACANO: No, I would say it went back to 1957 or that's my opinion it went back to when they originally owned the parcel. CHAIRWOMAN: Here's what we have to do because it's right now in order to make a decision we need some facts here and they are missing. We will contact the Planning Board and get more information from them. I don't think we have enough information from the Planning Board. We will ask them for their complete records as to when the lot was created,how it was created everything else like we have something in the file. It's not sufficient. MR. PISACANO: I did have 2 attorneys that were supposed to be here,but they are both away. Page 5 of 10 Page 6 February 20, 2003 Southold Town Board of Appeals Regular Meeting Public Hearing CHAIRWOMAN: What I need from you or your attorney I need to see when that lot the lot that you have was first a described lot in a deed. MR. PISACANO: Wouldn't this variance search show that? CHAIRWOMAN: No in fact with the variance search after I read the variance search it shows that everybody's lot was part of everybody else's lot- MR. PISACANO: They all have homes on them. CHAIRWOMAN: It does not give me a described parcel so it's very difficult to read and the easiest way to find out, I know you have a deed describing the meets and bounds prior to yourself,when was the first deed on that? When was the first deed recorded with the meets and bounds that are described on the lot that you have? Then we can take it from there. I don't want to send you around in circles anymore but we don't have any facts to start and the board members don't know what the lots are. We need a lot more facts. MR. PISACANO: Is there any way this doesn't have to be extended for another 30 days? Is there a special meeting? CHAIRWOMAN: The problem is I went through this file twice and we've done a lot of waivers of merger but I don't even know where to begin because I don't have a record. We don't have a clean record to be able to look at this and know what is in front of us. MR. PISACANO: That's what I've been doing for the last 8 months trying to get this together and that's what I thought I presented and that's pretty much everything that I could get on paper and that's what I handed in Planning Board decisions,planning board the way things were created it should all be in that paperwork. CHAIRWOMAN: I think your attorneys will be able to help you with this. They are far more experienced in this and they know what the board has to have to make a decision. Right now we don't even have, we have references to lots that don't exist on any of these maps- MR. PISACANO: You mean lots that already have houses on them that don't exist- CHAIRWOMAN: I don't even know which ones have homes on them, that's the problem. If this was a condition of the Planning Board's approval, was it a condition? If it was a condition, then why didn't it occur? I don't know why it didn't occur. MR. PISACANO: Well they can't force people to purchase property that they are not ready to purchase. It was a choice. That's why I thought the decision was premature. CHAIRWOMAN: You do have 2 attorneys? Page 6 of 10 Page 7 February 20, 2003 Southold Town Board of Appeals Regular Meeting Public Hearing MR. PISACANO: They said if I could keep it open they will be back next week. But for a couple more months I can't. This is killing me. CHAIRWOMAN: I understand,but please understand us we have nothing here to even begin with. =N. MR. PISACANO: If they are back shortly and if there's some kind of clarification, is there any way I can get this sooner? CHAIRWOMAN: We are booked right now all the way until April so the next hearing date would be April. But your attorneys are going to know what we need to see. We need a described lot,your lot. After the lot line change was made or prior to the lot line change being made so we can say yes this is the lot that was created either before the Planning Board approval, with the Planning Board approval,but one of the things we can't do is we can't undo Planning Board approval. If the Planning Board approves something, this board can't come back and undo it. MR. PISACANO: But they approved something that didn't happen, that's what I'm trying to say. CHAIRWOMAN: Try to get the information, try to get the tax maps, even if you simply with the attorneys write a letter to us tax map number blah,blah, etc. MEMBER HORNING: No questions. MEMBER OLIVA: I'm in the same predicament and the chairlady is. I don't know because according to the Planning Board they say your lot was merged with the other 2 lots right on the road and yet I understand because I was down there that there are 2 houses on those lots. But your lot was supposed to have merged with those other 2 lots. MR. PISACANO: But they didn't. CHAIRWOMAN: The other thing that's really difficult is the Planning Board says your lot was never supposed to be built on. MR. PISACANO: If they merged. CHAIRWOMAN: The letter we got says they weren't supposed to be built on. MR. PISACANO: They presented this today? CHAIRWOMAN: We will request more information, the entire file. We will do that. Let's adjourn this to April 3'd at 7:10, is that going to give you sufficient time? MR. PISACANO: Next week would be sufficient. Page 7 of 10 Page 8 February 20, 2003 Southold Town Board of Appeals Regular Meeting Public Hearing CHAIRWOMAN: Is there anyone else in the audience who would like to speak for or against the application? MALCOLM DOUBLEDAY: I'm Malcolm Doubleday, I'm here on behalf of Ted Wells who is in Florida right now. He would like to approach.the board himself. He may get the chance in April. Did you receive a copy of a petition signed by- CHAIRWOMAN: Yes. MR. DOUBLEDAY: Ted is very emotional about this and I can't be because I'm not familiar enough but he is involved with the Chudiaks when all this happened and at one time he had considered on that piece of property for his daughter but he and a couple of other people have thought about it and after going through the wealth of paperwork on the subject realized it was impossible. I'm sorry Mr. Pisacano bought the property but it's -his problem is sort of self inflicted right now. Everybody else did enough research to walk away from it and realized that they couldn't build on it. As I said,Teddy would be up here for hours telling you the history of it but I just wanted to make sure I got his point across that it was un-buildable for anybody else so it should remain that way. All those divisions were for lot line changes originally. I guess somebody didn't but their piece for their lot line change,but I don't think that makes it a buildable lot in 2-acre zoning. That's really it. CHAIRWOMAN: Is there anyone else in the audience who would like to speak for or against the application? CHRIS HILLIKER: I'm Chris Hilliker,my property abuts this particular piece of property in question and just a couple of things. There is a long paper history on file with the Planning Board apparently and in there is a letter dated August 13, 2001 from Valerie Scopaz, the Town Planner and she highlights that she discussed the matter with the Planning Board and 2 of the members present were on the board during the 1985 time period. They emphasize that the intent of the lot line applications were to merge land, expand the size of existing lots not to create new building lots. The record indicates that the subject lot of this memo 19.11 I believe is what it is was intended to be merged with 2 adjoining lots and not to be retained for sale as a building lot at some future date so that's one thing that's on file. I don't have that particular map that showed the numbers that you were talking about but Mr. Chudiak's parcel was quite large and at several points in time he did divvy up several pieces of property. One of which was sold to the Milowskis which was larger than the 2-acre zoning which was required at that point in time. I think that was 1985. CHAIRWOMAN: Which parcel? MS. HILLIKER: If you have the map I'd be able to point it out to you. There were 2 parcels in question, one being Michaels lot and the other being the Milowski property that was sold. 19.8 is the number. That was the original parcel and it also abutted the property in question so at that point in time if the owner had changed his mind he could have done some changes at that time. Page 8 of 10 • Page 9 February 20, 2003 Southold Town Board of Appeals Regular Meeting Public Hearing Also at that time his attorney filed information regarding original covenants and this was also on the file and this was dated November 6th 1985. CHAIRWOMAN: This is for what lot? Er MS. HILLIKER: Once again I don't have that. It says proposed lot line changes,William Chudia the following is the language of a covenant which we intent to insert in any deed made by the Chudiak's to the owner of the adjacent parcel and we understand that any approval of by the planning board of the lot line changes will be subject to the requirement of the deeds which convey the Chudiak property contain this particular covenant and that's this particular parcel in question. Then lastly, my particular property got subdivided- I don't know the total acreage but it's now considered Tallwood Lane there were 4 parcels. CHAIRWOMAN: Your lot is what number? MS. HILLIKER: Don't know again. Hilliker. CHAIRWOMAN: You're north of this parcel? MS. HILLIKER: Where am I-west. Once again this abuts the particular piece of property in question and if indeed knowing what the zoning and new building construction requirements were this could have been part of this particular subdivision. It was not done at that point and time. My husband along with the other 3 people were mandated into the new 2-acre zoning new construction log. That leaves me to show you that this is really a substandard remaining lot and with the paper trail that it has, really should not be able to be built upon. With the letter regarding today the Building Department Notice of Disapproval for construction of a single family dwelling the basis of this NOD is that 73616 sq. ft. parcel is not permitted. With that and one final note as far as the property terrain itself I think someone should walk it if this is being considered at all. CHAIRWOMAN: I've done a site inspection on the property. MS. HILLIKER: It's several feet below it provides a natural drainage basis for the surrounding existing unchanged topoghophy and I think that altering the elevation in any way would result in destructive deversion of runoff to not only the surrounding residential area but also it would end up in Cox Neck Road. CHAIRWOMAN: Is there anyone else in the audience who would like to speak for or against the application? CAROL BECKER SWITOCHIA: Hello, Carol Becker Switochia. One of the parcels that my father's house was on and they did the lot line change he's the one who didn't buy his piece because he died before- Page 9 of 10 Page 10 February 20, 2003 Southold Town Board of Appeals Regular Meeting Public Hearing CHAIRWOMAN: Do you happen to know what lot and tax map number? I've got a little map here and I'm trying to find it. Let's put it this way; are you on Cox Neck Road? MS. SWITOCHIA: Yes. I'm next to Wells and Sidorock which is on the other side and he didn't buy his parcel either. = ; CHAIRWOMAN: You're the southerly- MS. SWITOCHIA: Easterly. CHAIRWOMAN: Half of Mr. Pisacano's lot. MS. SWITOCHIA: So my neighbor said yes. That's what happened that's why it wasn't bought. Also Wannit and Wells did the lot line change it was the understanding that you could not build on that property. When my father died, I didn't buy it because you couldn't build on it. I understood it to be that it could only be offered to the people in the front so like nobody could really buy it except if I did and then if Sidorock's bought their piece. You know we were the only ones that were entitled to buy it. Is that what I understand to be so? Also there's a letter and I don't know if you have this but it was from the Planning Board and everything stating that the lot line changed and it was not a buildable lot. They weren't going to that was the idea of why the neighbors really bought there because they didn't want anybody building behind them. CHAIRWOMAN: Throughout the years what happened after the lots weren't bought what happened with the lot? MS. SWITOCHIA: Nothing it was just there it was just like an extension of our property. It's just like a piece that's behind our property nothing, it's vacant. I don't understand the law and whatever it was my understanding that nobody could buy it to build on it. So who would buy it if they couldn't build on it. (MALE IN AUDIENCE)You had to have property adjoining it if you wanted to buy it. CHAIRWOMAN: It's like a ball of yarn every time you open it, it continues to drop little pieces. I think we have a little bit more understanding. Is there anyone else in the audience who would like to speak for or against the application? Seeing no hands I'm going to make a motion to adjourn this hearing until April 31d at 7:10 pm and Mr. Pisacano we will try to get everything we can, all the information we can from the Planning Board. In the mean time I'm sure both of your attorneys could assist you in helping to identify all of these lots in terms of meets and bounds, numbers as opposed to names, what the tax lot so we can see immediately what you are talking about and a deed description for an exact deed description for when it was first created. I'll make the motion. ***** Page 10 of 10 i• , GEN AVENUE in BEKw os SURVEY OF PROPERTY I SITUATED AT i N/O/F N/O/F In PHILLIP NEUDECK LUCY NEUDECK o MATTITUCK & LUCY NEUDECK & MICHAEL NEUDECK 4 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD DWELLING DWELLING •s Cs. SUFFOLK COUNTY, NEW YORK S.C. TAX No. 1000-113-07-19.11 P`1 CESSPOOLr7 SCALE 1"=50' N 89'00'20" E 125 00' SEPTEMBER 23, 1999 °!, OLE Et. 023.POUND n ,�,�, rcncc"I' JANUARY 18, 2001 UPDATED SURROUNDING LOT OWNERS NAMES _ o - •�• ��was I.ohFENCFEBRUARY 27, 2002 ADDED PROPOSED HOUSE ons o7E. APRIL 30, 2002 REVISED AS PER CORRECTION DEED 00 & ADD PROP WATER LINE N N 10 3S O a ' q AREA = 72,97 1673 Oc,4 44 sq. IT xac I , 7y �S E w0•'•3 r,) T 0 r��� WOODED CI t1i r WNL wru c A • 9 '°� r7 TEST HOLE DATA N �,(((E yy>x t�-0T I:'n RixNc amI > GEST rover am m AMwVM+n rrosrxsrE ON.w+vARE 24 2002) r i FDF'(% G I Y : 11' ,,h i n W / %`I�.� aro.M tow'WO w N 3. 5' f` Ii. S ref ���� • Tt "T q•3 I. pi o.•N. tiiif1:%,r4•:.ri:t ,(.1':>.df 1 1 r N GOND Pb 6.. ,r O!'E. O I • I FWNO CDNC BLOCS C v .•, ,4• PNL BlVOWN 004 TO UMW SUM 9P mo, A I 0d 00 0 R' O'C ,r+LM • VI • ig. !� b 1. Pr CO 1-3 . i a • le, 1E�'co • o sn �*� V I o 12 El a I i�/ P. ��ig a .8' yg , „4", i 2e. '1 910094 TL TTsa SOW- sat — H.s IfOTES S 89.00'20" 125.00' 1.ELEVATIONS ARE REFERENCED TO AN ASSUMED DATUM pemT s01 EXISTING ELEVATIONS ARE SHOWN THUS 500 NW N 2 MINIMUM SEPTIC K CAPACITIES 109 A I TO 4 BEDROOM HOUSE • IS 1.000 O . !• 0� ^,.—LtssPooL I TANK,6'LOHO,4'-7•WIDE,6'-7'DEEP UH 3 MINIMUM LtACHINO SYSTEM FOR A I TO 4 BEDROOM HOUSE IS R. b , p b o 300 sq If SIDEWALL AREA. 1 POOL. 12'DEEP.e'AN. V ' N/O/F PROPOSED EXPANSION POOL ' E`J THEODORE R WELLS, Jr % PROPOSED LEACITIND POOL o m & RITA WELLS F O DWELLING ® PROPOSED SEPTIC TANK .., f 4 THE LOCATION OF WELLS AND CESSPOOLS SHOWN HEREON ARE FROM FIELD n �'� O OBSERVATIONS AND/OR DATA OBTAINED FROM OTHERS O 41 24.0.37..., 71. • • N/O/F f JOSEPH P WANAT ELL a f, & ELEANOR WANAT w I OWE LUNG it J A A / 2c�e 1 e• wRK:.NwN ' '40 O •.E •J an l^� / • ON1 'Ft 1,.• W •'� fN SST DSEPARED II AC00 ,.•f.WRH THE MINIMUM a` ovLFO",• ' A ' As bA Br I >E�1' AS ADOPTED ' -. , �� • ! j� •'K STATE LAND N A 33'AO" e w W �, �� g$r"N �.�,\APP, , yo9 1 • AY i b EI`�yIG • es �GHT OF W 3i21e' c> Ir � �%I�¢ . .•E• S0' 14IDE eT o �`t' 0 �. r, / `1 •I,'Nns"uRN- NYS Ile No 49868 I-A11 F UNAUTHORIIID ALIETAII(X1 CR AD0r00/4 - o M$11/0/F JO BIS SETT 70 SEclo nas 20s 6THE NEN Y7NOORK°STATE EDucAnow jA EN6 1Z ,COPR Or TN6 SURVEY MW NOI REMIND Jose IR h A. Ingegno W X IR THE LAND SURVEYOR'S INKED SELL OR °' `°�` "`L `°0 La d Surveyor 74'55 'AD TO BE A VAUD TRUE COPY. S OERREIEA THE INDICATLO HEREIN 01011 RUN ONLY TO THE PERSON FOR WHOM THE SURVEY IS PREPARED,AND ON HIS BEHALF 10 TIE TITLE LIMING B6TfURON 1401W HEREON.ANS D Title Surreys-Subdivisions - 9fe Plans - Consfruehon Layout CERTIFIED TO TO THE ASSIGNEES or THE WONG NSR_ FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY OF NEW YORK 911100 cram-imamMENOT 1PANSfERALRL PHONE(631)727-2090 Fax (631)727-1727 MICHAEL PISACANO THE EXISTENCE OF RIGHT OF WAYS AND/OR EASEMENTS OF RECORD,IF OFFICES LOCATED AT MAILING ADDRESS ANY.NOT SHOWN ARE NOT GUARANTEED 1380 ROANOKE AVENUE P O Boo 1931 RNERIIEAD,Net York 11901 Riverhead,New York 11901-0965 22-034A 4111) �! ��, '� a /,oil OFOLit e. 74, 00 Town Hall,53095 Main Road :O�' ,, Fax(631)765-9502 P.O.Box 1179 �`oos Telephone(631)765-1802 Southold,New York 11971-0959 '= ^t ik®,i06 BUILDING DEPARTMENT ____ H� TOWN OF SOUTHOLD - ;!r NOV •B' 2 ,;+ I' MEMORANDUM a2,3O iO ; ; TO: The Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals ` - - - FROM: Damon Rallis, Permit Examiner,Building Department DATE: November 8, 2002 REQUIREMENTS FOR NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL Project: Michael Pisacano Location: 1457 Cox Neck Road, Mattituck SCTM# 100-Section 113 -Block 7-Lot 19.11 Questions have arisen regarding The Southold Town Building Department's Notice of Disapproval regarding the above referenced parcel. In order to clarify,please accept the following: The building department has disapproved Mr. Pisacano's requested to build a single family dwelling at the above referenced location based on Article II, Section 100- 24A, which states that, "A lot created by deed or town approval shall be recognized by the town if any one (1) of the following standards apply: The identical lot was created by deed recorded in the Suffolk County Clerk's office on or before June 30, 1983, and the lot conformed to the minimum lot requirement(s) set forth in Bulk Schedule as of the date of lot creation. There is no recorded deed for this property on record with the Suffolk County Clerk's office. The lot(s) in question is/are approved by the Southold Town Planning Board. The Southold Town Planning Board has previously stated that the lot is not a recognized lot. i • 0 The lot(s) in question is/are shown on a subdivision map approved by the Southold Town Board prior to June 30, 1983 The property is not shown on an approved subdivision map. The lot(s) in question is/are approved and/or recognized by formal action of the Board of Appeals prior to June 30, 1983. There is no record of a Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals decision regarding this property. The Southold Town Building Department does not require any further information to make its determination. Damo`vallis APPLICATION TO THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS For Office Use Only �� �® Fee: $ Filed By: Date Assigned/Assignment No, Office Notes: Parcel Location: House No. •-- Street Cox; Alta f4ae/ Hamlet Math C,/6 5yp- SCTM 1000 Section//3 Block , Lot(s)/lam,// Lot Size I,74aZone District YO/O&O I (WE) APPEAL THE WRITTEN DETERMINATION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DATED: !->lrne-ne loi 1/— 'i— dL Applicant/Owner(s): 4/ (C/ Oc% ?/5a ca-i-i o Maili / � Address: � �j ! qJ f U� Gt�l�� l 'v ( L/ ( 9 7,/ Telephone: x, S -- 91i/ NOTE: If applicant is not the owner,state if applicant is owner's attorney,agent,architect,builder,contract vendee, etc. Authorized Representative: Address: Telephone: Please specify who you wish correspondence to be mailed to, from the above listed names: fi Applicant/Owner(s) ❑ Authorized Representative ❑ Other: WHEREBY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENIED AN APPLICATION DATED FOR: Building Permit ❑ Certificate of Occupancy ❑ Pre-Certificate of Occupancy ❑ Change of Use ❑ Permit for As-Built Construction Other: Provision of the Zoning Ordinance Appealed. Indicate Article, Section, Subsection and paragraph of Zoning Ordinance by numbers. Do not quote the code. Article Section 100- Subsection A `z) Type of Appeal. An Appeal is made for: ❑ A Variance to the Zoning Code or Zoning Map. ❑ A Variance due to lack of access required by New York Town Law-Section 280-A. ❑ Interpretation of the Town Code, Article Section '1.Reversal or Other .?a.;fe,chwna/i of- , e&ifeinq es� /� /OO._ ,2,y 4. `2) "?7,e, /.+ /,, ��xsr/flr, / ' e?O''bz�tacl `u/ �`ti.' Soct,'fi„in! ar.4vr/04,,rric,7 fora peal1 has Ig has not been made with respect to this property UNDER Appeal 30(241-4 <ts RECEptfiFlit6 , ear.200,3. , rrz,�;er ci-7 cry la c'r. MAY 2 2003 La_ /„� c�,c vm'e ��t1cil�.� r 5c,7C et )9'6/X V ' ZONING BOUT: OF APPPAi_3 . , TOWN OF SOUTHOLD PROPERTY RECOto CARD 7 . /C9 470 — li \ '417 -• 19 Fil OWNER STREET /C./5` , VILLAGE DIST. SUB. LOT 7) it .. , I 1 i , fr -.1 p,_A P ,e41 ,I; / //V 7 , • - -- ,' ,.--, 1 L.4. i , : : m — c.- /,,f1/4,, (1.J6 ( ,,C., --- \-./ . j.C., -__,L ,,,),(li „ FORMER OWNER N E ACR. --,---S-o-- (,‘ ------------ .- --'.------v- ' ' ..c. _i_,-. ii,, --r- / 7 7 a., „Jr. .:: (,„.. ..... (2 1,n 7 • s 1 W TYPE OF BUILDING ( tileg P A4 ti (r::•,,‹` 4 i MO k Y:9 1-4/7 NiLLOs•ALS 14, I' -e.S11 0! ..) 30,J ..,•.?(..p..7., RES. /0,2, c) SEAS. VL. FARM i, COMM. CB. MICS. Mkt. Value 32'91 _....., _... 7- ,5(i 9 -lc Cc-1 i LAND IMP. TOTAL DATE REMARKS p . 15-6 0 , .,,, , 8/2,/ -)-- v.-,, Act c.:1-5 kr-,54.:)- 5ctr-ks 4-'. CI:treAL...d.- -32,9 15 -.14- ee,- , „ 7, 7 3” :7 -2) o 0 i ///st-i2.1,- a/,,q/scg? i....i/or-, 4 l,.> (-) L.--,Z.6::-.i7, -- ;11- , 6 9 0 6 / c, Tir 0 d ,-. /.2_vy 7 =5-7 i cy/k 47,j0 _ f ,t ., 41-, F, 4 i C 1,k k ,j,-, B, .,-4.,,,-.,,, 4 &6-0 kr',0• ,4 3 c.,,,,, , --1-/?:/i() 5/57A,el • i-Pk,c),-P., 4 f*'''7" s 7 3 7' *7 3'2-- -CI-1 Li(-J t.--f it-- i.-.7., ii.,/,2 ,.t(.--;,cot-(.... (7-' F,,,,.:),-,--•, - -.7..N) /, la 6 - CI k.-.),>1, // / 0 65 . ,.50 U /5 4 0 6 6-4-' .'3,/S: i 602 7 / 4/6. /37673 ot ..2'-' 57/CA — C 0\1-4 1"-) 1--1 IC'i -?,.. r ive.,,...i..- ci1 .,.-- .: ,1 - S i 45 ov.- (54)' A---r- ) / 0 5' 0-6) 4,74 5-6'1 //5)Ye--'.' t-/..3 0/(3 LC/3'7(i/ ,95/, ,...4-,)e, i7rg;'3 (:-, vifq/1..;''', 1,..,91c.; Q 5- k /:"- . 'q‘'1' 0 ... /lc' fn(c) / /a 4-- s 23,/g-3 d 5 .1-%. x 2il -? 0-4) 'CZ,.964-- *• •(,?,CtliEr).„) (5.00..q<) , , t I / Lo 0 CD / 'ILL i 65 v . ... ... ... # , V9/0 ' -ej S4p ( 4, Cc-cue S0 tEc:., S . - s--1--e, .-- ---,...-',..Q 7A/8'dj'' 1-9 -="21 1='.. --2-4-- "" . PI;4 1,z 3 4-, 4a -4-e, M I lov./ ki - 24000 Tillable _r_.?.._-., ..... .-- 2.41 -4.1„1 6.-761-60Z-- FRONTAGE ON WATER ./ 5._L. - ,... 7,6' 4,..1.560 CX-19 4 ICJ •- '11- 6.432-1,_ -cip 41‘-fr-t+ Woodland ,, ' -6 -6 1 1205 FRONTAGE ON ROAD 340/. .,;*-- tn•47* Meadowland I DEPTH (07/0/Qq_ 2_11 ' lf10 Aiul+dsiliayskSk4- r,-5 A/C House Plot BULKHEAD 1 ,0,W) -- Total . 1 26-(k..)' i .- 1- -T4P-. - ClimeAlckk .(t.et,tutytt akmilv5 4 cr‘:tii S44,--,-", --Ire'lb ---' .0._ I D;Dl ADM9np0 .i9w11o0 '8 'O 8 'NH .ioold puz SUu001 wood uo!}oaaaa:{ 01TDd '238 .ioold ;s 1 swoo21 tooj adA1 96DaDD '210 400H aDDld 9.1!d ADMazaa.i8 '211 ys!u!d .io!aa.4ul sIIDM '4x3 ya,iod •>1 sioold 4uawasDB tpJod al;au!0 4408 _ uo!;Dpunod uo!sua;x3 uo!sua;x3 uo!sua4x3 '6PI8 'W W12:11 210-100 Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals Application of Michael Pisacano S CTM#1000-113-7-19.11 APPLICABLE LAW Southold Town Code Lot Recognition 100-24 A lot created by deed or town approval shall be recognized by the town if any of the following standards apply and if the lots have not merged: (1)The identical lot was created by deed recorded in the Suffolk County Clerk's office on or before June 30, 1983, and the lot conformed to the minimum lot requirements set forth in Bulk Schedule AA2 as of the date of lot creation. (2)The lot(s) in question is/ar'e approved by the Southold Town Planning Board. (3)The lot(s) in question is/are shown on a subdivision map approved by the Soouthold Town Board prior to June 30, 1983. (4)The lot(s) in question is/are approved and/or recognized by formal action of the Board of Appeals prior to June 30, 1983. (5)All lots which are not recognized by the Town pursuant to the above section shall not receive any building permits or other development entitlements. (6)all lots are subject to the merger provisions of 100-25 Merger 100-25 (C) Exceptions (1) The nonconforming lot has a minimum size of 40,000 square feet V J, MAY 2 2 2003 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS The Planning Board Approved this lot by the Action it took approving the Lot Line changes: May 1985: William Chudiak advises the Planning Board that he had a long standing agreement with the properties fronting on the west side of Cox Neck Road; "Zabicky", "Becker", "Wells" and"Wanat". He requests authorization to convey his land to the adjacent parcels without formal application. The Planning Board directed him to make 4 formal applications in order for the Planning Board to take action on the lot line changes. On November 6, 1985 Mr. Chudiak's attorney, Emil DePetris provided language for the Covenant to be filed with each conveyance. He writes.that"we intend to insert in any deed made by Chudiaks to the owner of the adjacent parcel [the covenant] and we understand that any approval by the Planning Board of the lot line changes will be subject to the requirement that the deeds ...contain the covenant" (Exhibit A) On December 16, 1985 the Planning Board granted by separate'resolution a lot line change, @12,500 sq.ft. of vacant land, from Chudiak to the Wells adjacent improved parcel. The Wells property(SCTM#1000-113-07-19.19)was made more conforming in that the Well's 1/4 acre improved parcel was enlarged to 25,000 sq.ft. (a little over %2 acre). The Board by separate application and separate resolution granted Wanat (SCTM# 1000-113-07-19.18) similar relief making the Wanat improved parcel 33,052 sq.ft. (also a little over Y2 acre). Both Wells and Want have a covenant that the parcels (improved and lot:line)merge and are considered one parcel. With,regard to Becker and Zabicky the Planning Board granted separate lot line change applications. However,Becker became ill and could not consummate the agreement and Zabicky had sold his property on 11/1/82, Chudiak had no agreement with Siderakis (Zabicky had never told Chudiak of the sale) The Lot Line changes with regard to Becker and Zabicky were never submitted to the Planning Board for final approval (endorsement by Chairman on the map) and those two lot line changes did not get completed. Consequently the retained lot remained, as altered and created by Planning Board action of December 16, 1985. The parcel was identified by the County as SCTM#1000-113-07-19.11 and taxed by the Town. In 2001 the Building Inspector recognized the lots and was prepared to issue a building permit upon submission of plans and Health Department approved survey. (Exhibit B) 1 - MAY 2 2 2003 '' ZONING !OAFi® OF APPEALS Response to Valerie Scopaz's Memorandum to the File: The following inaccuracies appear in her Memo. to the file: Point I. It is true that the Milowski parcel (1000-113-7-19.10)was created in 1984 by the Planning Board, as a set-off from balance of Chudiak parcel. The Chudiak and Milowski parcels are bisected by a right-of-way. It is also true that Milowski applied for 280A approval and the ZBA granted approval in Appeal 3243. However, the lot line changes did not require action by the ZBA. The Chudiak remainder parcel, now Pisacano, fronts Cox Neck Road and does not require 280A approval. Point II It is true that the resolution and approval of the Planning Board required the conveyed land to be merged to the adjacent improved parcel. However, there is no requirement that the balance of the Chudiak land be sterilized. Lot line changes do not result in a sterilization of the land, the lot line is a boundary line alteration which reduces the size of one lot for the benefit of adding land to the other lot. The lots being made more conforming were only 1/4 acre in size, after the lot line change they were still only %2 acre. Meanwhile the Chudiak parcel, even after the lot line change,was 1.7 acres. Point-III The willingness of Siderakis to purchase the land in 1988 (3 years after the lot line change)would have left Chudiak with 1/4 acre, no indication is given that Becker could complete the transfer. Valerie Scopaz's memo makes no mention of the fact that if Siderakis lot line change was completed that Becker's property we be left. Planning Board action would have created a %2 acre remainder parcel (Becker's land). Point IV No additional building lots are created: the lot line changes along Cox Neck Road are already improved and the Chudiak parcel could always be improved with one house. The lot lines merely reduced the size of the existing buildable parcel for the benefit of enlarging the 12,500 square foot lots along Cox Neck Road (Wells &Wanat) Point V Valerie Scopaz wrote a memorandum to the file. She did not address it to me as Chudiak's attorney or to Pisacano's attorney, Paul Caminetti. She knew that we believed that her position was not rational. She relied on the recollection of two board members as to the"intention of the Planning Board"but not the language in the zoning code, the documents in the file, and the property rights of landowners. Even the building department disagreed with her position. She forwarded her memorandum to the Health Department objecting to Health Department approval after the regulatory department had granted Pisacano Health Department approval. The Health Department retracted their approval and forced the matter to the Board of Review for a final determination. After a full hearing e Health Department granted approval to build on the subject parcel(Exhibit C) 6 WAY 2 2 2003 P MMHG 0 .p 9 OF APPEALSS The Building Department,when this parcel went to contract, recognized the lot(Ed Forrester's affidavit) see Exhibit B I met with Ed Forrester at the commencement of my representation of the Chudiak family. I was initially retained to obtain all the regulatory approvals. Thereafter, Mr. Pisacano went to contract to purchase the property subject to regulatory approvals. He had been assured by the Health Department that his approval was forthcoming so he closed on the property. He is severely financially impacted by the Planning Board's action. The Planning Board wishes to unlawfully sterilize the property. MAY 2 2 2003 OV 7 1985 SCT-TFINBEB.G, SCHNEPS, DE PETRIS & pE PETRTS• " • 3 ATTORNEYS AT LAW / �-- 220 ROANOKE AvEN JE POST OFFICE BOX 699 SHEPARD M.SCHEINBERG RIVERHEAD,NEW YORK MURRAY B. SCHNEPS 11901 ISIDORE SCHEINBERG EMIL F. DE PETRIS 1900-1985 RICHARD E. DE PETRIS (516)727-5100 JANET GEASA November 6, 1985 Town Planning. Board Town of Southold Southold, New York 11971 Att: Ms. Dianne M. Schultze Secretary Re: Proposed lot line changes (William Chudiak) Dear Ms'. Schultze: In accordance with our telephone conversation of today, the . following is the language of a covenant which we intend to insert in any deed made. by the Chudiaks' to the owner of the adjacent parcel and we understand that any approval by the Planning .Board of the lot line changes will be subject to the requirement that the deeds which convey the Chudiak property contain this covenant: "This -conveyance is subject to the following covenant and restriction which shall run with the land: The parcel hereby conveyed shall merge with premises of the grantee contiguous thereto on the east and the ' 2 parcels shall thereupon be deemed to be one parcel for purposes of the zoning ordinance of the Town of Southold, so that under the present provisions of the zoning ordinance of the Town of Southold only one • residence, together with accessory structures, may be constructed and maintained upon the said two parcels • which are being merged into one parcel. " Very truly yours, 7 Emil F. DePetris EFD:sr 116;EIVFD I ,\A� MAY 2 2 2003 ' Z2M 0�Ai , 1-�. , A PPE it A4S 7 STATE OF NEW YORK: COUNTY OF SUFFOLK: ss: Edward Forrester being duly sworn, deposes and says: 1. That I was the Chief Zoning Administrator for the Town of Southold from 1997 through August 2001; 2. That as Chief Zoning Administrator I was responsible for the review of building - permits for zoning compliance and approval; 3. That I am familiar with a property formerly owner by William Chudiak, located on the west side of Cox Neck Road, Mattituck,NY 11952, SCTM#1000-113-7- 19.11; 4. That on or about June 2001 I met with Patricia C. Moore Esq. who was representing Mr. Chudiak, and I discussed the subject property with Ms. Moore; 5. She showed me the Tax Map,the lot line applications made to the Planning Board of the Town of Southold, and a current survey. It was clear to me that the subject lot is the balance of the land remaining with Chudiak and is a result of the lot line approvals granted to Mr. Chudiak in 1985. The Planning Board created the subject parcel. 6. Thereafter, upon information and belief, one of Chudiak's neighbor's made inquiries at the Planning Department and Valerie Scopaz, the planner, asserted her opinion that the lot was not intended to be developed. 7. Mrs. Moore asked to meet with Valerie Scopaz, myself and the Town Attorney to resolve the issue. The Town Attorney did not attend the meeting but I made myself clear to Ms. Scopaz that I disagreed with her and that it was my opinion that the owner of the parcel was entitled to a building permit. 8. The surrounding lots were created by Planning Board action, as was the subject parcel. The lot is over 1.7 acres and fronts on Cox Nk Road. The Chudiak family could obtain a building permit upon the submission of Health Department approval and plans, the property was entitled to a building permit 9. In the interest of justice, a building permit should be issued for construction of a mpg z a. •.,- 'e c e ce on this property. MAY 2 2 2003 '-s l.a•a�,, €394 ® APPEALS o� P. 7 10. I make this affidavit knowing that the Southold Zoning Board will rely on the truth of the statements made (7 ----... Sworn to before mg this i--)-. day of / -e 4— , 2003 ( --7 _rte Notary Public PATRICIA C.NIOORE Notary Public,State of New York Suffolk County-No.48616613 Com = mission=Expires June 16, MAY 2 2 2003 ��gg(�`� (p{pp����qq ryry pg a®P4�lAtl OEOF APPA J P. )UNTY OF SUFFOLK Robert J. Gaffney £U"FOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES LINDA,MERMELSTEIN,M.D.,M.P.H. Aciing Cartwitsiarter March 28,2003 Mr.Michael Pisaca no PO Box 193t Southold,NY 11971 Subject: Board of Review Hearing-January 9,200,9 Report of Findings and Recommendation of the Board;;f Review Regarding: Ric-o2-0o52 Pisacaiio residence-w/s/o Cox Neck Road,v 1583 ft.s/a Bergen Avenue,Southold- t/a Southold SCHai: #1000-113-7-1 ,11 Dear Mr.;isaeano: Enclosed is a copy of the Board of Review's tinding.,recommendations and determination concerning the subject application. Based on the information submitted,the Board granted the request for variance with the provisions indicated in the determination_ The granting of this waiver does not imply that your application will be automatically approved. !tis your responsibility to ensure that your application is cornplet2;otherwise,your Jpprova:will be subject to unnecessary delay. Very truly yours, Walter Dawydiak,Jr..PE,J.D. Actin Charman,Board of Re"iew WD/kr enclosure, C: Board of Review File Southold Town Planning Board James Bagg-Planning Department Theodore Wells Paul Caminiti,Esq. Patricia Moore,Esq. Valerie Szopaz--Town of Southold Douglas Feldman,PE--SCDF€S Roy Dragotta,Esq.-Count/Attorney *.Bogard of Review o SC Dept.of Health Services . 'tag Rabro Drive East A,Hauppauge,NY U788-4290 t631)853-3084- Fax(6307 853-3075 MAY 2 2 2003 /• ZONING 0A ® �t APPEALS 1 SUB OLK COUNT-Y DFPA.RTME.2VT OF PliFALTH SERVICES DTVLSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AR/ICLE,2,SECTION 22,0,SUPOLE.COUNTY SANITARY;:C DE *4E4E*** , : TO: Linda Itileaare_sEein,M.D.,M.P.H..,Acting Conlmi,sssoner FROM: Waiter Dawydiak,Jr.,P,E„J.L.,Acting Chairman,Board of Review SUBJECT Report of Findings and Recormmendadons of the Review 13oard Regarding: Rao-o2-0052 Pisacano residence—w/s/o Cox Neck Road,z.1583 ft.s/o Bergen Avenue,Southold_,ti o Southold--SCT&I: #1000-113`7-29.11 . r nt rli:ltaea Pisacano PO l3ox 1931, Southold,DIY 11971 . a December 1$, 0O2 XiE.ARlaira_p_ EEs January 9,2003 S.TATEROUNdlitthat no developer Article 6,Section 760-6o2, -k-'2 of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code states shall engage in the creation of a development,or dispose of any parcel in the development,or erect any building in the development,unless Suffolk County Department of Health Services (SCDHS;the Department)approval has been obtained for the existing or proposed water supply and sewage disposal facilities in the development The applicant proposes.to construct a single- family dwelling on a parcel of land that was subdivided without the approval of the Suffolk County Department of Health Services(SCDHS). z. Proposed development of a 1.68-acre parcel with a single-faintly residence, 2. Site in Groundwater Management Zone#IV. •, Public water was not available at the time of application. Test well data shows that water quality meets Department standards, With the lifting of a Suffolk County Water Authority moratorium,public water may be available to the p&rcei. 4. Depth to groundwater is greater. than 17 feet(ft.). 5. Soils are sandy. 6. Distance to nearest public water supply wells is 4,000 ft. (Laurel Lake Welifleld). 7. Through a complex series of transactions and events,the applicant now finds himself the owner of a`parcel of land with a separate Suffolk County'ray Map identification)number (1Ooo-113-749.11;hereinafter"Lot 19•7-f),as shown on the current Suffolk County Tax Maps. However,the lot is not recognized by the Department,because a subdivision application had never been made to the Department to create it. Before addressing the waiver request,we will summarize relevant subdivision activity to put Lit 19.11 in context. k _ MAY 2 2 2003 :TQrkabv BOAR©OF APPEALS / / Linda Mermelstein,M.D.,M.P.H.,Acting Corn_rnlssioner Hearing Date: January 9, 2003 Subject: Report of Findings and Recommendation of the Board of Review Regarding: R10-02-0052-Pisacano residence-w/s!o Cox Neck Road,..:11.1,583 ft.sic) Bergen Avenue, Southold-t/o Southold-•SCTM: 01000-113-7-19m 4, .A. �•L',-�D r ING$ iP FACTS(conned.) 8.As presented by the Department's staff,the subject application concerns Lot ig.il;which is one lot of an"unapproved four-lot subdivision"(i.e.,four contiguous lots which were not approved for subdivision by the Department). On the existing Suffolk County Tax Maps (SCTMs),these are lots 19.10,19.11,19.18,and 19.19(all with SCTM prefix-1000-113-7). 9. All four lots comply with Article 6 density requirements,and would have been approvable by the SCDHS if a subdivision application were presented prior to the premature creation of the unapproved subdivision. Average lot size is 53,717 sq.ft.,which is 268%(assuming public water is available)or 1.34% (if private wells are used)of Department standards in Hydrogeologic Zone IV(20,000 square foot minimum lot size when served by public water; 40,000 sq.ft. minimum lot size when private wells are used). to. Because the parcels are in separate ownership,and the applicant cannot join all parties in a subdivision application,he cannot meet the requirements of Section 760.602 of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code. 11. The 1981 Suffolk County Tax Maps are the basis of exemptions("grandfathering")of single -and separate lots which predate Article 6 subdivision requirements. The four lots in question are actually comprised of portions of three Sots on the 1981 Tax Maps:then lots 17, 18,and part of 12(all with SCrM prefix 1000-113-7). As such,the proposed lot is not exempt from Article 6 density requirements. la. The Town of Southold has written a letter,dated January 7,2003(V.Scopaz to W. Dawydiak),opposing the regLested variance,for reasons described below. As back-up,the letter contains an August Is,2001 memorandum to file(from V. Scopaz). 13. As described in the August 13, 2001 Scopaz memorandum,the first lot of the unapproved four-lot subdivision was created when the subdivision of Lot 19.10 was approved by the Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals(ZBA)in the 1984"Chucliak application." A Town ZBA determination was required,as Lot t9.10 did not have road frontage,as required by Town Law Sec.280A(access). A condition of the ZBA approval of the Chudiak application was that any future subdivision of the pare$would require re-application for a Sec.280A access variance. 14. The Chudiak application created a long,narrow remnant(hereinafter"remnant")of former lot 12,bounded on the west by a right-of-way and new lot 19.10,and on the east by lots 15 through 18(as shown on the 1981 SCTM). Excluding the right of way,this remnant area totals 68,00o sq.ft. 15. The August iW memorandum describes the history of the remnant parcel. In 1985,Mr. Chudiak submitted four separate lot line change applications for the remnant parcel. The apparent intent was to merge portions of the remnant parcel with parcels to the east(via sale to adjacent owners);new building lots would not be created. Planning Board approval for each of the lot line changes was issued on December 16,1985. As a condition of approval, each separate approval required that every new lot be merged with contiguous parcels to the MAY 2 2 2003 ONING BOARD OF APPEALS • Linda Merrelstein,M D.,'M.P.H.,Acting Cotnnussioner Hearing Date: January it, 2ooY Subject: Report of Findings and Recommendation of the.&,pard of Review Regarding: Rio-o3-oO 2 Pisaeano residence -w/s/o C x Neck Road.4;1 i&3 ft,sjo Bergen A iemta,Sout -t/c►Southold- fc nt"(1.) 15. (sot t'd.) east. No new dwea,Ling unit's were to be allowed as a :es-tut of any-merger. Each lot line :.Marge would become effective.,as of endorsement by the Z A Dohab m zi. This endorsement would occur on receipt of amended :.rveys,as well its evidence of proper coven xt3 and restrictions concerning the merger and sterilization j,Le.,no PAM d'Areilic4S units permitted), i6, The southerly pair of lots(-18,8oc sq,ft.and 12,500 rt.)werF.,indeed, conveyed to adjacent owners,merged,and sterilized, The result , these two lot litre changes is lots 14.18 and 19.19,or.,the 2002 Suffolk County Tax Map, 'il'tlse are two lots in question in the four- lot unapproved subdivision. 17. The northerly two lot;:were 26,000 sq.ft.and t2,5+oto sq.ft. (they arc.now part of Lot 19.11, along with a pOrt.ksl3\/ fC i glYc= `way). Tha-113''opa memo to-file sr esti'that :negotiations were underway to sell these two lots to adjacent owners. However,these negotiations'r':e"e never brought to fruition, Hence,the lot line ct'ange&never occurred 8. The Town of Southold apparently contends that,by-firttte of the parties'intent and the .terms and conditions of the various approvals,the northerly lots shotrldbe considered as "sterilized"by the SCDIIS. 19. The applicant now holds title to the last piece of the remnant parcel:lot 14,17. Itis comprised of the two northerly lots($7,5oo sq.ft.), as well as the right of way,for a total of 1.7 acre. The applicant contends that the failure of predecessors in interest:to consummate proposed lot 11ne changes does not extinguish leis prerogative to seek to develop the parcel. No evidence was presented that restrictive covnants Ii ave e-er been filed on any portion of lot 1.9.12. DlilaiRmINAXIVN It was a 3 te,o decision of the Board of Review C"Board";i to apprc s e the request for variance. The Board is not unsympathetic to the Town's Intentions to sterilize the remnant parcel. However,the Board has no indication that Sanitary Code development rgl:ts were,in fact,II) any way extinguished.by the four separate approvals of conditional lot line changes. While two of the lot line changes were c nsut mated,the other S,No were not,leaving one lot wbioln clearly complies wita Article 6 density requirements. The legal status of Lot 19.11.with re. reeYt to Townjurisdiction. is a matter appropriately left to the Town. With respect to SCDH$jurisdiction;however,long-standing review prii,cipi s Can. and must,be applied, in the subject case,the-unapproved four-lot subdivision'"clearly complies with Article d density requirements It would have been approved,if proposed to the County before its premature creation, The Depa ttuient:has,on several occasions,dealtvwth owners of individual lots in unapproved subdivisions. When joinder of all owners within the subdivision is not possible,and the subdivision tithe}viiee meets SCDHS requirements,sabltvls1O31 require;nents havebeen waived., absent ether special circumstances which warrant a res..,-:to the contrary. Ultimately,the Win MAY 2 2 2003 ZONIbiri -P0AF1D r3F APPEALS 1 4 • • . 1 Linda Mermelstein, .la,,1.4.P.H.,Acting Commissioner Hearing Date: January 9,2003 Subject: Report of Findings and 1l.econimendation of the Board of Review Regarding: Rio-02-0052-.Pisccano residence-w/s/o Cox Neck Road, 1683 R.s,'o Bergen Avenue,Southold-tic►Southold-S"' _ M000-113-7-19.21 4 • iC."Emr'a1 (Boned.) SCDHS mustevaluate each application on its own merits,and within.the Department's jurisdictiorL: the Sanitary Code,and a =otiated water supply and sewage disposal requirements. In this particular case,the.applicant will need to connect to public water,if available. If public water is not available to the applicant at the time of SCDHS approval, then the applicant shall covenant.in language acceptable to the County Attorney,that the parcel will connect to public water when it is available. As per Section 760-6o9 of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code(Sanitary Code),the approval of the Variance is in--arirnony nd intent of the Sanitary Code,to protect groundwater and drinking water supplies,surface water and other natural resources,and public • health,safety and welfare. In compliance with Section 760-639(1)(2),the proposed variance is in general conformity with the Sanitary Code, 'the variance should net impair groundwater, surface water,and thinking water supplies,and,as such,is consistent with criteria W pecified in Section 760-609(1)(h). I • Walter Dawydiak,Jr.,P.E.,J.D. Date Acting Chairman_,Board of Review L 9,4 • MAY 2 2 2003 - . - �o- Nt6!3Ory APPEALS P /3 v._� Page 2 of 3 - Appeal Application Part A: AREA VARIANCE REASONS (attach extra sheet as needed): (1) An undesirable change Will not be produced in the CHARACTER of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties, if granted, because: 9 6-/Zed) (2) The benefit sought by the applicant CANNOT be achieved by some method feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance, because: (3) The amount of relief requested is not substantial because: (4) The variance will NOT have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district because: (5) Has the variance been self-created? ( ) Yes, or ( ) No. If not, is the construction existing, as built? ( ) Yes, or ( ) No. (6) Additional information about the surrounding topography and building areas that relate to the difficulty in meeting the code requirements: (attach extra sheet as needed) This is the MINIMUM that is necessary and adequate, and at the same time preserves and protects the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety, and welfare of the community. ( ) Check this box and complete PART B, Questions on next page to apply USE VARIANCE STANDARDS. (Please consult your attorney.) Otherwise, please proceed to the signature and notary area below. ignature of Appellant or Authorized Agent Sworn t• - - = me this (Agent must submit Authorization from Owner) g if Cr•ay�of po,of�r / 2003. otary Public) PATRICIA C.MOORS Nary Public,State of New York ZBA App 9/30/02 Suffolk Count es June �, 4i 6 .,..— MAY 2 2 2003 zoNI G BOARD OF APPEALS PROJECT DESCRIPTION (Please include with Z.B.A. Application) Applicanl(s). Ad/L_Ch Ad/Ch (id 45 a ca/!_o I. If building is existing and alterations/additions/renovations are proposed /V/4 A. Please give the dimensions and overall square footage of extensions beyond existing building: Dimensions/size: _ Square footage: B. Please give the dimensions and square footage of new proposed foundation areas which do not extend beyond the existing building: Dimensions/size: Square footage: II. If land is vacant: (4.0-r-) Please give dimensions and overall square footage of new construction. Dimension/size. Z 3 /25— X 300 Square footage: ''73 (�/(A Height: III Purpose and use of new construction requested in this application: N/A . IfEvr-c�vrtcer r' Uirid i Le -C ' IV Additional information about the surrounding contours or nearby buildings that relate to the difficulty in meeting the code requirement(s) at c a,ctc r7t,e /Jrppsere f' frden c., V. Please submit seven (7) photos/sets after staking corners of the proposed new construction. 7/02 Please note. Further changes, after submitting the above information, must be placed in writing and may require a new Notice of Disapproval to show changes to the initial plans. If additional time is needed, L-RFCFIr, contact our office, or please check with Building Department (765-1802) or Appeals Department ... a5-'809) if you are not sure. Thank you MAY 2 2 2003 ZONING BOARD OP APPEALS QUESTIONNAIRE FOR FILING WITH YOUR Z.B.A.APPLICATION A. Is the subject premises listed on the real estate market for sale? b � p � Yes ❑No /12 c thac/ -/ Se Ce i7o l0`a�s ' d B. Are there any proposals to change or alter land contours? ❑Yes V No C. 1)Are there any areas that contain wetland grasses? 2)Are the wetland areas shown on the map submitted with this application? N74 3)Is the property bulk headed between the wetlands area and the upland building area? AllA 4)If your property contains wetlands or pond areas,have you contacted the office of the Town Trustees for its determination of jurisdiction? A//A D. Is there a depression or sloping elevation near the area of proposed construction at or below five feet above mean sea level? i//A (If not applicable, state "n/a") E. Are there any patios, concrete barriers,bulkheads or fences that exist and are not shown on the survey map that you are submitting? Aro n d, (If none exist, please state "none") F. Do you have any construction taking place at this time concerning your premises? IVB If yes, please submit a copy of your building permit and map as approved by the Building Department. If none,please state. G. Do you or any co-owner also own other land close to this parcel? /1/'o If yes,please explain where or submit copies of deeds. n H. Please list present use or operations conducted at tl is parcel PSS G ij2(zg0 and proposed use NoSecteo/id./ /2 Authorized Signature and Date Vi $r MAY 2 2 2003 i i";,MACT BOARD OF APPEALS 1 APPLICANT TRANSACTIONAL DISCLOSURE FORM The Town of Southold's Code of Ethics prohibits conflicts of interest on the part of Town officers and employees. The purpose of this form is to provide information, which can alert the Town of possible conflicts of interest and allow it toot take whatever action is necessary to avoid same. YOUR NAME: M e chi l"c Pe.s cail-o (Last name, first name, middle initial, unless you are applying in the name of someone else or other entity, such as a company If so, indicate the other person or company name) NATURE OF APPLICATION (Check all that apply.) Tax Grievance • Variance Change of Zone Approval of Plat Exemption from Plat or Official Map Other �C If"Other", name the activity: Do you personally, (or through your company, spouse, sibling, parent, or child) have a relationship with any officer or employee of the Town of Southold? "Relationship" includes by blood, marriage, or business interest. `Business interest" means a business, including a partnership, in which the Town officer or employee has even a partial ownership of (or employment by) a corporation in which the Town officer or employee owns more than 5% of the shares YES NO X If you answered "YES", complete the balance of this form and date and sign where indicated. Name of person employed by the Town of Southold Title or position of that person Describe that relationship between yourself (the applicant) and the Town officer or employee. Either check the appropriate line A through D (below) and/or describe the relationship in the space provided The Town officer or employee or his or her spouse, sibling, parent, or child is (check all that apply)' A) the owner of greater than 5% of the shares of the corporate stock of the applicant (when the applicant is a corporation), B) the legal or beneficial owner of any interest in a non-corporate entity (when the applicant is not a corporation); C) an officer, director, partner, or employee of the applicant, or D) the actual applicant DESCRIPTION OF RELATIONSHIP MAY 2 2 2003 Submitted this .9‘15rdayo /9-y',, 03 Signature. Pi int Name./11(c-HAC9 NO l zoinii _so A M OF APPEALS] MEMORANDUM SUPREME COURT, SUFFOLK COUNTY I.A.S.PART 27 X • By: Ralph F. Costello, J.S.C. CONSTANTINE IOANNOU, • Dated: March IA 2002 • Petitioner, • Index No. 01-11586 • • Mot. Seq. #001--MG - against- • CDISPSUBJ SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD, : Return Date: 6-7-01 Adjourned: 6-12-01 Respondent. • • X PATRICIA C. MOORS, ESQ. SMITH,FINKELSTEIN, LUNDBERG, Attorney for Petitioner ISLER and YAKABOSKI, LLP 51020 Main Road Attorneys for Respondent Southold,New York 11971 456 Griffing Avenue P.O. Box 389 Riverhead,New York 11901-0203 Petitioner commenced this Article 78 proceeding seeking a judgment reversing and annulling a resolution by respondent,Southold Town Planning Board("Planning Board"),dated April 16,2001,denying petitioner's application for subdivision. Because,the resolution is contrary to law, the petition is granted, - and the matter is remitted to the Planning Board for further consideration of petitioner's application. Petitioner alleges that on or about December 15, 1981 he acquired real property identified on the Suffolk County Tax Map as parcels #1000-23-1-14.7 and #1000-23-2-5.6. He further alleges that on February 26,2001,he applied for approval of a three-lot subdivision of a 6.8 acre lot,and that the proposed subdivision was proper for the Town of Southold's R80 Zoning District,which requires that each lot have a minimum of 80,000 square feet,referred to as"2 acre"zoning. The Planning Board resolved to deny his application on the basis that the lots had been subject to a condition, imposed on the prior owner in a determination adopted June 6, 1977, that no further subdivision of the property be allowed. Petitioner alleges that he was a bona fide purchaser of the property, having no actual or constructive notice of the condition, since the condition was not set forth or noted on the subdivision map that was filed with the County Clerk. Petitioner also alleges that the imposing ofthe condition was unenforceable legislative action by the Planning Board, and that the denial of his application'constituted a"taking"within the meaning of the State and Federal Constitutions. P requirements _ - The Planning Board counters that it complied with the filing that exi to -in 1977- pursuant to Town Law § 276 (2) (e). It also alleges that the restriction against further sub•ivisi q I.!raS 2 2003 • zoN1NG BOARD of APPEALS y • Ioannou v Southold Town Planning Board Index No. 01-11586 Page No. 2 contained in minutes of the Planning Board and its public records, affording petitioner constructive notice. The Planning Board also raises objections in point of law that the claims are barred by the thirty-daystatute • of limitations under Town Law § 282, that the condition was agreed to by petitioner's predecessor-in- interest, that the condition is a matter of public record, and that the denial of the instant subdivision application was accordingly proper. Generally,towns have no inherent power to enact or enforce zoning regulations since they exercise such authority solely by legislative grant. In the absence of a legislative delegation of power, their action is ultra vires and void (Matter of Kamhi v Planning Bd. of Town of Yorktown, 59 NY2d 385, 389, 465 NYS2d 865 [1983];Riegert Apts. Corp. v Planning Bd. of Town of Clarkstown, 57 NY2d 206,209,455 NYS2d 558 [19821). • As described in Marx v Zoning Bd_of Appeals (137 AD2d 333, 337, 529 NYS2d 330, 332-333 [1988], quoting 4 Rathkopf,Zoning,and Planning § 64.02, at 64-16 [4th ed.]): "Zoning restrictions are principally designed to separate the uses to which land in various areas of the community may be put as well as to regulate density ofpopulation and the degree of proximity of buildings and structures by prescribing the size of the lots on which permitted uses may be operated and the location of buildings and structures on those lots. Subdivision regulations are employed to ensure that individual lots intended to be developed for such permitted uses may safely be used for such purposes and that the use of specific parcels as zoned will not impose the burden of expense upon the community or create health or other hazards." There is a dichotomy between the zoning and planning functions of local government(see, W.), the former commonly delegated by statute to the Board ofAppeals or Town Board,the latter to a Planning Board. Even where there has been a delegation of authority to a Planning Board to vary the statutory zoning requirement, such delegation must be a limited one,since"[i]f the Planning Board were given unlimited discretion to[do so], it would-be a usurpation of the functions of the Board of Appeals and of the [Town] Board" (Daly v • Eagan, 77 Misc 2d 279, 280-281, 353 NYS2d 845, 847 [1972]). Thus, where a Planning Board, in conducting review under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA), imposed a maximum height restriction lower than that required under the local zoning ordinance and SEQRA did not authorize such a on, the ction was deemed to be operly within the thority TownBoardratherthanthePlaanningBoard(MatteroprMacchio vPlanninuBd. ofT wn Zoe 'E o a[r L f g ofTown of Ai st Hampiort, 152 Misc 2d 622, 578 NYS2d 355 [1991]). SAY � � 2003 Here, Town Law § 276 authorizes the delegation of approval of subdivision plats s vs the Town Board to a Town Planning Board, which delegation has been made by the Town of Sou o •�_°'�cY'.13o:fF. APPEALS Southold Code § A 106-10). The Planning Board was authorized to conditionally approve, conditionally approve with or without modification, disapprove,or grant final approval of a subdivision plat(Town Law §276[6] [d]).The condition that the parcels could not be further subdivided,however,effectively mandates a minimum lot size that is in excess of that provided under the Town Code. As discussed supra, absent a legislative grant of authority,restrictions affecting zoning matters are not within the purview of a Planning Ioannou v Southold Town Planning Board Index No. 01-11586 Page No. 3 Board. Although former Town Law § 281 (now Town Law § 278) authorized towns to allow Planning Boards to permit some deviation in the area restrictions for lots to be approved as part of a cluster development(BayswaterRealty& Capital Corp.vPlanningBd.of Town ofLewisboro,76 NY2d 460,560 NYS2d 623 [1990];Matter ofKamhi vPlanningBd. of Town of Yorktown,supra),there is no analogous provision for conventional subdivisions (id., at 867 ["Section 281 also applies to subdivision plats but it applies only to `cluster' development."]). Accordingly, the Planning Board lacked the authority either to impose such a condition or to require it in exchange for relief from the Town Code's requirements for a major subdivision. In addition, contrary to the Planning Board's contention, the proceeding was timely commenced within the thirty-day period required under Town Law § 282. Because the determination adopted June 6, 1977 does not affect petitioner's interest in his real property, it is not the relevant determination for statute of limitations purposes. Finally, the Planning Board contends that petitioner is estopped from challenging the Planning Board's restrictions since the prior owner benefitted from them and petitioner did not have an expectation to subdivide the property at the time he purchased the property. This contention is without merit,however, since there is no proof of any prejudicial change in the Planning Board's position in reliance upon the alleged conduct ofpetitioner(see,Prudential Home Mtge. Co. v Cermele,226 AD2d 357,640 NYS2d 254 [1996]). In light of the foregoing discussion, the Court need not reach petitioner's remaining contentions. Submit judgment. Dated: 2,a/cg qZU� A :7/ALR J.S.C. Page 1 2003 WL 1826319 2003 N.Y.Slip Op. 12859 (Cite as: 2003 WL 1826319(N.Y.A.D.2 Dept.)) Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York. In the Matter of Constantine IOANNOU, Respondent, v. SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD., Appellant. March 18, 2003 . April 7, 2003. Smith, Finkelstein, Lundberg, Isler & Yakaboski, LLP, Riverhead, N.Y. (Frank A. Isler of counsel) , for appellant. Patricia C. Moore, Southold, NY, for respondent. SANDRA J. FEUERSTEIN, J.P. , HOWARD MILLER, SANDRA L. TOWNES, and WILLIAM F. MASTRO, JJ. *1 In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Southhold Town Planning Board, dated April 16, 2001, which denied the petitioner's subdivision application, the Southhold Town Planning Board appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Costello, J. ) , dated April 29, 2002, which granted the petition and annulled the determination. ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with costs. Restrictive covenants are strictly construed against those seeking to enforce them and will be enforced only where their existence has been established by clear and convincing proof (see Witter v. Taggart, 78 N.Y.2d 234, 237-238) . The recording statutes in a grantor-grantee indexing system charge a purchaser with notice of matters only in the record of the purchased land's chain of title back to the original grantor (see Andy Assoc. v. Bankers Trust Co. , 49 N.Y.2d 13, 24; Aiello v. Wood, 76 A.D.2d 1019; Doyle v. Lazarro, 33 A.D.2d 142, affd 33 N.Y.2d 981) . A purchaser is not normally required to search outside the chain of title (see Buffalo Academy of the Sacred Heart v. Boehm Bros. , 267 N.Y. 242) . A purchaser is not chargeable with constructive notice of conveyances recorded outside of that purchaser's direct chain of title, where, as in Suffolk County, the grantor-grantee system of indexing is used (see Real Property Law § 316-a; Witter v. Taggart, supra at 237; Andy Assoc. v. Bankers Trust Co. , supra at 24) . Here, the petitioner's subdivision application was denied by the appellant due to a condition imposed on a prior owner not to further subdivide the property. As this condition was only filed in the office of the Southold Town Planning Board and was not in the petitioner's chain of title, he cannot be bound by it. Therefore, the Supreme Court properly granted the petition. The appellant's remaining contentions need not be addressed in light_of our determination. 2003 WL 1826319 (N.Y.A.D. 2 Dept. ) , 2003 N.Y. Slip Op. 12859 MAY 2 2 2003 2---- Copr. ©West 2003 No Claim to Orig.U.S.Govt.Works "O8IWP tl OF APPEALS ( c $ rJf ) PATRICIA C. MOORE Attorney at Law n• �� /) L f15°'1 51020 Main Road G(/� w Southold,New York 11971 Tel: (631) 765-4330 Fax: (631) 765-4643 Margaret Rutkowski E�� ®®p py Secretary I°�I Fa: MAY 2 2 2003 May 21, 2003 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals Lydia Tortora, Chairwoman Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Re : Appeal #5264 Michael Pisacano Dear Chairwoman and Board members : At the last hearing I submitted a memorandum in support of Mr. Pisacano' s application. Mr. Pisacano submitted, at the instruction of the Town, a waiver of merger form. I have enclosed an application on your standard application form requesting that you reverse the decision of the building inspector. The public notice for the relief requested remains the same . The building inspector sites that the parcels have merged (100-25) in light of a memorandum forwarded to him by the Planning Board. I believe that the lot is a recognized lot pursuant to the unambiguous language of 100-24 . The lot would not have been created, but for the action of the Planning Board. I have also enclosed a copy of both the New York Supreme Court and Appellate Division Decision of Ionnou v. Southold Town Planning Board. The Supreme Court held that the Planning Board has no authority to impose a condition that a parcel not be further subdivided. The Appellate Division affirms the lower court decision and further rules that a condition "not to further , subdivide" must be recorded so that it appears on the owner' s chain of title . The Planning Board has claimed that the Chairman had a "hand shake" that the all the lots would merge to the Road frontage parcels, sterilizing the subject parcel . This is clearly contrary to law. The Planning Board refuses to follow the law. This appeal would be moot if the building inspector issues a permit based on an opinion from the Town Attorney or the Planning Board retracts the memorandum issued by the Planner Valerie Scopaz . Consequently, failure of anyone to clean up this mess it is left to your board to reverse the decision of the building inspector. If there is anything else you need or I can answer any questions you have please do not hesitate to contact me. J Very`""tru y Yours, f �� r '"P t cia C. Moore cc : Paul Caminiti Michael Pisacano / .OFFO —APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS �•i® C® 10 4.) ���` Southold Town Hall Lydia A. Tortora, Chairwoman ® 53095 Main Road Gerard P. Goehringer ; co P.O. Box 1179 George Horning k�� Southold,New York 11971-0959 Ruth D. Oliva = ® ® �d� ZBA Fax(631)765-9064 illTelephone(631)765-1809 Vincent Orlando **".° Vincent P http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD October 3, 2003 Mr. Michael Pisacano Southold, NY 11971 Re: Ap eal No. 5381 Dear Mr. P' cavo: "Enclosed please find a copy of the Board's determination regarding your recent application. The original was filed today with the Office of the Town Clerk. Thank you. Very truly yours, X/EV- • inda Kowalski Secretary to ther Board Enclosure Copy of Decision 10/3/03 to: Building Department Patricia C. Moore, Esq. _,4-y F4 /biz f y,03 c,t- . 'i'1 /0# a f�/71. Co Remised 10/ /03 - Midiael Pis-•ano ,,,,....,-. ELIZABETH A.NEVILLE A7 ; Town Hall, 53095 Main Road TOWN CLERK P.O. Box 1179 REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS Pry Southold, New York 11971 . ® e� Fax (631) 765-6145 MARRIAGE OFFICER � RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER �//�, Telephone (631) 765-1800 FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER ,1 southoldtown.northfork.net OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD TO: Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals FROM: Elizabeth A. Neville, Southold Town Clerk DATED: June 2, 2003 RE: Zoning Appeal No. 5381 Transmitted herewith is Zoning Appeal No. 5381 of Michael Pisacano by Patficia Moore for a variance. Also included is: letter from Patricia Moore dated May 21, 2003; copy of applicable law regarding lot recognition; summary of lot line changes; response to Valerie Scopaz's memorandum; history prior to - applicant going to contract; letter to Planning Board from Emil F. DePetris of Scheinberg, Schneps, DePetris & DePetris dated November 6, 1985; affidavit by Edward Frorester dated March 20, 2003; letter from Suffolk County Department of Health Services dated March 28, 2003 to Mr. Pisacano; Suffolk County Department of Health Services Report of Findings and Recommendations fo the Board of Review for Hearing on January 9, 2003 (4 pages); Project Description; ZBA Questionnaire; copy of memo concerning Article 78 filing by Patricia Moore for Constantine Ioannou against the Southold Town Planning Board and court's decision. Note: Amendment to Application No. 5264 1 , Town Of Southold P.O Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 * * * RECEIPT * * * Date: 06/02/03 Receipt#: 124 Transaction(s): Subtotal 1 Application Fees $250.00 Check#: 124 Total Paid: $250.00 •Name: Pisacano, Michael PO Box 1931 Southold, NY 11971 Clerk ID: LINDAC Internal ID.76149 Sulfate hit , iOY rna� 0103, drs c• PATRICIA C. MOORE Attorney at Law 51020 Main Road Southold,New York 11971 Tel: (631) 765-4330 Fax: (631) 765-4643 Margaret Rutkowski Secretary July 10, 2003 Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals Lydia Tortora, Chairwoman Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Re : Pisacano- recognition of lot Dear Chairwoman and Board members : The Following Subdivisions were approved by the Planning Board in date order: £ZaMilowski Set-Off : March 12, 1984 Planning Board authorized the creation of SCTM# 1000-113-7-19 . 8 Milowksi obtained 280A approval to access off Right-of- Way (ZBA Appeal 3243) Simicich minor subdivision: July 30, 1985 Planning Board authorized 4 lot subdivision (1000-113-7-19 . 10, 19 .28 &19 . 29 was one lot, 19 .27, 19 . 15, and 19 . 17) A Covenant that the lots not be further subdivided was a condition of approval) Simicich filed Covenant preventing further subdivision. (Exhibit A and B) s.Chudiak Lot line changes in 1985 : The Planning Board had Chudiak make separate applications for each lot line change : Adjacent owners who were to benefit from the lot line changes were Wanat (now Milowski) , Wells, Becker and Zabicky (Milowski and Wanat are related) December 17, 1985 the Planning Board took action on each application for lot line modification separately. The Planning Board did not condition one lot line aaoow •3 t?ToT.zgpd--, _/- /71:k(///' 'slnoA ATnaq'Aaan pepuaquT AaTq. qou 10 aoggargm p.zxoq 6uTuusTd aTl Aq pagPaao SPM qoT orgy •padoTaAap aq qou pTnom A 1adoad sTrgq qpgq A.zowaw s ,urw1Tpgo auq uo saTTa1 p.zpog 6uTuuPTd orgy •paPog sTTq. oq pup Tpaddp quawq.zpdoc IDTPaH argl ggoq oq uoTgTsoddo PeTTJ 'gTw.zad 6uTpTTnq P Jo aouPnssT argq TlTm paaagaaquT spq p.IPog 6uTuupTd orgy • TaoaPd sTrgl go uoTTeaao argq 1aAo aTggpq p paT2TgTUT ALT AGgq pup qU U A0D eons ou spq TooaPd oureopsTd-NPTPng3 'qax 'papTATpgns 1aq .zn; aq qou pTnoo Agaadoad aqq TPgq S U U Aoo peq rgoTrgm L661 uT Taa1Pd agq apTA.Tpgns oq 1aqsod pamoup Aargy '1cTTngmpTun pup ATTaPagTg1P qoT ouPopsTd-)[ TpnLD argq. 6uTgpaaq a1P Aargy -4oT (NpTpnga ATaawao;) 0U aesTd aTfl go uoTTeaao agq. aog ATTTTgTsuodsa1 aNpq oq sasnga1 p.zsog 6uTuuSTd orgy (ci pup D gTgTgxg) • spaooa1 p,ziog 6uTuusTd argq uT uoTsTATpgns paAoaddd as ST qnq dPW xPy argq uo .ziaddp qou scop uoTsTATpgns sTgy (uoTgnTosag pup d2N pagoaggv) a6puTpip 66o Z P pup sgoT oquT 6Z' 6T Pua 8Z' 6T PapTATpgns aH •1agsoa aTg1V oq 8Z' 6T qoT uoToTwTS auk go uoTsTATpgns iatt,.zng peAoadds paPog 6uTuuPTd a'-I L66T ' ET A1pnuSf :1a4sog aT4-17d. • spappuP1s quawgapdaQ rgglpaH argq. o: 6uTw.zoguoo oaow aq °sip pTnom Aagq 6uTuoz oq waoguoo sgoT argq pTnom ATuo qoN •A 1adoad 6uTwaoguoouou panoadwT as oq quawaAoadwT GIC[PaoAPJ SP 3UOTP puPgs pTnom uoTgPDT;Tpow GUT' goT T4DPa ' , 5ZT x 1 OOT SPM ANDTgPZ pup 1al{oag 'sr-PM 'q-PusM cq paumo p8oH NaaN xo3 6uoTp qoT 6uTuToCpp rgopa aauTs • suoTTPDTJTpow auTT qoT 1nog TTP go uoTgaTdwoo uo uoTquoT;TPow •0NMI y��i ' - 44' gFULI - -N, P \kik I- . I6 D T 'W P i • .,1 A LD '_ w „,,9 Y • =L �'e i Of Southold, N.Y. 11971 , (516) 765-1938 July 30, 1985 • Mr. Charles Cuddy Attorney at Law 108 E. Main Street Riverhead, NY 11901 Re: John and Catherine Simicich Dear Mr. Cuddy: The following action was taken by the Southold Town Planning Board, Monday, July 29, 1985 . RESOLVED that whereas , a formal application for the approval of a subdivision plat entitled ” John and Catherine Simich" located at Mattituck was submitted to the Planning Board on February 21, 1985 and, filing fee of $100 was paid on February 21, 1985 , and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on said subdivision application and plat at the Town Hall, Southold, New York, on July 8, 1985 at 7 : 45 p.m. , and WHEREAS, the requirements of the Subdivision Regulations of the Town of Southold have been met by said subdivision plat and application, NOW, therefore, be it RESOLVED that the application of"John and Cather Simicich" for approval of said subdivision plat prepared by , Howard Young and last dated June 7 , 1985 , be approved and the chairman be authorized to endorse approval on said subdivision plat subject to the following conditions within six (6) months from the date of this resolution: 1 . Filing of covenants and restrictions with the county clerk as to no further subdivision of any lot in perpetuity. Enclosed is a draft document which can be used as a guide for preparing the covenants and restrictions which the Board requests . U R 9848 PACE 257 • DECLARATION SEP 13 1985 THIS DECLARATION, made the 31st day of July 1985 , by JOHN SIMICICH, JR. and CATHERINE SIMICICH, residing at (no # ) Bergen Avenue, Mattituck, New York, hereinafter referred to Declarants. WHEREAS, the Declarants are the owners of certain real strict: property situate at Mattituck, Town of Southold, County of Suffolk and State of New York, more particularly bounded and described as ;tion: set forth in Schedule A, annexed hereto and made a part hereof ; 300 and )ck: )p WHEREAS, the Declarants have made application to the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Planning Board of the Town of Southold for approval to subdivide the said real property into q00ify four ( 4 ) parcels, bounded and described as set forth in Schedule A annexed hereto and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, for and in consideration of the granting of �V said approval, the Planning Board of the Town of Southold has Itl(((/ deemed it to be for the best interests of the Town of Southold and the owners and prospective owners of said parcels that the within covenants and restrictions be imposed on said parcels, and as a condition of said approval said Planning Board has required that the within Declaration be recorded in the Suffolky, C1 r ,� Count � �����sr��}t,��;w, � , �:•�. Office; and i's��,, �,,•t,.,.i ;: WHEREAS, the Declarants have considered the foregoing and determined that the same will be for the best interest of the Declarants and subsequent owners of said parcels. NOW, THEREFORE, THIS DECLARATION WITHNESSETH: That the Declarants, for the purposes of carrying out the intentions above expressed, do hereby make known, admit, , LIBER 9848 PAGE 258 -y SCHEDULE A DESCRIPTION MINOR SUBDIVISION JOHN SIMICICH, ,JR. AND CATHERINE SIMICICH ALL that certain plot, piece or parcel of land, situate, lying and being at Mattituck, Town of Southold, County of Suffolk and State of New York, bounded and described as follows: BEGINNING at a point which point intersects the southerly line of premises now or formerly of William Chudiak and which is distant 27 degrees 03 minutes 06 seconds east 829 .41 feet from the intersection of the southerly line of Bergen' Avenue with the westerly line of Cox Neck Road forming the southeasterly corner of lands now or formerly of William A. Lindsay, Jr . , et al . ; and from said true point of beginning running : South 12 -degrees 19 minutes 19 seconds East a distance of 153. 57 feet along the westerly line of Cox Neck Road and thence along land now or formerly of P. Neudeck South 77 degrees 40 minutes 41 seconds West a distance of 250 feet; and thence continuing along land now or formerly of P. Neudeck and William Chudiak the following two ( 2 ) courses and distances (1 ) South 12 degrees 19 minutes 19 seconds East 264. 67 feet, (2 ) South 63 degrees 14 minutes 01 secondsWest 314 .66 feet to land now or formerly of James D. Norris Estate; thence along said last mentioned land the following three ( 3 ) courses and distances (1 ) North 33 degrees 00 minutes 09 seconds West 230. 69 feet; (2) South 63 degrees 14 minutes 31 seconds west 505 .27 feet; (3 ) South 33 degrees 00 minutes 09 seconds east 619 . 82 feet to the northerly line of land now or formerly Of Fred P. Jens and thence along said last mentioned land South 53 degrees 24 minutes 51 seconds west 222 .12 feet and thence through land now or formerly of John Simicich, Jr. North 33 degrees '00 minutes 09 seconds West 934 . 52 feet to the southerly line of land now or formerly of William Chudiak- and thence running the following four (4 ) courses and distances along land of Chudiak, Lindsay and Hogan (1 ) North 59 degrees 19 minutes 51 seconds East 231. 90 feet; (2) North 83 degrees 02 minutes 21 seconds East 93 .90 feet; (3) North 76 , degrees 16 minutes 51 seconds East 413 . 25 feet; (4) Nor'h1 67W0' degrees 22 minutes 51 seconds East 724 .07 feet- to the point or place of beginning. "' LIBER 9848 PAGE e.,A publish, covenant and agree that the said premises herein described shall hereafter be subject to the following covenants which shall run with the land and shall be binding upon all purchasers and holders of said premises, their heirs , executors , legal representatives, distributees, successors and assigns, to wit: 1. That at no time hereafter shall there be any further subdivision of or modification to the real propertY' the subject of this Declaration, without prior approval of the Planning Board of the Town of Southold. 2 . That the within Declaration may not be annulled, waived, changed or modified, unless and until approved by a resolution ,of a majority of the Planning Board of the Town of Southold. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Declarant above named has executed the foregoing Declaration the day and year first above written. `3\i}- 4 .�c�l�.(,�r Jpn Simicich, Jr: Catherine Si 'cich STATE OF NEW YORK) ss � 01,40E,t , COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) On this 31st day of July 1985, before me personally appeared JOHN SIMICICH, JR. and CATHERINE SIMICICH, to me known and known to me to be the persons who executed the foregoing instrument and they duly acknowledged to me that they executed the same. Notary Public WAKES F0.CUDDY Wary Publ 5,S8ow York Qualified In Suffolk County Commission Expires March 30, 1 E-MAIL:pacatty@optonline.netr..&,eeo FAX.NO.(631)765-5902 \V 53345 MAIN ROAD(FEATHER HILL) P.O.BOX 846 SOUTHOLD,N.Y. 11971-0846 CAMILLE LUCARINI PAULA.CAMINITI LEGAL ASSISTANT (631) 765-5900 JULIE MCGIVNEY LISA M.PENNY OFFICE MANAGER { ... • July 3, 2003 , PJUL 7 2003 Lydia A. Tortora, Chairwoman 110#1,1210-1L53%( ha. Southold Town Board of Appeals ZOMIe.,s, � ,<o . Southold Town Hall PPEAL 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold NY 11971-0959 RE: Appeal#5264- Lot Waiver Dear Ms. Tortora: Enclosed is an affirmation which I wish to submit in support of the above petition by Mr. Pisacano which is presently on your calendar for Thursday evening, July 10, 2003. Ms. Patricia Moore, Esq. Will be appearing on behalf of Mr. Pisacano at the hearing. �ryt Y% ` PA ITI SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Xq ` .Y` In the matter of the application of JUL 7 2003 MICHAEL PISACANO, ZONiNGB Respondent u ._ Wr For reversal of Building Inspectors Decision X PAUL A. CAMINITI, an attorney at law admitted to practice in the State of New York, affirms under the penalties of perjury that this affirmation in submitted in support of the respondents petition to reverse the Building Inspectors decision. That my office represented Michael Pisacano when he purchased the land known as SCTM 1000-113-07-19.11 consisting of 1.7 acres from William Chudiak, et al, on August 27, 2002. At the time of purchase a title report was ordered which reflected that title was vested in Trustees of Mr. Chudiak who had originally acquired title to the property consisting of 32.915 Acres by deed dated August 2, 1956 and recorded on August 2, 1956 in Liber 4155 cp.51 and by deed dated January 14, 1959 recorded February 7, 1984 in Liber 9508,page 105. A copy of the title report is enclosed which shows no other title objections, liens,judgments or covenants. The title report only reflects the Right of Way Agreement to Cox neck Road that was included in the purchase. The title report is totally silent as to any Covenants and restrictions that might have been imposed on the property by the Planning Board. It is respectfully submitted that it is well established law that the unrecorded covenants suggested by the Planning Board when the lot lines changes were approved are not binding on the purchaser of the instant property and do not run with the land. To rule otherwise would be arbitrary and capricious and subject to judicial review. The property has been in Mr. Chudiak's possession for over 42 years. Over the course of years Mr. Chudiak not only applied for but was granted lot-line changes for pieces of his property. Two pieces were set-off and sold to neighbors on Cox Neck Road upon condition that the two pieces set-off would merge with the property already owned by the neighbors and that the set-off pieces standing alone would not consist of a buildable lot. PAULA.CAMINITI • ATTORNEY AT LAW P 0 BOX 992 • MAIN ROAD • SOUTHOLD,N Y 11971 • . I The remaining piece retained by Mr. Chudiak never had a covenant recorded against it, which in any way would limit its use. In effect the Planning Board by granting the lot line changes APPROVED of the lot that was in existence thus meeting the requirements of Section 100-24 of the Southold Town Code. It can also be argued that the identical lot(less the 2 pieces set-off was created by deed on or before June 30, 1983. The Suffolk County Health Department has recognized the lot and has granted the respondent their approval for the construction of a single family residence. As further proof of the above,the records of the Southold Town Assessor confirm that this lot was legally created. A memo attached to the property card reads" all of which appears to exist dating back prior to 1984 and going back to 1940's. Lot is 1.7 with adj. ROW per assessor Scott Russell." It would therefore seem to be just plain old common sense that if this lot existed in the 1940's and purchased in 1956 then it was legally created at that time and continues to be such. Carving off pieces by lot line changes does not and should not be deemed to be creation of a new lot. WHEREFORE it is respectfully requested that the application,of;Mr. Michael Pisacano be granted in all respects and for such other and furtheryee :� .:o Y ard may seem just and proper in the premises. / Dated: Jul 2, 2003 - k. Southold NY Paul A. 1 ./ PAUL A.CAMINITI • ATTORNEY AT LAW P 0 BOX 992 • MAIN ROAD • SOUTHOLD,N Y 11971 • TITLE NUMBER: 641-S-01620 EXCEPTION SHEET SCHEDULE A, IN WHICH ARE SET FORTH THE ADDITIONAL MATTERS WHICH WILL APPEAR IN THE POLICY AS EXCEPTIONS'FROM COVERAGE, UNLESS DISPOSED OF TO THE COMPANY SATISFACTION PRIOR TO THE CLOSING OR DELIVERY OF THE POLICY: 1.) TAXES, LIENS,WATER RATES, SEWER RENTS AND ASSESSMENTS SET FORTH !N GN)irdi iii SCHEDULE HEREIN. I /1- 2.) MORTGAGES RETURNED HEREIN ( 0 ). DETAILED WITHIN. E;(zer0.) RIGHTS OF TENANTS OR PERSONS IN POSSESSION. 4.) IN THE ABSENCE OF A GUARANTEED SURVEY,THE EXACT LOCATION, COURSES AND DIMENSIONS DESCRIBED IN SCHEDULE A HEREIN WILL NOT BE INSURED. .2 5.) ANY STATE OF FACTS AN ACCURATE SURVEY OF THE PREMISES MAY DISCLOSE. Oror 6.) ANY STATE OF FACTS 'N.INSPECTION OF THE PREMISES MAY DISCLOSE. n _ 7.) THE ATTACHE r (1) FEDERAL TAX LIEN VS. BARBARA CHUDIAK TO BE yr,i r SATISFACTORI 'ISPOSED OF. 8.) CLOSING DEED MUST CONTAIN A RECITAL AS TO THE GRANTORS SOURCE OF ''s TITLE. 1� , 9.) CONTRACT OF SALE TO BE SUBMITTED TO COMPANY FOR EXAMINATION PRIOR :11 i r TO CLOSING. ,i --10.)TRUST AGREEMENT TO BE SUBMITTED TO COMPANY FOR EXAMINATION PRIOR I r TO CLOSING.Yri _ 11.)PROOF IS REQUIRED THAT JOAN C.WASKEWICZ HAS NOT BEEN KNOWN BY If4 I r ANY OTHER NAME WITHIN THE PAST TEN YEARS. 9 12.)PROOF IS REQUIRED THAT BARBARA CHUDIAK HAS NOT BEEN KNOWN BY ANY rvt�'T OTHER NAME WITHIN THE PAST TEN YEARS. l RIGHT OF WAY I LIBER BER 9601 PAGE 524:- P-?( C‘° Mai 30 03 04: 447p p. 2 frit) r40 g V) I, k PATRICIA. PATRIC� C. MOO �- Attorney20at Road Main �epLaw St",' Southold,New York 1 i 971-4616 1-COG (631)765-4330 1-o' Fax May 30, 2003 BY FACSIMILE Town of Southold Zoning Board of Appeals Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Re: Michael Pisacano Property: 1457 Cox Neck Road, Mattituck, NY SCTM # 1000-26-1-12 Dear Ladies/Gentlemen: I have been retained by Mr. Pisacano to represent him in chis matter. Please adjourn his hearing from June 5, 2003 to your next hearing date. Please send all notices and correspondence to me. Thank you. Very truly yours, Patricia C. Moore PCM/mr 4 1 1/A A 3 r 7.2E Ps .)L:e/ -sem ,_p 1w6 E.MC S'E o a coil G F „e____ 14-e_0-4.7-14 l' Efl-f-Y oto=1-(2-6 ciF R.-e-u tAAJ S FAUo y2 bLic -piL 1kJZ Vrk, fv# 970t ) o rU -1-14-E, S- U Lje-Cr e -J-, rn,qr0a//3 - 7- /9, //1 l i oti , 0/1 Id4P ePPAI RECEIVED APR - 3 2003 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS StJ FFC U :J7 '' D ? A li Me ^i r or HEALTf 22O RA $ IPO Ditty !, HAL' Ft) & UL12 , % 1i '' 8 $ FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL SHEET TO: FROM, Michail Pi jaaria Waltz r Iia,�y'ua'►akt COMPANY: DATEr FAX NUMBER.: TOTAL NO.OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER: _g8.SBi3 6 PHONE NL- BERT SENDER'S REFERENCE NUMBER1 _______- RE. ....� YOUR REFERENCE NUMBER,: Cl URGENT CI FOR RINIEI,V 0 PLEASE: COMMENT C PLEASE REPLY 0 PLEASE RECYCLE NOTES/COMMENTS; I+ff?ON1 631.8$3.3086 FAX 63i,S3 .3075 F yea�q� COUNTY OF SUFFOLK Robert J. Gaffney G.IFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT CF 1-42AL7ii$ERVdCES LINDA MERMELSTEFM, seting CcMrisswer March 28,2o03 Mr.Michael p154103110 :PO B C%19.3 `do!)thuktl, "t(u971 ;1 Subject: Board or Rewiem, Hcartng-Jar uary y, 200= Report of F"irtdir_gs and Recommer►datior of the Board of'Review tegarding- A Ric-o2-0032 -Piaacaiio rasidenze- 4+t/s/o Cox Neck Rovi., :5{33 ft iJo Rargel"venue,Southold- tie.Southold--SCIM: *i000-173-71.9,1 . Dear Mr..Fisa:atlo: Encioac i$e :opy of bh Board 4:f Itesiev'+iindinge,recommendations and.cIet rminati!r cc:nee-ming the subject application. 3aa.d on the Information!sabniitteri,the Bo ird grantee the regi.es; vpirlaroe s's,th the rovisionsIIl iicatec iii the deterrnic.aiIon. The granting of th;s waiver dots out anply that your application.'w it h ai tiCiili y approved. Zt is your responsibiit'y to e7•isare that yow4 a ppticatioi is complete;otherwise,voi:t cpprovQ:vyii:b .s biccct to taineCessarF delay. Very truly yours. Waiter llaw;yzak,:Ir.,PE,,P,J?. Acting Chairman,.Board of WD;`kz enckoslire C: Board of Review Pile $outhold Torun Nanning ycard James B3,sz—Plarlriug Depa'rtmetlTheodorci^We;ls ;Paul Caxninitl, Esq. Patz ria Moore,Rsq. ir.,icrie Szr)piz w Tows ax r,'dthold. Doli ,as Feldman. '.)E 5Ci)J•:;5 f.)re otla, Ctuint;J ttornet: Plogi rd of Review.0 SC Dept.€1f Health Services -- Rakaro Drive Fast . ilaUPPa,.wg(,NY 1,1188-4290 t6:3”$53-3084-. Fax( i)8$3-3073 SUFFOI,K CONT'DEPARTMENT OP HEALTH'SERVICES DwBsiON OP ENvmoNstiTENTAL,Qr.ainv ARTICLE 2,SECTION 220,SUFFOLK COMM'SANITARY CODE To. Linda al extr e:stem,?vI.U.,M.P.H.,Acting t;tiarmnissioner .FROM: vkralter t)actiyclialt,Jr..P,E.,J.D.„Actin(1a:rma.,Board of Review SUBJECT: Report of Findings and Recornmend&tions of the Rei;iz :Board Regarding: R/O-02-0052 - P1sa;aro residence-w/Sjo Cox eel:Road,=1583 ft.s/o Bergen Avenue,Southold- Vo Southold- SCT I: #1000-113.7-t9.i1 &141, "i t Mi:tb e1 Pisacatic5 PO flox'9:3-`. Southold,NY 1 ter 1 .02aft„L � December 18, 2002 XD sar1uary 9,2,:t0.3 5.'A INUEri PYtdau1a"'t Article 6,Section.76o-6o2,¶i -a of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code states that:no de<eloper shall etxgag,e in the creation r1f a development,or dispose of any parcel in the development,or erect any buildin;in the t{evelopment,unless Suffolk Cit Department of Health.Services' (SCDHS;the Department)approval has been obtained for the existing or llt..oposed water supply and sewage disposal Aariii'tiet,in the development. 'Mei applicant prrlgro:;es to construct a single- family dwelling on a parcel of land that was st3bdivided without the apl roval of theSuffolk Count,:Department of Heal th Services CSCD,HS)- a. Propcosed development of a 1.68-acre parcel with a single-far...Lily residence. a. Site it in G t.3ttz;dti ater Management Zone#TV. Public water was not available at the time of apgicativ r.. :t'est v,ell data shows that water quality meets Department standards, With the lifting,of a Suffolk County Water Authority moratorium,um. public water may be available to the pa cfcel. . Depth to g'rou ldwater i:,greater'than :?feet(it.). S Soils are sandy. - 6. Dis-tarce to nearest public water supply wells is 4,ocio fr. tU t..rel Lake:Wet:Yield). 7 Through a catnplex series of transactions and events, the applicant o.ow finds himself the owner o Darin of!and with a separate Suffolk County Tax Map identification number (t 000-g 13-7-19.11;herain.aftei "Lot 1.9.11"),art shown on the current Suffolk County Tax Maps. However,the loot is not re cor..i:e t by the Department,because a subdivision application had*lever been made to the Department to create it.' Before acfdres ing the waiver rcciu t.we will summarize relevant.subdivision activity to put Lot 1g-u in context. Linda Met'melslain, M.D.,M.P.H.,Acting Commissioner Hearing Date: January 9,2003 Subject; Report of Findings and Recommendation of the Board of Review Regarding: Rho-o2-oo52 Pisaeano residence-sir/.3;o Cox Meek Road, :553 ft.sic, Bergen Aver ue. Southold-t/o Southold- SCTM: e1oo0-u -ti-19.11 .444414 1�rnri F.ACT(coned.) 8.As presented b3-the Department's staff,the subject application concerns Lot r9.3.1,which is one lot of an''unapproved four--:rt subdivision"(i.e.,four contiguous lots which were not approved for subdivision by the Department). On the existing Suffolk County Tax Maps CSCTZMab,these are lots 19.10, 19.11,19.18,and 19,19 sail with 3CTM prefix 1oo0-fl3-7). 9. All four lots comply with Article 6 density requirements,and would have been approvable by the SCDHS if a subdivision application were presented prior to the premature creation of the. unapproved subdivision. Average lot size is 53,717 sq,rt.,which is 268%(assuming public water is available)or*34% (if private wells are used)of Department standards in Hydrogeok gic Zone IV(20,000 square foot tninirnum lot size when served by public water; 40,000 sq.it. minimum lot size when private wells are used). to. Because the parcels are in separate Q-,-nersihip,and the applicant cannot join all parties in a suledMsion application,he cannot meet the requirements of Section 76o-6o2 of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code. at. The 1981 Suffolk County Tax Maps are the b..sis of exemptions("grandfatheri-ng")of single and separate lots which predate Article 6 subdivision requirements. The four lots in question are actually comprised of portions of three mats on the 1981 Tax Maps:then lots 17, 18,and part of:12(ail.us'ith 8C TM i efix:000-113-7). As such, L.p proposed lot is not exempt from Article 6 density requirements. 1.2. The'row,/of Southold has written a letter;dated January 7, 2003(V.Scopaz tr W. Dawydiak), opposing the revested variance,for reasons described below. Asbaek»up,the letter contains an An;ust i3,www memorandum to file(from V. Seopa7). 13. As described in the August 13,tool Scopaz me.norarcdurta,the first lot of the unapproved four-lot subdivision was created when the subdivision of lot 19.10 was approved by the Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals(Z8A)in the 1984"Chudiak application" A Town ZBA determination was required,as Lot 19.10 did not haw road frontage,as required by Town.Law Sec.26o.A,(access). Aeonditior of the ZBA approval of the Chudiak application was that any future subdivision of the parcel would require re-application for a Sec. 280A access variance. 14. The Clhttdiak application created a long,narrow remnant(hereinafter"remnant")of former lot 12,bounded on the vest by a right-of-way and new lot 19.1.c,and on the east by lots t5 Through 18(as shown on the 1981 SC'T'M), Excluding the right of way,this remnant area totals SS,caoo aq.ft. 35. The August 13 memorandum describes the history of the remnant parcel.. In 1.985,Mr, Chudiak submitted.four separate let line charge applications for the remnant parcel. The apparent intent was to merge portions of the remnant parcel with parcels to the east(via sale to adjacent owners));uwbuilding lots would not be created. Planning Board approval for each of the lot line zhanges was issued on December 16, 1.985. As a condition of approval, each separate approval required that every new lot be merged with contiguous parcels to the Linda Mermelstein,DMD.,M.P.H.,Acting commissioner Hearing Date: January 9,2003 Subject: Report of Findings and Recommendation of the Board of Review Regarding: Rio-cm-005e Pisacano residence—w/s/o Cox Neck Road,ez 1583 ft.sic) Bergen Avenue,Southold—tfo Southold—SCTM: #1Ooo-113-7-19.11 eeeeee 1e. (cont'd.) east. No new dwelling units were to be allowed as a result of any merger. Each lot line change would become effective,as of endorsement by the ZBA chairman. This endorsement would occur on receipt of amended surveys,as well as evidence of proper covenants and restrictions concerning the merger and sterilization(i.e.,no new dwelling units permitted). 16. The southerly pair of lots(18,800 sq.ft.and 12,goo sq.ft.)were,indeed,conveyed to adjacent owner,merged,and sterilized. The result of these two lot line changes is lots 19.18 and 19.19,on the 2002 Suffolk County Tax Map, These are two lots in question in the four- lot unapproved subdivision. 17. The northerly two lots were 25,000 sq.ft.and.12,500 sq.ft.(they are now part of Lot 19.11, along with a portinirrflire-right ofray). The Seopae-men e-tofile-,li-ggests that negotiations were underway to sell these two lots to adjacent owners. However,these negotiations were never brought to fruition. Hence,the lot line changes never occurred. 18. The Town of Southold apparently contends that,by virtue of the parties'intent and the terms and conditions of the various approvals,the northerly lots should be considered as "sterilized"by the SCDHS. 19. The applicant now holds title to the last piece of the remnant parcel:lot 19.11. It is comprised of the two northerly lots(97,500 sq.ft.),as well as the right of way,for a total of 1.7 acre. The applicant contends that the failure of predecessors in interest to consummate proposed lot line changes does not extinguish hiS prerogative to seek to develop the parcel, No evidence was presented that restrictive covenants have ever been filed on any portion of lot 19.11. DETheeNeeeeeleeM It was a 3 to o decision of the Board of Review("Board")to approve the request for variance. The Board is not unsympathetic to the Town's intentions to sterilize the remnant parcel. However,the Board has no indication that Sanitary Code development rights were,in fact,in any way extinguished by the four separate approvals of conditional lot line changes. While two of the lot,line changes were consummated,the other two were trot,leaving one lot which clearly complies with Article 6 density requirements. The legal status of Lot 19.11,with respect to Town jurisdiction, is a matter appropriately left to the Town. With respect to SCDHS jurisdiction,however,long-standing review principles can, and must,be applied. In the subject case,the'unapproved four-lot subdivision"clearly complies with Article 6 density requirements. It would have been approved, if proposed to the County before its premature creation. The Department has,on several occasions,dealt with owners of individual lots in unapproved subdivisions. When joinder of all owners within the subdivision is not possible,and the subdivision otherwise meets SCDHS requirements,subdivision requirements have been waived, absent other special circumstances which warrant a result to the contrary. Ultimately,the Linda Mermelstein,NLD,,1,i,A, 't-,Acting Ccromissianer Hearing Date: January 0,aoo Subject: Report of Findings and I ecommendatior.cif et e Board of Review Regarding: R.10-o2•oo - Pisacano residence--w'/s/o Co:.Week Road,z 1583 ft s,'c Bergen Avenue,Southold-t/o Southold-Scrti #i000-u3-7-19.fx *ten ,ii'aE u etmd(coned.) SCDHS must evaluate each application on its own merits,and wltzn the Department's jurisdiction: the Sanitary Code,and associated water supply and sewage disposal requirements, in this particular case,the applir,ant will Need to connect to public water,if evvdiabl+ , if public water is not available to the rppiwcant at the time of SCIDHS apprcwal, thea the applicant shallcovenant,in language acceptable to the County Attorney,t 4 t the parcel will mined to public water when it is available, .44 per Section 760 609 of the Suffolk Coesety Sanitary Code(Sanitary Code),the approval of the variance is'in Q tear. - uutpose.an.d.. ,ntyQ iatlanit Code,tQpr0tect groundwater and drinking water supplies,surface water and other natural resources,an uoltc health,safety and welfare In compliance with Section 76o-6c 9(1)(a),the proposed variance is to general corifom ity with the Sanitary Code. 'l"=o variance should not impar groundwater, surface water,and dzinithig water. 3;,1ppi s,and,as sw±,is consistent'0'ith criteria specified in Sectaoal 76o-6o9(1)(b). A Date Walter'Da.w'diak,Jr.,P,E,,JJ Acting Chairman Board of Review Li., A \ • ,/,'' , ti- 1, J I R'LANNING BOARD MEMBERS ,pit/ f Ff OL, ' (\ BENNETT ORLOWSKI,JR. ��� ®�'® � � ®� : P.O. Box 1179 \/ Chairman 14 g„,.. s 1 �'� Town Hall, 53095 State Route 25 ® 4 }]] Southold, New York 11971-0959 RICHARD CAGGIANO ; vo � f� �j Telephone (631) 765-1938 U 4 WILLIAM J.CREMERS ® Fax, �� Fax(631) 765 3136 KENNETH L.EDWARDS : or Town MARTIN H.SIDOR `-7491 toll PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD - RECEIVED APR o 1 2003 MEMORANDUM ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS To: Lydia Tortora, Chairman and Members of the Zoning Board of Appeals From: Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman 230got b,s. Date: April 1, 2003 Subject: Request of Pisacano, Michael for a Variance SCTM#1000-113-7-19.11 (formerly Chudiak) Appeal #5264 The Planning Board did not authorize the creation of this parcel as a separate building lot. The Planning Board, by request of the owner, intended to allow the property owner to sell his property in four separate parcels to adjacent property owners for the purpose of merging with pre-existing lots. The owner never requested any single and separate lots to be created by the Planning Board. The Planning Board never created any new lots by this resolution; they just enlarged the old existing lots. And, from my , understanding, two of the parcels created were transferred immediately to the bordering neighbors and we were told the two remaining parcels were to be transferred shortly. VS:ck • • ill Of FOUr VALERIE SCOPAZ,AICP Telephone (631) 765-1938 TOWN PLANNER ; Fax(631) 765-3136 t,‘,.1.45® 1� Valerie.Scopaz@town.southold.ny.us P.O.Box 1179 Ai) jig ;;;t Town Hall, 53095 Main Road : �( �,°�•.i6 Southold, New York 11971-0959 � JN — 2 OFFICE OF THE TOWN PLANNER • TOWN OF SOUTHOLD L MEMORANDUM To: Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman and Members of the Zoning Board of Appeals From: Valerie Scopaz, AICP, Town Planner ki-75 Date: January 2, 2003 Subject: Pisacano, Michael SCTM#1000-113-7-19.11 (formerly Chudiak) Attached please find my memo to the file regarding the history of the parcel. The Planning Board has reviewed this memo and file and has told Mr. Pisacano that the lot line amendments were done with the intent of reducing non-conformity of existing lots — and not to create a new building lot. VS:ck att. / exg 'PLANNING BOARD MEMBEI__ ��� SVFF00. BENNETT ORLOWSKI,JR. i� ®N0 00 Town Hall, 53095 State Route 25 Chairman P.O. �� � P.O. Box 1179 WILLIAM J. CREMERS C: . C Southold, New York 11971-0959 KENNETH L.EDWARDS ` H y Fax(631) 765-3136 r GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM,JR. aY rPr Telephone (631) 765-1938 RICHARD CAGGIANO y,�1 �a0��,� 0 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD 1, l ! JAN ® 2 S Memorandum to the File - - Date: August 13, 2001 Re: Chudiak Property located in Mattituck on West side of Cox Neck Road, Mattituck, NY SCTM # 1000-113-7-19.11, formerly part of 113-7-12. From: Valerie Scopaz, AICP, Town Planner/4.. . This memorandum was written in response to a query regarding the status of the Subject lot, noted above. The question before the Town was whether said lot was a recognized building lot. This memorandum presents the history of the parcel as ascertained from the Planning Board's records: ) In 1984, William Chudiak, through his attorney, Emil De Petris, applied to the Planning Board to set-off two separate building lots from his farm. The set-off of concern to us in this instance is the 80,000 square foot lot that was to be accessed by way of a 50' private right of way from Cox Neck Road. This lot was subsequently acquired by Mr. and Mrs. Kevin Milowski. The lot did not have - road frontage on a public street, thus was required to obtain a variance from Section 280A of Town Law for access. On June 13, 1984, the ZBA granted access subject to four conditions, one of which stated that "Any future subdivision or set-off past this parcel along this or any other right of way will require re-application and consideration by this board for appropriate 280A access consideration (or the Planning Board if same falls within their purview): (A copy of the ZBA decision is attached.) Subsequently, in October of 1985, Mr. Chudiak, again through his attorney Emil DePetris, submitted four separate.lot line applications to effect a merging of land between the aforementioned right-of-way and existing lots facing Cox Neck Road, of which there were four: Wanat, Wells, Becker, and Zabicky, (later known as Siderakis). On December 16, 1985, the Planning Board voted to approve the lot line amendments between Chudiak and each of the aforesaid property owners. X757 I . I • It appears that some of the neighboring property owners were not prepared or in the position to acquire the additional property at the time of the lot-line applications. The Planning Board approval was subject to conditions that the property of Chudiak be, in each case "conveyed to and merged with the contiguous house lot -i, to the East, and that only one (1) residence together --- d{ with accessory structures may be constructed and maintained upon the two parcels which will become JAI\ - 2 ;; merged into one....and that the above covenants and �I!,%'' restrictions be included in the deed and on the survey map for the lot line change" The approval letter went on to note that the Chairman of the Planning Board would endorse the approval upon receipt of the final surveys as required. (A copy of the approval letters is attached.) A hand-written note in one of the files indicates that Mr. De Petris stated that all lots will be sold, and that Zabicky was not prepared to buy, but that Neudack could buy her parcel. The note goes on to state "they are agreeable to C&Rs that the conveyed property will merge and not have any residences." Further, there is a letter in one of the files dated April 13, 1988, addressed to the Planning Board from Nicholas Kordas, attorney for Lambros and Matrona • Siderakis, who had acquired the Zabicky property in 1982. The letter states that ) the Siderakis' are aware of the terms of the lot-line amendment and are "ready and willing to acquire the vacant land adjacent to their premises" The attorney also sent a letter to Mr. Chudiak expressing his clients' readiness to proceed. A copy of those letters are attached as well. I discussed this matter with the Planning Board at its work session of Monday, August 6th. Two of the members present were on the Board during 1985, and they emphasized that the intent of the lot line applications was to merge land to expand the size of existing lots: not to create new building lots. The record indicates that the subject lot of this memo, 19.11, was intended to be merged with two adjoining lots, and not to be retained for sale as a building lot at some future date. Cc: Planning Board Building Department Town Attorney's Office 3 7i 7 6 k lb' ,,,.. --,-/-‘ ‘ , . ,,,,,,,,,,,....... , , _ _c,...Lot u.4,0t.g., in . — _.-. ' (( j ; Southold Town Board ofAppeals -=0 4 ���;'�`` , MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11971 ''OTELEPHONE (516) 765.1809 ACTION OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Appeal No. 3243 Application Dated April 11 , 1984 (Public Rearing May 17 , 1984) ' TO: Mr. and Mrs . Kevin Mi l owski l i ,[Appellant(s)] P.O. Box 134 i Cutchogue , NY 11935 , ii '; ', , JAN ® 2 ; I\c'c At a Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals held on May 31 , 1-984 -- -- -_.-_ _ the above appeal was considered, and the action indicated below was taken on your [x] Request for Variance Due to Lack of Access to Property New York Town Law, Section 280-a [ ] Request for Special Exception under the Zoning Ordinance Article , Section [ ] ' Request for Variance to the Zoning Ordinance Article , Section [ ] Request for Upon application of KEVIN AND LESLEY MILOWSKI , Box 134, Cutchogue , NY for a Variance to New York Town Law, Article 16 , Section 280A, for approval of access over a private right-of-way at the west side of Cox Neck Road, Mattituck, (now or formerly of W. Chudiak) ;. County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-113-7-part of Lot 12. The board made the following findings and determination : By this application , appellants seek approval of access over a 50-foot private right-of-way located at the west side of Cox Neck Road and ex- tending westerly 312 . 16 feet to the premises in question , which is an 80 ,000 sq . ft. vacant parcel set off by the Planning Board , File #368 , at its Meeting of March 12 , 1984. Although the right-of-way has been traveled by farm vehicles , the right-of-way is in need of improvements for. satisfactory access by emergency and other vehicles . It is the understanding of the board that this request is for access only to the parcel in question , and it should be understood that any further subdivision or additional dwelling structures will be required to return for an updated review and updated improvements as this board would deem necessary under the circumstances . ``"/ In considering this appeal , the board also determines : (a ) that the relief requested is not substantial ; (b ) that-by granting the requested relief, the character of the neighborhood will not be adversely affected; '(c) '• that by allowing the variance , no substantial detriment to adjoining properties would be created; (d ) that no adverse effects will be -produced on available governmental facilities of any increased population ; i.e) that the relief requested will be in harmony with and promote the general purposes of zoning; and (f) that the interests of justice will be served by allowing the variance , as indicated below. Accordingly, on motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Doug- lass , it was - - - + . 1. _ , . -if- (.CONTINUED ON PAGE TWO) - e-c,b+k u .44/\ 7' 7 DATED: June 13 , 1984. , CHAIRMAN, SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Form ZB4 (rev. 12/81) / ' r Page 2 - 'Appeal No. 3243 ` Matter of KEVIN AND LESLEY MILOWSKI Decision Rendered May 31 , 1984 RESOLVED, that Appeal No. 3243, application of KEVIN AND LESLEY MILOWSKI for approval of access , BE AND HEREBY IS APPROVED AS APPLIED AND SUBJECT TO 'THE FOLLOWING 'CONDITItNS :' 1 . That the right-of-way must be improved a full ten-foot width with four inches of bankrun (mixed with 20% stone content) to the parcel in question for a length of approximately 312 . 16 feet; 2 . Any future subdivision or set- off past this parcel along this or any other right-of-way will require re-application and consideration by this board for appropriate 280A access consideration (or the Planning Board if same falls Within their purview) ; 3. ' The right-of-way must be continuously maintained in good , tisfactory condition for access by emergency and other vehicles ; 4. Upon written notice to the Building Inspector or Board of Appeals , an inspection and approval of improvements must be made prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. , Location of Property: Right-of-Way at the West Side of Cox Neck Road, Mattituck, NY; County Tax Map Parcel 1000-113-07-part of 012. Vote of the Board : Ayes : Messrs . Goehringer, Doyen and Sawicki . (Members Grigonis and Doyen were absent. ) This resolu- tion was adopted by unanimous vote of the members present. * * 0 f J- GERARD P . GOEHRINGER, HAIRMAN June 13 , 1984 i4N - 2 . . 7 , • • . \ •. , . . . . l/ ` SCF EINBEBG, SCipS, DE PETRIS & DE PETBIS ATTORNEYS AT LAW 220 RDANoKE AVENUE o ci 3 l5 3 POST OFFICE BOX 999 �+,+ SHEPARD M.SCHEINBERG RITi7ERHEAD,NEW YoRK MURRAY B.SCHNEPS 11901 ISIDORESCHEINBERG EMIL F. DE PETRIS 1900-19es RICHARD E. DE PETRIS (516)727-5100 JANET GEASA October 1, 1985 Southold Town Planning Board t r Town of Southold Town Hall Southold, New York 11971 Att: Diane M. Schultze, Secretary Re: Property Of William 'Chudiak Dear Ms. Schultze: In accordance with your letter of August 14, 1985 , I enclose herewith four applications for lot line changes to- gether with four checks for the filing fee of $50.00 each. We understand that when approved, there will be a re- quirement that a covenant be filed to the effect that each of the parcels will merge with the contiguous parcel on the east which fronts on Cox Neck Road, and we will assume that the approval will be made conditional upon such filing, and the covenants will be filed once the approvals have been given. I understand that it is not necessary for me to be '" • prese1it when these applications are heard since they are self- explanatory. If this is incorrect, please let me know. Very trul yours, i P - I • - - Emil F. DePetris -- - r711.1-,crm : NOV 7 1985 SCHEINBERG, SCHNEPS, DE PETRIS & DE PETRIS• ' 8 ATTORNEYS AT LAW 220 ROANOKE AVENUE POST OFFICE BOX 699 SHEPARD M.SCHEINBERG RIVERHEAD,NEW YORK MURRAY B. SCHNEPS 11901 ISIDORE SCHEINBERG EMIL F. DE PETRIS - 1900-1995 RICHARD E. DE PETRIS (5161727-5100 JANET GEASA November 6, 1985 JAN Town Planning Board - Town of Southold Southold, New York 11971 Att: Ms. Dianne M. Schultze Secretary Re: Proposed lot line changes (William Chudiak) Dear Ms. Schultze: In accordance with our telephone conversation of today, the following is the language of a covenant which we intend to insert in any deed made by the Chudiaks to the owner of the adjacent parcel and we understand that any approval by the Planning Board of the lot line changes will be subject to the requirement that the deeds which convey the Chudiak property contain this covenant: "This conveyance is subject to the following covenant and restriction which shall run with the land: The parcel hereby conveyed shall merge with premises of the grantee contiguous thereto on the east and the 2 parcels shall thereupon be deemed to be one parcel for purposes of the zoning ordinance of the Town of Southold, so that under the present provisions of the zoning ordinance of the Town of Southold only one residence, together with accessory structures , may be constructed and maintained upon the said two parcels which are being merged into one parcel. " Very truly yours, 7 Emil F. DePetris EFD:sr 7 b Gj U ,• ,,,,I,, P ► o' D _yi, 5 :� T t ■'�,_ 1 .ry L D i JAN.q • .. • 0- o.', - Southold, N.Y. 11971 (516) 765-1938 December 17, 1985 Mr. Emil Depetris, Esq. 220 Roanoke Avenue Riverhead, NY 11901 Re: Chudiak to Zabicky located at Mattituck Dear Mr. Depetris: . The following action was taken by the Southold Town Planning Board, Monday, December 16, 1985. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board approve the lot-line change to add 25,000 square feet from the property of Chudiak to the property now or formerly of Zabicky, - located at Mattituck,subject to the following conditions: 1. That the property of Chudiak will be conveyed to and • merged with the contiguous house lot to the East, now or formerly of Zabicky 2. That only one (1) residence together with accessory structures may be constructed and maintained upon the two parcels which will become merged into one. 3. That the above covenants and restrictions be included in the deed and on the survey map for the lot line change. When we are in receipt of the amended surveys as requested in condition No. 3, the Chairman will endorse the approval on the survey. Please forward six (6) prints of the amended surveys. If you have any •questions,- please don' t hesitate to contact our office. Very truly yours, - . , 0,(B)-0-6\k-k, r( 04rt-i) BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. , CHAIRMAN ` SOUTHOLD- TOWN PLANNING BOARD •. . :. �' • :::''''6=•:17:7-1; to • r 59 .• `, 5 f!, :4,.i { � 3 yry 1 { l �,; , 1 / , . ! • r :3- 4 . , f.ii - i : , 1 R' ; Stit l ¢ x --:-‘40` »w TO j�fy/y „ 'a* '� +Rr; a. r 4 # �Y 1� f}t1 �! • €�1 J- 4 T 74 , tet aill6 VI fi}r � w , d ?ys ( ( i 1 18— .4,,,,e• go 8 t T /y (�(/ �T F 11 t : - 13125 �5,0°514 E, g EXtST1NG LOT 0LINE ,�4000. - V ' 5, i.,-,Z.s4 2C). e, . i' Hwy 1 II '--,—.:16, fir t .h _ • �Jc-gt ,--1 5. . . �*>' ,4_to , a < 9. " rI!tis - s to -_... 1 z i a "' �-` ,i` t 'b„J p�.. r - - • , i , el 1 StitA . 1 }3.: - t :TIV , t" • t t^ # r 44 ' , .3 • ? r-..•.+.._.n..........n < -".....,...,wi.-.=....... ........-...��..•..,..•...e,.....h,. "...s;_...+.,..•.,.........;«..rr.......��a........._ .f..-�._........•..m.,.._.....-�.._.•» ..., ___._ -__......_ `'.,. ....� ~ i r _ ..-,..-..—._.._-•---,...-.--..-..- . „, \ N„,\, . • ti,Z' , 44 - ' ,i. ( `4 Vis„ it int _1 : 1 14-.Ct. 1D/3/63 - - 0 UPDATE FOR THE RECORD FILE#5381 —M. Pisacano Application Member Goehringer confirmed his abstention during the 9/11/03 ZBA Meeting. cc: LT, GG i ,5-76 /9 f �� 9titaziA/A (juj I - , 761 7s:Gtid .�-61 _ /79:z-- 6 3 / - atff- RECEIVED MAR 2 5 2003 i& 4J, 5.1 Ca/ _ Pi3a.eAfto -ern ,c� l3j® 3 ZONING BOARD OF AppE COUNTY OF SUFFOLK , • , kl,pe Robert J. Gaffney SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES CLARE B.BRADLEY,M.D.,M.P.H. Commissioner December 18,2002 • Mr.Michael Pisacano PO Box 1931 Southold,NY 11971 Subject: Rio-02-0052 - Pisacano residence-w/s/o Cox Neck Road, 1583 ft.s/o Bergen Avenue, Southold-t/o Southold-SCTM: 1000-113-7-19.11 Dear Mr.Pisacano: As previously advised,your request to appear before the Board of Review of the Suffolk County Department of Health Services has been received. The review of this case has been scheduled for January 9,2003 at 2:0o p.m.in the Suffolk County Department of Health Services'Conference Room, County Center,Room S-238,.Riverhead. You and interested parties are requested to appear,with or without counsel. On that occasion,you may produce any information or evidence you wish to be considered concerning the above-referenced property. Should you have any questions,please call(631) 853.3086. Very truly yours, Walter Dawydiak,Jr.,P.E.,J.D. Acting Chairman,Board of Review WD/kn C: MartinTrent Southold Town Planning Board James Meyers Theodore Wells • James Bagg- Planning Dpt. Patricia Moore, Esq. Paul Caminiti,Esq. Douglas Feldman, PE- SCDHS Valerie Scopaz-Town of Southold •Board of Review• Suffolk County Department of Health Services 220 Rabro Drive—Hauppauge,NY 11788 (631)853,3086 Fax: (631)853.3075 3523302066 FROM :Pe agy Cribb,, Bookkeeper&I, y FAX NO. :3523302066 'eb. 18 2003 08:50AM P1 2/15/2003 12:36:00 PM To ZBA Board, We, Theodore and Rita Wells grant authority to Malcolm Doubleday to Represent us at any meetings now and in the future pertaining to said property of Mr. Pisacano reguarding any application for a budding lot. Due to a medical condition we cannot attend any meetings. We hereby appoint Malcolm Doubleday to represent us. Thank You, Theodore and Rita Wells 1.. I�Iwiwr .C44k. 0 x ./7. 03. Dated SrATE aF rweA , Couto-N o F. Sum-7-62 Qu -rat 5 I -11-k b a FicteeAmeki , Sao Z -7 boP� tA}6u.s pee50,u,4"..v 44e e't, 6&cce4 ,tom , tibi 1145 W i Fe ern4 (L '-'-i we r tcwtrrrry P 2. tiemA -n-ie 64{17 t5 0 A floe/itea t bEit -n F Sc.a-no N C44-Q4b , g t h t(leg OP 1146- .4$01/6 r lu 6-1-gd'v`-t i , 42-4 b -Clk,�--N1 AC'.1tit(a.v tzit) 1-44 ':>tea rr. LPIAM CiA.h10 L. Cribb :1R, givoiosi7 sir\- :47 19,2065 Boodid Thri, Atilatie- r+yf Ca. Ira ii iJ( 1. • l� J i SOHE.nie no, SOHNEPS, DE PETRTS 8c DE PETRTS• V • ATTORNEYS AT Aw �� L• 220 ROANOKE AvENVE POST 09?I0S BOX 599 SHEPARD M.SCHEINBERG RrvE$E$AI,NEW YoRx MURRAY B.SCHNEPS • 11901 ISIDORE SCHEINBERG EMIL F. DE PETRIS 1900-1985RICHARD E.DE PETRIS • 1516)727-5100 JANET GEASA November 6, 1985 Town Planning Board Town of Southold Southold, New York 11971 Att: Ms. Dianne M. Schultze Secretary Re: Proposed lot line changes (William Chudiak) Dear Ms. Schultze: In accordance with our telephone conversation of today, the following is the language of a covenant which we intend to insert in any deed •made by the Chudiaks to the owner of the adjacent parcel and we understand that any approval by the Planning Board of the lot line changes will be subject to the requirement that the deeds which convey the Chudiak property contain this covenant: "This conveyance is subject to the following covenant and restriction which shall run with the land: The parcel hereby conveyed shall merge with premises of the grantee contiguous thereto on the east and the 2 parcels shall thereupon be deemed to be one parcel for purposes of the zoning ordinance of the Town of Southold, so that under the present provisions of the zoning ordinance of the Town of Southold only one residence, together with accessory structures, may be constructed and maintained upon the said two parcels which are being merged into one parcel. " Very truly yours, • � 1 f" •ni t�4 Emil F. DePetris f si' I- .r • • iEFD:sr ��y • SCT ' EBG, Scit ji's, DE PETEIS 8c DE PETRIS ATTOR. EYS AT LAW 220 ROANOKE AVENUE our 3 185 POST OFFICE PDX 399 • SHEPARD M.rS El N BERG RTVFTJT.7_EAD,NEW YORK MURRAY B:S$1-I'1EPS 11901 ISIDORE SCHEINBERG EMIL F. DefFirS _ 1900-1985 RICHARD E DE PETRIS (2161727-S100 JANET GEASA 04, October .1, 1985 Southold Town Planning Board Town of Southold Town Hall Southold, New York 11971 Att: Diane M. Schultze, Secretary • Re: Property 'of •William. 'Chudiak Dear Ms. Schultze: • • In accordance with your letter of August 14, 1985, I enclose herewith four-applications for lot* line changes to- gether with four checks for the filing fee of $50.00 each. We understand that when approved, there will be a re- quirement that a covenant be filed to the.- effect that each of the parcels will merge with- the• contiguous parcel on the east which fronts on Cox Neck 'Road, and we will assume that the • approval will be made conditional upon such filing, and the . covenants will 'be filed once the approvals have been given. • e I understand that it is not necessary .for me to be preseht when these applications are heard since they .are self- - explanatory. If this is incorrect, please let me know. Very trul yours, Emil F. DePetris EFD:b2m • 4l J Planning Board Page 2 12/16/85 Arshamomaque Island - Board to review the correspondence from the Suffolk County Planning Commission and corresponcence from the applicant regarding this subdivision of 4 lots on 12 acres off a right-of-way, at Southold. Leander Glover - Board to take action on this sketch map for this minor subdivision of 3 lots on 15. 68 acres at Oregon Road, and Cox Lane, Cutchogue following a field inspection. Premises is located in a C-1 zone. Bertha Kurczewski - Board to make recommendation to the Board of Appeals on thisset-off of 22, 132 square feet from 1. 5 acres following a field inspection. This proposal is located at Depot Lane, Cutchogue. Richard Duchano - Board to make recommendation to the Board of Appeals on this set-Off of 11, 250 sq. ft. from 22,500 sq. ft. located at Champlain Place and Bridge Street, Greenport, following a field inspection. Henry Arbeeny - Board to take action on the sketch map for this major subdivision of 6 lots on 7. 592 acres at Kenny' s Road and County Route 48, Southold. Three lots are in a B zone and three lots are in an A zone. Cranberry Acres - Board to take final action on this subdivision for three lots on 24 acres at Cedar Beach Road, Southold. Chudiak to Wells- Board to take action on this lot-line change to merge 12,500 square feet from Chudiak to property of Wells, located Cox Neck Road, Mattituck. Chudiak to Zabicky - Board to take action on this lot-line change to merge 25, 000 square feet from property of Chudiak to property of Zabicky located at Cox Neck Road, Mattituck. Chudiak to Wanat - Board to take action on this lot-line change to merge 18, 800 square feet from property of Chudiak to property of Wanat, located at Cox Neck Road, Southold. Chudiak to Becker- Board to take action on this lot-line change to merge 12,500 square feet from property of Chudiak to property of Becker located at Cox Neck- Road, Mattituck. Walter and Marilyn Gatz-Board to take action on this site plan Drs. Ciletti and Claps- Board to refer this site plan for offices, located at North Road, Southold to the Building Department for certification. LAW OFFICES � n WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER, P.c. IUr✓ 10315 MAIN ROAD, P.O. BOX 1424 MATTITUCK, LONG ISLAND MELVILLE OFFICE WILLIAM WICKHAM NEW YORK 11952 275 BROAD HOLLOW ROAD ERIC J.BRESSLER SUITE 111 ABIGAIL A.WICKHAM 631-298-8353 MELVILLE,NEW YORK 11747 LYNNE M.GORDON TELEFAX NO. 631-298-8565 631-249-9480 JANET GEASA TELEFAX NO 631-249-9484 August 20,2001 Michael Verity, Senior Building Inspector Southold Town Building Department 53095 Main Road P.O.Box 1179 • Southold,New York ,11971 Re: Theodore and Rita Wells SCTM# 113-7-19.19 1575 Cox Neck Road,Mattituck,New York 11952 Dear Michael: We are the attorneys for Theodore Wells and Rita Wells,who own the above property. We understand that the Town has received inquiries as to the development of tax lot 19.11 for a single family residence. The Wells have a deeded right of way over the 50 foot right of way outlined in blue. The Wells and their neighbors keep open and use the right of way on a constant basis for its full extent. Tax lot 19.11 was supposed to have been added to tax lots 15 & 16 per Planning Board lot line change approvals on December 16, 1985 (Chudiak to Zabicky and Chudiak to Becker). At that same meeting,mergers for Chudiak to Wells and Chudiak to Wanat were also approved, and those transfers were made(now tax lots 19.18 and 19.19). The Planning Board approvals prohibited,constt'41etto of a;Tesidence on 19.11 since it was to be added to the two lots which already contained residences. Moreover,the property is an R-80 zone. Please keep us advised if this matter progresses. Very truly yours, . • Abigail A. Wickham Encl. AAW/al cc: Valerie Scopaz,Southold Town Planning Board Greg Yakaboski, Town Attorney • Mr.and Mrs. Theodore Wells 30/Verity yam... -...._..-...g • • { . ,,,t,,,,, 131b2!:4 ;t1(21) Wj Southold, N.Y. 11971 00 (516) 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD AGENDA December 16, .1985 7:30 p.m. Public hearing on the question of approval of the minor subdivision of Walter and Marilyn Gatz to be known as "Green Pastures" located at Sound Avenue , Mattituck, 4 lots on 24.54 acres. 7:45 p.m. Parker Wickham has scheduled a pre-submission conference • to discuss the site plan for construction of a 42' X 60 ' storage building at Mattituck Airport. Board Lo set January--- , 1986--at, the Southold Town -Hall as the time and place for the next regular Planning Board meeting. Board to set January , 1986 at the Southold Town Hall, 7:-30-p.mJ as the time and place for a public hearing on the question of approval of the minor subdivision of the Estate of Thomas Mrowka, 3 lots on 5. 8 acres, Mill Lane, Peconic. aL Board to set-.the following new proposals for a field inspection: 1. Philip Horton- Lot-line change located at Main Road, Cutchogue 2. Kay Dee Estates (Patricia Bailey) - 3 lots on 5. 9 acres located off a right-of-way from Leslie Road, Cutchogue. 3. Eleanor D. Leonard - 2 lots on 49, 089 square feet off a right-of-way from Bay- Home- Road, Southold.- - -- San Simeon Retirement Community -Board to review the amended site plans for this proposals for 144 dwelling units located at Chaple Lane, Greenport. Gretchen Heigl - Board to make recommendation to the Board of Appeals on this set-off of 65,000 squre from 3. 24 square feet located at Soundview Avenue, Southold. • Frank and Diane Ammiriati - Board to refer this site plan for conversion of a three-family house into a retail food store with dwelling use, located at Love Lane, Mattituck. Board of Appeals has granted a special exception approval. ' I ,. ,z • T I; I ...140, :T LD pr S ° .,,. ►,' Y Ari =�.... „� °°°°° Southold, N.Y. 11971 (516) 765-1938 ti December 17, 1985 Mr. Emil Depetris, Esq. 220 Roanoke Avenue Riverhead, NY 11901 Re: Chudiak to Wells Dear Mr. Depetris: The following action was taken by the Southold Town Planning Board, Monday, December 16, 1985. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board approve the lot-line change to add 12, 500 square feet from the property of Chudiak to the property now or formerly of Wells subject to thefollowing conditions: 1. That the property of Chudiak will be conveyed to and merged with the contiguous house .lot-to the East, now or formerly of Wells. 2. That only one (1) residence together with accessory structures may be constructed and maintained upon the two parcels which will become merged into one. 3. That the above covenants and restrictions be included , in the deed and on the survey map for the lot line change. When we are in receipt of the amended surveys as requested in condition No. 3, the Chairman will endorse the approval on the survey. Please forward six (6) prints of the amended surveys. If you have any questions, please don' t, hesitate to contact our office. Very truly yours, elf ) BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. , CHAIRMAN SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD n.. m4 --- •,t O.-L...1 .... C r...,-..i--,r.r 61 kk to ,, t T S :;--" R ►, Y * Southold, N.Y. 11971 (516) 765-1938 • December 17, 1985 Mr. Emil Depetris, Esq. 220 Roanoke Avenue Riverhead, NY 11901 RE: Chudiak to Becker located at Mattituck Dear Mr. Depetris: The following action was taken by the Southold Town Planning Board, Monday, December 16, 1985, RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board approve the lot-line change to add 12,500 square feet from the property of Chudiak to the property now or formerly of Becker subject to the following conditions: 1. That the property of Chudiak will be conveyed to and merged with the contiguous house lot to the East, now or formerly of Becker 2. That only_ one (1) residence together with accessory structures may be constructed and maintained upon the two parcels which will become merged 'into one. 3. , That the above covenants and restrictions be included in the deed and on the survey map for the lot line change. When we are in receipt of the amended surveys as requested in condition No. 3, the Chairman will endorse the approval on the survey. Please forward six (6) prints of t1}e amended surveys. If you have any questions, please don' t hesitate to contact our office. Very truly yours, ( .41)WdOt 1D'- :6\1-("% )1(21V°Gxx' BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. , CHAIRMAN SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD • , .� ,,,0,,, Ii i T P, S 1 (ti�r9 2L S'r ,� ' ,. .. , i,p,.77 ,Y pl '`'y Southold, N.Y. 11971 (516) 765-1938 December 17 , 1985 Mr. Emil Depetris, Esq. 220 Roanoke Avenue Riverhead, NY 11901 Re: Chudiak to Wells Dear Mr. Depetris: The following action was taken by the Southold Town Planning Board, Monday, December 16, 1985. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board approve the lot-line change to add 12,500 square feet from the property of Chudiak to the property now or formerly of Wells subject to the following conditions; 1. That the property of Chudiak will be conveyed to and merged with the contiguous house lot to the East, now or formerly of Wells. 2. That only one (1) residence together with accessory = structures may be constructed and maintained upon the two parcels which will become merged into one. 3. That the above covenants and restrictions be included in the deed and on the survey map for the lot line change. When we are in receipt of the amended surveys as requested in condition No. 3, the Chairman will endorse the approval on the survey. Please forward six (6) prints of the amended surveys. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact our office. Very truly yours, /CIANNUIA 065 der BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. , CHAIRMAN SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD so". IFOUr P P' a (4 j D i s T ( �, s, -i;3rt QLD S �� � -� �`� �� Y �l �, so Southold, N.Y. 11971 (516) 7651938 December 17, 1985 Mr. Emil Depetris, Esq. 220 Roanoke Avenue Riverhead, NY 11901 Re: Chudiak to Zabicky located at Mattituck Dear Mr. Depetris: The following action was taken by the Southold Town Planning Board, Monday, December 16, 1985. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board approve the lot-line change to add 25, 000 square feet from the property of Chudiak to the property now or formerly of Zabicky, located at Mattituck,subject to the following conditions: 1. That the property of Chudiak will be conveyed to and merged with the contiguous house lot to the East, now or formerly of Zabicky 2. That only one .0.) residence together with accessory structures may be constructed and maintained upon the two parcels which will become merged into one. 3. That the above covenants and restrictions be included in the deed and on the survey map for the lot line change. When we are in receipt of the amended surveys as requested in condition No. 3, the Chairman will. endorse the approval on the survey. Please forward six (6) prints of the amended surveys. If you have any questions, please don' t hesitate to contact our office. Very truly yours, 9201-niftt (B)Ott\A:A-)ql(Otinu° BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. , CHAIRMAN SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNTNr. RnARn . ,,,, 00-1Four,, lof " . -4 Tn `` ` ° ALD , �z r�Y'-i2 e s` s ►S ..r ,� � ...Y•��' 1)'' Y .411 14• • Southold, N.Y. 11971 (516) 765-1938 December 17, 1985 Mr. Emil Depetris, Esq. 220 Roanoke Avenue Riverhead, NY 11901 RE: Chudiak -to Wanat located at Mattituck Dear Mr.. Depetris: • The• following action was taken by the Southold Town Planning Board, Monday, December 16, 1985. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board approve the lot-line -change to add 18, 800 square feet from the property of Chudiak to the property now or formerly of Wanat subject to the following conditions: 1. That the property of Chudiak will be conveyed to and merged with the contiguous house lot to the East, now or formerly of Wanat. 2. .,_That. ,only... one (1) residence together with accessory structures may be constructed and maintained upon the two parcels which will become merged into one. 3. That the above covenants and restrictions be included in •the deed and on the survey map for the lot line change. When we are in receipt of the amended surveys as requested ` •• in condition No. 3, the Chairman will endorse the approval on the survey. Please forward six (6) prints of the amended surveys. If you have any questions, please don' t hesitate to contact our office. Very truly yours, 1 BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. , CHAIRMAN SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 7 • SCHEINBERG, SCHNEPS, DE PETRTS 8c DE PETRIS ATTORNEYS AT LAW 220 ROANOKE AVENUE POST OFFICE BOX 599 SHEPARD M. SCHEINBERG RIVERHEAD,NEW YORK MURRAY B.SCHNEPS 11901 ISIDORE SCHEINBERG EMIL F. DE PETRIS 1900-1985 RICHARD E. DE PETRIS (516)727-5100 JANET GEASA December 23, 1985 Mr. Theodore R. Wells, Jr. (No #) Cox Neck Road Mattituck, New York 11952 Re: Chudiak to Wells & Others Dear Ted: Enclosed herewith are copies of the 4 letters from the Planning Board, which I received from the Planning Board, approving the 4 lot line changes. I am now preparing contracts with you, Becker and Wanat. You will note that condition #3 in each of the approvals requires that the first 2 conditions be shownon the survey map. I, therefore, suggest that you take the enclosed copy of the conditions to the surveyor and have him place those conditions on the map. If you will then forward 6 prints of the map, as so amended, to the Planning Board, the Chairman will endorse his approval on the surveys. I will rely on you to attend to this . I will send the contracts to Bill Chudiak in a day or so and the 2 of you can see about getting them all signed. We will be able to close the contracts and get the deeds out to all of you as soon as the buyers are ready, after the Planning Board Chairman has endorsed his approval on the surveys. Very truly yours, Emil F. DePetris EFD:sr Encs. Lambros Siderakis 192-B Cox Neck Road Mattituck, New York 11958 June 10, 1988 Re: Land behind: 192-B Cox Neck Road Mattituck, New York To whom it may concern : Please be advised that I am the owner of the property whose address is 192-B Cox Neck Road, Mattituck, New York . Further, please •le,t this serve as written notice that I am against the building of a house or any such structure on the above captioned land . Further, please note , that said land is currently owned by a Mr. Chudiak and it is less than an acre of property . Under current law, two acres of land are required for construction of a house or similar structure . I thank you for your cooperation and concern in this matter , Sincerely, 1amvvo5 Lambros Siderakis Dated: Sworn to before ne this 10th of June k 19 88 `►lel _ ♦ . '� ',� 14 Notary P U b 1 C DOROT SARANTOPOULOS . Notary P •.ic, State of New York No. 43-40%.851 • Qualified in Rich LI 'o .{ Commission Expire•4\• ,' f 1 MN . IS. I _ / ' A3 6 4 1A.6 • " us sn • a` �. 14.2 14'1 SA(c) 1.4A1d 1.014(0N 1. 1. `' I'ATTCH k vM .. 7.4 FOR PCI.H0. :$ '4 ,,s , 1,44tc) SEE SEC.N0. a zci 4 7.5 106-09-019 sx WI 1,7A1c) 3 is et, `n 7» + 2 ,C ,,• 4 c(/J, i� 111 ° 1 07: 1SS IW 1M 14.5 9J, 7n Y6 8`�a a), x as, 8 NO 1 pm K e' 1.2Alcl A 9 w t,,a g 7.3 Q 2_x ,w 1. 1 7 P ,� Qa° $ .1,:V- IP Y 1,OAlc1 3 ? 1 :N 5 6 �w a,. 700 6 -0'L r or 1� yl A cl to f,V '(o O s urt la0 Ln 7S w ,d 7.i %�'c O� 10# A N Ilk 7s1 d as a„ a0, uu g 10 11 ,3 1allo " se, s, 4 w 5 6 8 V. .i f' Q �. O jp0 irs tK 4. I.3 ,W �% I _1 • r +� 3 iso s 1 ' sa 2 ,o, sis-, (50') s0 1 3... = 703 31 xes '^' 9 se ..--- '%.°� 9 A. a 1.3A1c1 L ' ,102. �_ ti iura` to, to no L E y, e sol i,s �Q- x O2 ° ., d 1 !� S a ti l50')irios1, 4 2 `c, 1N Y°! 't.\::. BR OF �� ANCH _ 701 '• 4 \\ \`gyp\F ' ` \6 7 \ l• I, 4) 1016> \t,.\ \ \ 01'5 1 6AIth 1014 P\G� 1.64(c) u ''R . tla 1 1 1 i r 0\ \\p T4 , 2c) %% Jr \9 .. 1�,1 '� -< \ �0' 'v 6$ 9. 7.8• '� 0.1c$1 I 1 ' d' 1 Tr \ 2.6 `�` .°' 11 1 tiA 5 1_ ,a a 2.5 8.54 . s° 1.84 1 g 1 �I 1,� I " 1'' : 1 \ I 8.9A ca s ti C 1 I,a 1 s.1 ��, „90 "' ti .al�p7 ' tiZ '1 1 • ,dl`°. Id I, 1,e \ `s' &I - 11''1 P 1 1 - • 1e I N x 20 '`i9.291. m I ,cP t I 1 l I�,p I a4 ;, a % 7S. 8 VI 9 i ,' 6i . = 11, 1'*'1 l le. I 1« 0 _ I I*VAS' 19.28 $ .. I a"II aYI°°1°1 I~ ;� p 2.3A °` 77s Ilia sd G 1 1 1 a 1 aiiii `moi ►ld,l 0i°°1 112 pI I alto Nr S ' 19,21 ai ` 19.10 s. yo`�"1 I , 17 1 1 ,y, 5 O UM! , 1.9A(c) OW? $ 16 ' or c ItiS11. i I 1 A ., 4 1. 1 1 6\ • villtglt 1 1 # 2% , 19.15 19.8 1.1 d ti ' 11 .0. '7* 2 4A(d 2,1Al2.1140 # 19. ,d, 6 \c, is '1 ' 1918 'S 20P V. %.. Ill +° Q. �4 3 r' IA 1 , kG D 1. 4 $' 49.11 Q .,� 3 0 2.3k' r. n Alp 1 p �, ti CPI' o t i A7 29P • s d S 9' 25 %°t' 11. 5.04 `` 19.23a 37.0A o 'd a 6 4 IT ° 1 • o .,6 1N cr '$ �� 0N.\cl w 22 ,6 '� t 21p .,.,, 0 6.0A • m i;;,ijii��3,;Sii, 4 ' RODERICK VAN TUYL, P.C. s [ W f\ - 218 FRONT STREET GREENPORT, NEW YORK 11944 PHONE 518-477-0170 March 21 , 1986 - DATE Ted Wells Cox Neck Road Mattituck, NY 11952 PLEASE DETACH AND RETURN THIS STUB WITH REMITTANCE AMOUNT REMITTED$ DATE CHARGES AND CREDITS ,BALANCE 5/9/85, Revise maps of Wells, Wanat, Becker. $ 75.00 1 /2/86 Move monuments and pipes. 125.00 9/4-12/23/85 "Overall" map of Chudiak parcel; revisions. 300.00 't6 6 $500.00 4 le\ !..5)c ytYL \�iarz� ou( • RODERICK VAN TUYL, P.C. Item k STR72©Wheeler Group Inc 1982 FOLD AT(—)TO FIT DRAWING BOARD ENVELOPE t+EW6P ,,:., _.), , ,., .•;....;;;::;;;;:i ) .S• i' ),ti+ '. :'*.‘,/":•.::',:,,*. u .�.. . CREDITS s::;; DATE CHARGES AND u; I Map of property, wept of house par $175.00 Corners set on west line. 8''F o 6) g3144r141 , • •,'.,',,:::',,'1, 6i_ 60.„ : , •,,,•:.:,;;; ; Twit ya , .,,.•. , .,,,.,,„ • : , {.-. , • . ., RODERICK VAN TUYL, P.C. •• Item N STN72 0 Wheeler Group Inc.1982 — Fold At(—)To Fit Drawing Board Envelope#EW6F ;).,;,;,;, r ii 1{.'.l ',., ;V i'•' {; ,Y;{)i}. ;t;',< {if;, /, • S Y. .ys.{{{ .• ))i,,,/,f7 , ' ).'Y :;'V}.){,fin,.. • '••;,:,:r4:;i; i. . _ ,;,,•;;;•:-.4,,,,, : is ;,r,i .';,j's: ;i't;,S3;; • '>1:,I•i$s�;�: • ,r,,;;.• y, { %S;% {{),,,f, ;;5,; , • RODERICK VAN TUYL, P.C. FRONT STREET AT MAIN I 1 GREENPORT, NEW YORK 11944 _ 516-477-0170 __ -f - % , DATE iay 18, 1984 TO Mr. Theodore R. Wells, Jr. Cox Neck Road SUBJECT Mattituck, NY 11952 I 1 Dear Mr. Wells: _ • Enclosed please find four prints of a sketch for you and the - - other parties to examine. Please feel free to mark them with any _ _. ._ r instructions regarding the work required. We will await your word. f Yours truly, _ ____74i) Colin Van Tuyl - CVT:avt - Enclosures _ • 1 r Form Ml 5-N72 The Drawing Board, no,Box 505,Dallas,Texas s RODERICK VAN TUYL, P.C. 1 FRONT STREET AT MAIN t GREENPORT, NEW YORK 1 1944 516-477-0170 j� TO Theodore Wells, Jr. DATE August 6, 1984 Cox Neck Road SUBJECT Cutchogue, NY 11935 Cox Neck Property Dear Mr. Wells: . If these maps look o.k. to you, please let us know and we`; will proceed with setting the corners. - - Very truly yours, _ - Colin Van Tuyl , CVT:avt �^, Enclosures 1 • Form MI.5-N72 The Drow,ng Board,Inc Boa 505,Dello,,Tee., �,,.... fi PLANNING BOARD MEl'`'_",; .,S ••• skIFF0(� • O RICHARD G.WARD i Off' • Chairman ��� • Gy Town Hall, 53095 Main Road GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM,JR G • ` P O. Box 1179 BENNETT ORLOWSHI,JR. % ,?j Southold, New York 11971 WILLIAM J. CREMERS �'Y Fax (516) 765-3136 WI WILLIAM L.EDWARDS 5-1 `.�'dlp� �a� • � Telephone(516) 765-1938 .•s� PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD January 14, 1997 Arthur Foster Private Rd. Mattituck, NY 11952 Re: Proposed major subdivision for Arthur Foster SCTM# 1000-113-7-19.14 Dear Mr. Foster: The following took place at a meeting of the Southold Town Planning Board on Monday, January 13, 1997: The final public hearing which was held at 7:35 p.m. was closed. The following resolution was adopted: WHEREAS, Arthur Foster is the owner of the property known and designated SCTM# 1000-113-7-19.14, located on Cox Neck Rd. in Mattituck; and as WHEREAS, the Planning Board has classified the current application as a major subdivision since there have been prior subdivisions involving the subject lot and th application brings the total number of lots to 5 or more; and e WHEREAS, the subdivision before the Planning Board is for a clus • 2 lots on 4.6572 acres; and tered subdivision of WHEREAS, the Zoning Board of Appeals granted a variance for substandar and width (Appl. #4423) on October 17, 1996; and d lot depth `i Page 2 Major subdivision for Arthur Foster January 14, 1997 WHEREAS, a 20,959 square foot area is to be dedicated to the Town of Southold for drainage purposes; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act, (Article 8), Part 617, declared itself lead agency and issued a Negative Declaration on November 25, 1996; and WHEREAS, a final public hearing was closed on said subdivision application at the Town Hall, Southold, New York on January 13, 1997; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to Chapter 58, Notice of Public Hearing, has received affidavits that the applicant has complied with the notification provisions; and WHEREAS, all the requirements of the Subdivision Regulations of the Town of Southold have been met; be it therefore RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board approve and authorize the Chairman to endorse the final surveys dated December 9, 1996. Enclosed please find a copy of the map which was endorsed by the Chairman. The mylar maps, which were also endorsed by the Chairman, must be picked up at this office and filed in the office of the County Clerk. Any plat not so filed or recorded within sixty (60) days of the date of final approval, shall become null and void. Please contact this office if you have any questions regarding the above. _ Sincerely, v/ / Bennett Orlowski, Jr. 1 S Chairman enc. cc: Building Dept. , Tax Assessors James Richter Zoning Board of Appeals ,1 til' 6 ,y i �,,p .� ..• 1FS• I QTc \ \ , ,9 �`. is St 2 5 a •V 4 rF 1 - I 1 C3 ,kG\\ 11\ 9< - . / ...// g'� �' ,cP A. •3y ,d' • 'f" H '� / Q) J ,{ 1 I 1 I 1�'� tAd> >\O ' \�' �g .y _......./ .../ ,'t'9 .,...--• �'� R �. A� `� ,� `1.P a 6AP�G1 `' A I Y 1 1 1'S 1 ,� 1\`' \12\ �(' 3 1�12 / ,r -0 A \ a; 1'', cA yeti 0 1 1 p 1 1 1 ApIG\ g\ 3y 614 - )4',cv / % .s.<3.„„--\ N. 1 AP 6 1, 't. '$ 6 $ "O' 16 c\ 1 V' 1 1 11 I ,� \ \ C\\ \® --- 1. mfrs u 1 A 2�p` a` • ,4,4,0 1 1 % 12.p c, ,M, 0\ '3y\ Vs' . , ,°, \ *0_ ,c, til0 as ieo ,,� g�$ yy A.6 3y 1 ! 1 Frl vl �l \ �p 69\ C oD\ \\ 1\ a us 9 26 �'a +4. t 11 A2 , 4'' e 6 r. \ \ p \ \ 1 S. 1 4' 15014 1 * \ 2 \I \ \ 1 � � \1� \-Z 1d aO r3 ,d' 1\ ,4 ,4 a° �, 1'• 0 ,, ., 5t. y. ,?`� 1 1 i2 11d1` 1 �i. 4.1. L r 1`�,, ,, p d P„' 11 ,� 11 1 111 1 1 I 0 1• ,. yes A 1A ar �Dggrc192* Yt `� 1 10 ,'F` ,, I 1 1 I 1` 10} �I I I 2,s �� �.� , roo1O� m tiry�G1.1 g 1 ,ca•�. I �.,� ? g1 a> mN1 I I I 1 ��' 11ti�P� `� $ �1� �� apS.oA 50 a �• '11 I I�'1 ��1eI s 11;1 1� , �, °,� - + 9Z \ 5; 1 1 o I 29P1 ' ti# . p9 12 �° S1 - fc� E I0 19 e isp 3z 11 � I "t 1 1 1�1 \ p 8 1 In° �' tir I I 'a �, $ 6 iso. 11 .” 19.25 �3 isl v� I ,nc n5 ' 1 1 ' 5.7A ,$ `? \\`G((//1g1oG\ , S21 G '1 '1�1 �1 I 1•dl 0" $ Z © ��' S t .t, s+ d ,, 19p �.r , '°,, �I I 1 �1 1 ,ca 5 16p�G, , 4, e �� g21 9. 11 + 6 I.' I 1 1 1 15'. A ,� N. '3 tip , °, % 16'0. 19.15 vs •e. = do,+`, Y I I I r�S 2.4A(c) fr� 19.19 161 '� �y. q� '* 9 <fa1g P c\ 4 ... H� 4; y IA P S t.j .3 2N MiNG*119.18 '� 2iNt' ' 'b O is S •9�p\ 2 r4 d t.d2. m z Pa d w e 3 2916 I. t6 10 B A til * 0 G\ S P. COUNTY OF SUFFOLK SOUTHOLD 19.17 .� ? Alp t, NT ROOTS) .- 8 PARKS DEPARTMENT 2,3Alcl >� IP % 9 z e li• v rg ,�'$ 2.50, Oci - N a, 25 d - 19.23 6 to ¢ 2 w S.OA 37.OA t�, m WO N m % p' 1� d •i ,L,o •9j 15 d 24 22 4; % ';2 2 S.OA SS A 6.0A 0 $ %P.?.Gl rn `90 .1>t'. ptiq e ' 2� '' a to •, 9 8 2NY' 7p0 14 23 <321 6 �y i5 11p 4 otos .0 rilertil 5.0A 5.5A s ��� N 28 400 tst 37 %• t`° 1an o1p o ,� .0 'Eb T6 1, INORjH Rp l 8 Z S 1 LBS gyp. t5� �' MATCH LINE �, $ 10.q 11 12 VA C R•AS W cs SEE SEC.NO.121 1,3A1c} ,y, RD• n 100 M\DOFF p�0 151 SECTIOI COUNTY OF SUFFOLK © K 105 106 107 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD UNLESS DRAWN OTHERWISE, ALL PROPERTIES NOTICE 'air . E ———- —- — �° —-H —- Real Property Tax Service Agency Y ARE WITHIN THE FOLLOWING DISTRICTS: �. 114 VLLAGE I I © Ws o lct Uro —-F —- Renee n.trt&r 1ti —-R—- swam. g SEWER CID MAINTENANCE,ALTERATION,SALE OR T�' County Center Riverhead,N Y 11901 172 IL 1 3o HYDRANT DISTRIBUTION OF ANY PORTION OF THE 99M later District Una —-L—- NetarkolOMtrict Lt» —HST —— FRE NATER SCALE IN FEET: LIOHT 46 SUFFOLK COUNTY TAX MAP I5 PROHIBITED e4. (,; � p6TRICT NO 1000 PROPER UST detrkt Line ——L —— M�WUKs Oletrkt Llns —'—A—— PARK 71 ��E WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION OF THE ,8�,1p�. 0 �0= P 120 121 122 -- Park District LM —-P—- Woeferatar Dletrict Uro —WV —- AMBULANCE WASTEWATER REAL PROPERTY TAX SERVICc AGENCY. -- CONVERSION DATE: Dec 12,1996 ��.�--— s...-DistrictLlne —-S—- i t t t . 1 1st 01 \;; f \r3... . 1.51 . . 0 . . ....• \i 8' ..3.:?::-.0--------:12-,_ _..„ 773.21-‘5. 7::::„.0,1 ,,w, ........„..._ .c ',.. \ ICY o ��� � � ��AI Itao wE y y°�t OF s �` 6") so r JTA 4( !�� 410 458da$ '\ r�3«' IAND 50�v�{O 0� G . N >y, �� �-�- QFC p AA i 2 t ToW 05 &`-'1.1-11-101-1. ✓NAUFHORIZED ALTERATION OR ADDIT1011 ` _ - ,/ t0 THIS SURVEY IS A VIOLATION Of �`� ®LK .Cu`I�Y' �, l • SECTION 7209 OF THE NEW YORK STATE NOW 0 Fa E Su F� t it,L, aTICN LAW. ... ,.�1.-Y �ai,o NOT BEARING SMITH ,. �� ®C1 ►'� low ,_. AL OR • y{�(� Gym EMBOSSED SEAL SHALL Nc.;l 3E C`�'aSiUERED r��A�,� AAAPS' �rJ✓yj� � t�i1vO� a +, ��- TO BEA VALID TRUE COPY. i'•�rl� W�', f^^• t1 T`-��i►1 Na �O �UARAt•'TS:FS I;a^'-ATED HEREON SHALL RUN • NIS 1-' y� vy' � N� Q 1 tg4 ONLY 7U THE i':'SON FOR WHOM THE SURY-`•7 �I•"at'�'` I }vr �/©�ty�� 1`�_ y� �G"` PRET-APED, A:+i CH HIS BEHALF TC THE L ���`� I}` G 1 ��Ct •l ;c:a�1L tI1L` COW: :Y. 0 LESt.LD H R�N.NCY AND yy�� - .:*O:J Lt;TLD HLRE9N, AND IL .��r�(3C� fjr j/ .` � 1^f� iO OE A f TI:E TENDING IN5T1_ �. �U' ^ y��i �JQ iUT10N.GUpnn.•tc��A.�tiC.T TRANSFERABIF ` ¢;1� 4�a Y�� u^ 10 ADDITIONAL INC:A.n:LE N5 OI SUBSEE OIV +� -.WNERS. s 1 .Subject - 1000-113 . 00-07 . 00-019 . 011 , 1000-113-7-19 . 8 Mr. and Mrs . Kevin Milowski P.O. Box 779 Mattituck, NY 11952 1000-113-7-19 . 10 Mr. and Mrs . Thomas Hilliker P.O. Box 244 Mattituck, NY 11952 1000-113-7-19 . 19 Mr. and Mrs . Theodore R. Wells, Jr. 1575 Cox Neck Road Mattituck, NY 11952 1000-113-7-19 . 18 Eleanor Wanat 1475 Cox Neck Road Mattituck, NY 11952 1000-113-7-13 Lucy Neudeck & another P.O. Box 537 Mattituck, NY 11952 1000-113-7-14 Mr. and Mrs . Michael Neudeck P.O. Box 537 Mattituck, NY 11952 1000-113-7-15 Lambros Siderakis c/o Nancy Nikolis 130 McKinley Avenue Albertson, NY 11507 1000-113-7-16 Mr. and Mrs . Stanley V. Becker c/o Helen Shalvey Box 56, RR1 Mattituck, NY 11952 1000-113-7-19 .23 Mr. and Mrs . James J. Bissett, III P.O. Box 386 Holtsville, NY 11742 LEGAL NOTICE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS THURSDAY, JULY 10, 2003 NOTICE is HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Section 267 of the Town Law and Chapter 100 (Zoning), Code of the Town of Southold, the following public hearing will be held by the SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS at the Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, P.O. Box 1179, Southold, New York 11971-0959, on Thursday, July 10, 2003: 6:45 p.m. Michael Pisacano #5381. Location of Property: 1457 Cox Neck Road, Mattituck; Parcel 1000-113- 07-19.11. This is an Appeal requesting a Reversal of the Building Inspector's amended November 8, 2002 Notice of Disapproval, based on Section 100-24(A)for construction of a single family dwelling. The basis of the Notice of Disapproval is that this 73,616 sq. ft. area is not permitted in the R-80 District because it is not a recognized lot by any of the following four code standards: 1) The identical lot shall be created by deed recorded in the Suffolk County Clerk's office on or before 6-30-83, and the lot conformed to the minimum lot requirements set forth in Bulk Schedule; or 2) Lot was approved by the Southold Town Planning Board, or 3) Lot is shown on a subdivision map approved by the Southold Town Board prior to 6-30-83, or 4) Lot is approved/recognized by formal action of the Board of Appeals prior to 6-30-83. The Board of Appeals will hear all persons, or their representatives, desiring to be heard at the above hearing, and/or desiring to submit written statements before the conclusion of the hearing. The hearing will not start earlier than designated above. Files are available for, review during regular business hours. If you have questions, please do not hesitate to call (631) 765-1809: Dated: June 10, 2003. Lydia A. Tortora, Chairwoman Southold Town Board of Appeals LEGAL NOTICE ' SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD_; COUNTY OF SUFFOLK OF APPEALS - STATE OF NEW YORK ss: THURSDAY,.JULY 10,2003 NOTICE ' IS HEREBY Lise Marinace, being duly sworn, says GIVEN, pursuant to Section that she is the Legal Advertising 267 of the Towri -Law and Chapter 100(Zoning), Code of Coordinator, of the Traveler Watchman, the Town of Southold, the fol- a public newspaper printed at Southold, lowing public,hearing will be in Suffolk County; and that the notice of held by the 'SOUTHOLD TOWN- - BOARD OF I which the annexed is a printed copy, has APPEALS at the Town Hall, j been published in said Traveler 53095 Main Road, P.O. Box - 1179, _Southold, New York Watchman once each week 11971-0959, on Thursday, July for / week (iccessively, 10,2003. ' '6:45 p.m., Michael Pisacano ' commey in: on the day of #5381. Location of Property: C2003. 1457 Cox Neck Road; ' ' Mattituck,Parcel 1000-113-07- C .- 19.11. This is an Appeal Fly requesting a Reversal of the Building Inspector's amended November 8, 2002 Notice of Disapproval, based,on Section ' 100-24(A)for construction of a �� day of single family dwelling. The Swo to before me this ' basis- of the Notice of I .. u..-,&....4,-, , 2003. Disapproval is that this 73,616 1 sq. ft. area is'not permitted in the R-80 District because it is . . _ ` not a recognized lot by any of / // the following four code stan- -!iN(' h ` ��%I dards: • Notary Public 1) The. identical-lot shall be created by deed recorded in the Suffolk County Clerk's ' office on, or before; 6-30-83, Emily Hamill 1 and'the lot conformed to the NOTARY PUBLIC,State of New York minimum-lot requirements set No.01HA5059984 forth in Bulk Schedule; or 2) Qualified in Suffolk County Lot was approved. by the Commission expires May 06,2006 Southold Town Planning Board, or 3)Lot-is shown on a subdivision map approved by I the Southold Town Board prior ' to 6-30=83, or 4) Lot is 1 approved/recognized by formal action of the Board of Appeals prior to 6-30-83. , The Board of Appeals'will ' hear all persons, or their repre- , sentatives, desiring to be heard , at the above hearing, and/or desiring to'submit written state-' i - ment before the conclusion of the hearing.:The_hearing will not start earlier than designated { above. Files are available_for ', review during regular business - / hours. If you have-questions, '! please do not hesitate to call (631)765-1809. , Dated:June 10,2003 ' Lydia A.Tortora,, Chairwoman Southold Town ' _Board of Appeals 1X 6/19/03 (787) lI NOTICE OF HEARING A public hearing will be held by the Southold Town Appeals Board at Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, concerning this property APPLICANT: PISACANO, MICHAEL TAX MAP #: 113-7-19.11 APPEAL: REVERSAL BLDG. INSP. DECISION PROJECT: NEW 1 -FAMILY DWELL. 73,616 S.F. TIME & DATE: THURS. JULY 10TH -6:45 P.M. If you are interested in this project, you may review the Town file(s) prior to the hearing during normal business days between the hours of 8am and 3pm. ZONING BOARD 'TOWN OF SOUTHOLD-• 631 -765-1809 I/861 {/�► g/•�1 `rye��// E! 1.3/4013-1C0V :::::: ..c`� • n � �{ V;V oVY "Styr. ,n:r`r' 'Si:d.`v vn I1401.«a. .`1 /ll Q8 1t ��i�� mnn p c+7,s �•:<ICh:il Bats d0 Sa�N'_'-IS3'�i 36?�Q3 � .- MtI Y •JIMMY 1d 1 0 111110) • ,.,d ttc7glii rs.".,t-mr!rmsmi��eal ` 1-[1 A ^1 V +�73"M, 1Yix31=::..\z:' 'Ar.&..�:0�ilia , /W CI3A13✓3a -'CJ aitr.a S .'^,I CNV C.liVL 1sd SS — IN:-7S ZSSOSM 0 1`r' Er..$'L "� •!"• 11?e Ice c7a.f}7 r c;; n v 3s t; — r7 p z� �I t,l 91 .21.5" !D "£D! s-�a�an✓n " -;;s 1•, T,zat3h-ens oral 3K1 ,`; \ . _ & �. s�,a? p a s�•+a T if ,.�w v1 �,xns sll;i ao s3rd0i ,I ?�. 6 /-'; ..� M O p a cs� a�afr rap► _______H— . -1 I-� �`; " n�vl Trott»n`ff I ---- — - 3tr_;:f:6�K.3r1]Rl dO 60L[N011]3 I r� .y (dye. /� _ 9Sr.' 4 ` U .✓ f �� / • ^i11lkiY Y(1 NO1YL317YAam'�Njj1Y�i ".. 0 x d TZ1 ;WA a► t.��pJIiii oZt „ ,:..„ \ ,.. „ , CC \Z.. . Al 4'. b l -2.` em ' -— / s..t 46, A.. I . A ao +1 • S.,, ' �� • 4.\c-,4 '-,-.. IPfi / .• , r f. r • 1----p-, 6-7 __, , , ., ___ ,:. ,. ... .. ,„ O ,L P 4,$-. 0 0 0 - L �i c'` / /d 7 ..z. s �: :. _ •_ , . _-� a 1 Ott oo . tit Ys/ * --- . = i — i. _ - l __ = k 4 1 9Z f gz 1 r 'd 'I f1 f~1 f/till COs i! 1 • a t„• : ''',n.,;f'na4, ase \ . . — �c. ! • *r 1 !, ' i-- r , , _ __ i �', I. • '1'2 2.2 .... i :?..1.1 , ...,. - *V . . -,,i, . ,• : 41 A rir .. .. .:. N---...,....4 . .. - . . , . _ ... , —- . ,. - •, ' \ ' - ......- '.• . . N . \ . ..,. _ \ \ ,./..,. / . . . -,.... . . , \ ,• , . ---4,„ . 1 i ,a, \ \ . . , . ,• .,, . . \ , . ., . , .• . ., ..n , .cn \- / yi ..--,... .: 3..''.,'• • , , 4:0,, . / . '.. . . • • ? r. ...-N.ke...‘„, '''`, .„ •;• . ' . , •}•tt,t,.. • \,..,, .,- ;6'''• 'W* 4?1.4" . 1Y/ . % . - f • - • , '. ...N.,., ,:',' Q) N. i.,..-724, •1 ,, .. . -""3"1...• ,°'\\C\\)'° I. ,/'\-\:47. A , , ... '<„...,,z,,,C.• ‘''.el, • . . . ')Fre_x ,......, ?-1,1 1 -.• .;1- '', : )..1 , ...... , - l 1 , •••••'"'i. ' . ''ve 0 .. 1\/ '....• ''''\*N,..,,,...., Ank' I* (.1\r•1 >4.4'4 " ..4 t...8.4 .._, it....--..................---..... NN.....•%. . e 0 ' '1 Ne, ' ..".'" 1 \ 0 1 \ , „„..........__.....,,, ...-s-I.14- - , . - f j ,„....: 1 iiS lic? 4‹, ' i.t.V . • ole ''',.. tz eli, ,.4.,,,r7 ,,..:<, . 'er../.. > I * 1 15 i * qd.• St^ 0 gi lii ' • *. . I • \ . • , '91 *(‘'''' t ' • 1 ,,,, ••• , , . . . . , • • ...., ,..., _ ,. r)! 1 . , • r \ (- t,22: 7,' , - . f • , . . s , 0 P• .5, r--, SUI .1...K CO. HEALTH DEPT. APPROVAL .. . H.S. NO. . . . ,. ' , .. k;, .'• -ece, _ , • , . ' I •Ce STATEMENT OF INTENT THE WATER SUPPLY AND SEWAGE DISPOSAL N 'la>. SYSTEMS FOR THIS RESIDENCE WILL • CONFORM TO THE STANDARDS OF THE , N\,.. SUFFOLK CO. DEPT. OF HEALTH SERVICES. S N. ' (S.I N. APPLICANT _ . SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPT. OF HEALTH . SERVICES - FOR APPROVAL OF ,,, CONSTRUCTION ONLY DATE: -- _ . H.S. REF. NO.: , APPROVED:: . . , . , . , - , 0SLIFFCtK CO. TAX MAP'DESIGNATION: , . • ,-;',... -,,,,* :.; : , ., DIST. - -SECT. ELOCK PC4. L.t 1,1'' _•*_ 1113CICP-:r:-—It ,-— 7 ,..i,..,j,.... , . - „, OWNERS ADDRESS: . ---. - 1,:f.:‘,:i , . , P-0.„-e,C, A. • 7,,,..7 P .,. . . - CLITCHOC7Lre i\LN't ItFi'5 - / 77 „ ' -29aY9:14% . . DEED'. , • . r‘ ' tE :1....455 -.- -,-- -P..:59CREF:).. ( . . ' TOT 461E STAMP . A • ..07 itimcnioacts)ALTUAVION UR rairvirtop , "" 10 MS SUM'IS A ViOLATIOEI CI, inmati 1209 OF THE NEW TOW STATE gpigATIO,11 LAW. ' SANCY I CKO.F13 OF THIS SURVEY&kV nal REARM V CS\ . . - VE I.At,O SURVEYOR'S in'.7'.3 SEAL OR epx , 1OSS52 SEAL SHALL Ii bT SE CONSIDERED ' i f,:10- 3 . Kg.g A itAtd)TR+IL"COPY. <it, ' . PDARAMES* - . 6.0.'.:A-`.ce.,2,MON SHALL MI . ...„ .. - my TO THE Rt.:..:""crri,WW:4.1.31E V.40110, , . . 15 p;,..,.-mrp,A7--n.)°.KU:Pt;(A LF to . - 5A1s11,$,.. VILE COWAM c.;OVE.:ti,41IVITAI,.0,4,144*/ at.' 176.9MG HISTIEUITON 115150tici-.1,•ale Aug- , - - KAPjAmErcuED--:JULY t 1,f t4M.. CrevAver: CO I'm ASS:CDIEES OF THE allinistil", 03,1)11OU)SUARAMFEEZ ARE MOT MAPOSOLAn , Mr E,AlWilerrt,,,At(.3-InfooIN4(111 5141.ifei . , . 4EAL. 't . . :I4VY.GEAVkL' ' . . . i GUA ,12ANTEEDTO: 1440Ack.(72:LITLE,IN5U,VANCE(.0, ____ •ROERICK VAS.IuyL,P.C. - 1 . . Liaos:Ed:Low SURVEYORS - - . . GREENPOT NEW YORK • - - - - . - 4FUL4 _ =`CIL : outhold Town Board of eals MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD. L-.I.. N.Y. 11971 * ' " TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 ACTION OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Appeal No. 3243 Application Dated April 11 , 1984 (Public Hearing May 17 , 1984) TO: Mr. and Mrs . Kevin Milowski [Appellant (s) ] P.O. Box 134 Cutchogue , NY 11935, At a Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals held on May 31 , 1984, the above appeal was considered, and the action indicated below was taken on your [X] Request for Variance Due to Lack of Access to Property New York Town Law, Section 280-a j ] Request for Special Exception under the Zoning Ordinance Article , Section [ ] Request for Variance to the Zoning Ordinance Article , Section [ ] Request for Upon application of KEVIN AND LESLEY MILOWSKI , Box 134, Cutchogue , NY for a Variance to New York Town Law, Article T6 , Section 280A, for approval of access over a private right-of-way at the west side of Cox Neck Road, Mattituck, (now or formerly of W. Chudiak ) ; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-113-7-part of Lot 12 . The board made the following findings and determination : By this application , appellants seek approval of access over a 50-foot ' private right-of-way located at 'the west side of Cox Neck Road and ex- tending westerly 312 . 16 feet to the premises in question , which is an 80 ,000 .sq . ft . vacant parcel setoff by the Planning Board , File #368 , at'''i'ts 'Meeting of March 12 , 1984. 11 Although the right-of-way has been traveled by farm vehicles , the right-of-way is in need of improvements, for satisfactory access by emergency and other vehicles . It is the understanding of the board that this request is for-access only ' to the parcel in question , and it should be understood that anyfurther subdivision or additional dwelling structures will ' be required to return for an updated review and updated improvements • as ' this board would deem' necessary under the circumstances . In considering this appeal , the board also determines: • (a ) that the relief requested is not substantial ; (b ) that .by granting the requested relief, the character of the neighborhood will not be adversely affected; (c) - that by allowing the variance , no substantial detriment to adjoining properties woilld be created; (d ) that no adverse effects will be :produced on available governmental facilities of any increased''popul'ation ; (e ) that the relief requested will be in harmony with and promote the general purposes of zoning ; and (f) that the interests ,of•',7ustice will be served by allowing the variance , as indicated below. Accordingly, opmotionby Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Doug- lass , it was '� Gt`, 0 ' , v"''" CONTINUED3 ON PAGE TWO=) ' ' DATED: June 13, 1984. CHAIRMAN, SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Form ZB4 (rev. 12/81) k. (7‘-, Page" 2 - Appeal No. Matter o'E KEVIN AND LESLEY MILOWSKI Decision Rendered May 31 , 1984 RESOLVED, that Appeal No . 3243, application of KEVIN AND LESLEY MILOWSKI for approval of access , BE AND HEREBY IS APPROVED AS APPLIED AND SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING 'CONDITIONS: 1 . That the right-of-way must be improved a full ten-foot width with four inches of bankrun (mixed with 20% stone content ) to the parcel in question for a length of approximately 312 . 16 feet; 2 . Any future subdivision or set-off past this parcel along this or any other right-of-way will require re-application and consideration by this board for appropriate 280A access consideration (or the Planning Board if same falls Within their purview) ; 3. The right-of-way must be continuously maintained in good , satisfactory condition for access by emergency and other vehicles ; 4. Upon written notice to the Building Inspector or Board of Appeals , an inspection and approval of improvements must be made prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Location of Property: Right-of-Way at the West Side of Cox Neck Road, Mattituck , NY; County Tax Map Parcel 1000-113-07-part of 012 . Vote of the Board : Ayes : Messrs . Goehringer , Doyen and Sawicki . (Members Grigonis and Doyen were absent. ) This resolu- tion was adopted by unanimous vote of the members present. GERARD P . GOEHRINGER, HAIRMAN June 13 , 1984 z . , t , I ...- ( ' • )I , Y ". „• 1 , 1 - I . 1 , , 1 I ' I -- ` .i .1;t,,,V.V.f.tc.4,,_7•,,•".-A?„,,,I24,,,,,,,..°,,,,t,.",,,,,,,„?Nir„,,,,,,r,..„,,,, ,,,-..,.„,,,,,,,,,,, . ,,„•2i ,-"-.2"14kiTeuiiifiek-7...t,-AW,,,i',-,, '..&'1:-'2,* .42'''',IF*,-*64•••,•-j' I .4'AVINftraii."0041.,^12•Mtki ''''''.,,,e21•'^i',^";2,',•' - ' 1. • . 1 V•II \..............,............, i 7' STr146 ,-,a, ,..-.. SEE SEC NO 106 - ,LIATOh z LINE ‘ C.,_ •-•",,k u? c- \,.0 ,1P. 101111kin 61 , 7.3 7.2 13 171.tc) 2 ,•:‘ 110110 4. 2- "; \ .„..0. ,..I.0" •,,, s 4\\' r ., ; 0 - 'Z. .0, .0 15 .. " ' L7A(t) '.....ecol. 0 • 1 1#• 9 9 10 i 1 12 3 ,..0.,,p ,,6 - .•4 .6 1. 6 '..•G'-') \\:0,0_,I,. $• . „, ,. ,Alt: 2 0 t., t, . "I •3 -.4,1.' 6 • s , . S ' t. -..il " s 2•°'' '•," i .7.' ' -.9 : ,. 4 1 •..0. P \‘ t S.'7 7". ---.. . 4, ____. '•' ° ,' ' 0.,------::,••••0.•••••1:• ••• \O•"' ,',..4._ 7 '. , k7 ---".----- 4t-Y•-• „' • '.- ..'" , -..."--..f..... .... s'e's., ,.. .,.t.50') -.•...,,,,,,, :.!,. 7-„ •-•174,,o, : %T.,..„ :lcii ,' 'I •' -0---; kl.• 6.‘ _ .4,1., .. „..,•:,,,,,,,t.3,4,00,0,,,,-„,„, , •• .... ,, 1E, - ‘2, -- S,'.- , ,,,,. 7. P. • .......k' `t. „L;:- ..P Ilk 1111" , l'..,'id ' , , 0 b 1..k 4\ii.. '''''''''" ‘i• ,.... . \.;.(- ' ' 4‘.1'. • '\ ii,..00- -.' . ^ '', ') I 1 t „' ,s t b , s •t, '' ,, "•, .... l', ..•••••••07.;,,.• ••• . OW . ,— k.,1 *# ,.. -",‘1"-S,--E4,s,,s . - S;0' , .-.1... - _ '1•11‘s ,Ys, 3 , — \\'6 • ‘.z,„ ,, •-!,-„-"^••'-',.-7'", -. 1 ..• - -13 2•6,,,LY-, , 6,, .. „,,.• '-' 1•.-*-•.:,F„,s•."..\2'•I 1. erI,D, „...e.0,I. .',,tk,,,,,,I'1•, 4r.E El • 71: \ - in6 e? , , • , Z . .... • ! - .. \ •. ,,.. i .•-• •,- \ i• \kl: , _ . , ‘0 , , .• : ,•• . _t •0 p',. ' :1, , \ I 't 1 i < i: -' '..., - „,,... CO: ..' '',‘ -V•1'. ' ..\” Zf.,"i'i•-•-: 1, ..., •.• I 1.1" •. ',,,‘'- it•§'•,,' 10 ---171' '' ,----- .... . • 6 7,,, , ...1', • '..! \ '• -< „..:......„)..„. ., z,7 •• C•Oi„!, rtl - '3 , -'. , ` - \.,2- ' r.,Y.** e••••‘‘, 1 ,' t ', ‘,' . ,„8 • • ' .1' .. ........... i .., 131 U) ' •‘/P-Z.''',.. ''' 7. 71- - - - .' •'' •-•• '' SI, 7..f,L,} • 1 ..., 0. . ... \10 ‘ ' ir., ,..:4-•:‘ I. '.±,,--'''.L,.t• 5,1,-:.- .... '7 ..,_ , • t..,• -54r•'''''-it ' ''"C:YI V 22 , .. ‘'.5 4 1 •', ,•17"...1:•4-'•'7,, ./..., •4,P-41-4:i% 1 • 2,‘‘ , 6,A2\ ',4,ff.:1;':,vp..,.,e . ,.. , • ,, , .. 4.• ta' I IS"1" r 0 I2 M 1 A ri . - . ,",,,*,.,0,y,,..",,,,,,V,..•1 ''', ,a, -,•_. ‘:`0' . IS ke• -.`...` P•449.127' %.":"...VAI 'I''''''5,' sl'Eatrflf•Mi 2.91' <°.;"•'-‘r•••.' "'A' s-S•,•7t,". • 9ki•,..,... ••.. -•.,j1;•...,,...4.4„,•,,,,-•i:,•,45 • e 1,si ' ,-',,:rc%:.1,1,xi,--,,,''-,,,-,-,74-• P. • -1.••• .:. .,„,^1r];•44;11 i,,,,,,,,,11;',.,,,:'1A-1.1";1:!-' 1 . . :",-•-`,4",--41--,...,-t•-,y4- .., -- • ,.1. . -,... 1 t • ,, I., (4 d gen ,--,....//, _,-- ti I - II f • • _.. ,...nm t'i°"`..^-..r,. ., . ..,_ •. ,-.-,.-..... - I t I- 'I.^'1'ri"tl"iIr P'i i I - .,_. i„ n - i- t I 1/,,///II#_,. A •,'' ��FD(rr- P `. -. I � ( ' D TOt‘ A1 1` 1 D r ''' • ;4.SL h ° . Y Southold, N.Y. 11971 (516) 765-1938 March 13 , 1984 Mr. Emil Depetris, Esq. 220 Roanoke Avenue Riverhead, NY 11901 Re: Set-off for Chudiak #368 Set-off for Chudiak #374 Dear Mr. Depetris: Please let this confirm the action by the Southold Town Planning Board at the meeting 6f March 12 , 1984 . RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board approve a set-off (106-13) as designated on the Map of William Chudiak, dated January 5 , 1984 , located at Mattituck. (#368) RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board approve a set-off as designated on the map of William Chudiak, dated January 27 , 1984 located at Mattituck. (#374) If you have any questions, please contact this office. Very truly yours, HENRY E. RAYNOR, JR. ,CHAIRMAN SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD By Diane M. Schultzq Secretary - // V •' X23/ _ - ldo�ra� • Z7. -r AG.2ES _ i • -,..-.55 } t ; x SoS }! • rlarri s Est '� i i4,,,,,,,,,,_, IA T. • :•=7,4r /,. `I - N.71.33'40-0'.0: - 1 / z`�f''.�.E --- ' __ _ X63.zó y a v/ At 1:74 t',AX'pA R G6+ 144"O 913 7-I,Z b :_:5.:__ _..,. ,-,1-.1� 7 '_� ____ C_'l. roe �� "3 I -.--- `- �LC ,di ���,-,3 � vQ - --- -. - 4adD • 21 • TJ tej • rt �. •ecad r ek Van rktyl !Via: a /// �AOJH nun AreaArnm w Afnnr..w ,h 7�ltus lever n A MIAMI.'c► .2. 1/- "�I z 5 B PITON 710i OF THE NEW TOM S:AO .--_-_—- f r - - S= tAStCATION tAw. - Mf FCeB0iTHIS sua+er•AArp7rT_. "=- LICdHSed Ldts01 Pi"�elafe P{sars' O LV�S:F'.Y.�: :H VI tADID Euavaroxs F. • ,,e e:. v '31J!`✓FyaYS /0.3.Q!. - 9 pJNO:LTC: :,"y d r-ea�rr�itrr7"� 3l Z...6 y b\ ' .2 0 A IJ aP 6F A Vtif).:L.0.'N:. J V. S.7�i+�3 C!" - VHAeAN,7E,'-J IAT•` _ .`h i, .�� . .:.,it..opt ' �J7 TWYTo rEtsen;OP v.tr, ..te. �,� Nor,�i3 �sf, y� :'',:a f u?8FlA3T Ago c<t s a H�c ro RECEIVED tau COa?AHY,.AV:7,,,tEATAt AG:Nh. ',..i>61'.4% .. _,,,,, t, T�8@iC 14TfRJIlOt1 IZiit.J 1 y.., , ,;tom; �ISE Assn c OF Tkt t ._• SOUiHOtD 10 `N PLPJV�':T;:. ---,AVQ 4X - MN'011A➢AtariS AAE':J.1M1.M1.• :.. . Si AlzurONAr>�•r1,,,- _ . ,. _.MAR-1 919 :` CONSULT YOUR LAWYER REF 1)IGNIN6 THIS. INSTRUMENT—THIS INSTRUM (MOULD BE USED BY LAWYERS ONLY. NOTE: FIRE LOSSES. This form of contract contains no express provision as to risk of loss by' fire or other casualty before delivery of the deed. Unless express provision is made.the provisions of Section 5-131 1 of the General Obligations Law will apply. This section also places risk of loss upon purchaser if title or possession is transferred prior to closing. THIS AGREEMENT, made the clay of March , nineteen hundred and BETWEEN WILLIAM CHUDIAK and ANNE CHUDIAK residing at (Nol#qty-four Bergen Avenue, Mattituck, New York 11952, hereinafter described as the seller, and KEVIN MILOWSKI and LESLEY MILOWSKI., his wife, of (P.O. Box 134) Cutchogue, New York :1.1935 , • hereinafter described as the purchaser, WITNESSETH, that the seller agrees to sell and convey, and the purchaser agrees to purchase, all that certain plot, piece or parcel of land,XvilbEtackailitixgoiaticimoneximaxtbrotoccormt, situate, lying and being t abc at Ma t t i tuck, Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York bounded and described as follows : BEGINNING at a point in the northerly line of land now or formerly of the Norris Estate, which point is South 74° 33 ' 40" West 312. 16 feet from the westerly line of Cox Neck Road at the northeast corner of said land of Norris Estate; RUNNING THENCE from the point of beginning the following two courses and distances along land now or formerly of Norris Estate: 1. South 74° 33' 40" West 103. 01 feet; 2. North 21° 40 ' 30" West 439.43 feet; RUNNING THENCE North 74° 33' 40" East 263. 26 feet along other land of the seller to a point; RUNNING THENCE South 00 59 ' 40" East 451 . 09 feet to the point o place of BEGINNING, containing an area of 80, 000 square feet. r TOGETHER with a right-of-way for ingress and egress and public utility XMAP and other like purposes over a 50 foot private road to and from the 3NATION premises from and to Cox Neck Road; the southerly line of saidprivate road being a line which runs South 74° 33 ' 40" West 312. 16 feet the northerly line of Norris Estate from Cox Neck Road to the said remises. , Seller represents that the subject premises is a good. valid, building lot for the construction of a single family residence which meets the Fule, Regulation and Zoning of the Town of Southold and the . Suffolk County Health Dept. not requiring variance procedures. This representation shall not survive delivery of the deed. • 1-.—This sale includes a rig t, title and inerest, i any, of�e K L avenue opened or proposed, in front of o an ae�ere n e o any street, road or of the seller in'and to a r. a4 pining said premises, to the center line thereof, and all right, title and interest Y award-Ttt or to be made in lieu thereof and in and to any unpaid award for damage to said premises by reason ge of grade of any street; and the seller will execute and deliver to the purchaser, on closing of title, or thsrsafter, m and�y- � ,tom conveyance of such title and the assignment and collection of an ard. U.S. Postal Service,. o CERT(D MAILTM RECEIPT .-1 (Domestic Mail Only;No Insurance Coverage Provided) 0 For delivery information visit our website at www.usps.coma Postage $ a 3 7, 10H®4/40 mp Certified Fee 42. 46 �', , L. - - Postmark'. ® Return Reclept Fee (Endorsement Required) 7 S_ J U Np 7 2003 Here Restricted Delivery Fee C 3 O (Endorsement Required) Ui o 0. t[ u _ k Total Postage&Fees 7 s'`�ti+'� Y r 11-1 im Sent To o Mr. & Mrs. Michael Neudeck N. street Apt.No.; or PO Box No. P.O. Box 537 City,State,Z1P+4 Mattituck, NY 11952 PS Form 3800,June 2002 See Reverse for Instructions 11.S Postal Servic-em, r ERT'�ED MAILTM RECEIPT 11-1 r., Domestic mail Only;No Insurance Coverage Provided) O For delivery information visit our websitellit www.usps.com® m ` I Postage $ i�(�0!lD M 1i 0 Certified Fee :71_11.i';;;.. a Return Reciept Fee mark (Endorsement Required) / . 7 ore Delivery JUN702003 im (Endorsement met Reqired) CI Total Postage&Fees $ •• p m tw i I ..cavo p Sent To o Mc. & Mrs.-Theo.-Ore R. Wells, JI . N Street,Apt.Na; orPoeoxNo. 1575 Cox Neck Road City,State,ZIP+4 Mattituck NY 11952 PS Form 3800,June 2002 See Reverse for Instructions U.S. Postal ServiceTM a a CERT( MAILTM RECEIPT r9 (Domestic Mail Only;No Insurance Coverage Provided) 0 For delivery information visit our website at www.usps.com5 Lnm Postage $ e 37 ac�®� 0 Certified Fee d•3 S®,�°�- O !,� P nraric I= Return Reciept Fee (Endorsement Required) 1• j s Here 0 Restricted Delivery Fee J U f` 1 7 2 0 O (Endorsement Required) Ln o Total Postage&Fees $ •`(-= ;y, m 2 CI Sent To _-. CI Eleanor Wanat , N Street,Apt.No,; or PO Box No. 1475 Cox Neck Road City,State,ZIP+4 Mattituck, NY 11952 • 3800,Ju e2002 S--R-'- s-f. I t ti. U.S. Postal ServiceTM ru CERTLED MAILTM RECEIPT D (Domestic Mail Only;No Insurance Coverage Provided) o _ For delivery information visit our w.e!sitel?tc!lgv+'+,usps.comy Postage MICertified Fee 4 Return Reclept Fee MUM (Endorsement Required) He o Restricted Delive Fee O (Endorsement Required) IIIIII'rg '^`'; ._ 0 Total Postage&Fees ' IIIIIIIiii Pisacano M o Sent To . 'rs an ey Y . :ec er o c/o Helen Shalvey N Street,Apt.No.; or PO Box No. Box 56, RR1 \ City,state,zIP+4 Mattituck, NY 11952 -S Form 3800,June 2002 See Reverse for Instructions U.S. Postal Service,. r ▪ CERT�JED MAILTM RECEIPT 0- (Domestic Mail Only;No insurance Coverage Provided) For delivery information visit our website at www.usps.corne L o 1710 0 A 11 SSE rn Postage i. .t:.1:AA ��g,q, rfl 0 Certified Fee I11131%�'�,' Return Reclept Fee I�CI P•{> ark CI (Endorsement Required) ; 1 ° 2I D Restricted Delivery Fee MIMI p (Endorsement Required) ,I\, iii .� - �A� Total Postage&Fees o riE9.,.i, t r a� A: - Total _ ano 0 Sent To CI Mr. & Mrs. James J. Bissett, III N Street,Apt.No.; or PO BoxNo.p,O. Box 386 City,State,ZIP+4 Holtsville NY 11742 PS.Form 3800,June 2002 See Reverse:for Instructions , U.S. Postel Verv'CiPTM` ru CERT( D AILTM RECEIPT p- (Domestic Mail Only;No Insurance Coverage'rovided) For delivery information visit our website at www.usps.com5 OFFllCil USE Postage _ Certified Fee W v� Retum Reciept Fee Posim (Endorsement Required) `:�� J 7 2003 Here O Restricted Delivery Fee O (Endorsement Required) , u'! eg Total Postage&Fees WWII / 11, -- acano ci Sent To Mr. & Mrs,. Kevin Milowski N street,Apt No.; orPOBoxNo. P.O. Box 779 City,State,ZIP+4 Mattituck 1Ti 11952 PS Form 3300,June 2002 See Reverse for Instructi.ns U.S. Postal Service-. °; CERTTED MAILTM RECEIPT ,-a (Domestic Mail Only;No Insurance Coveragerrovided) CI For delivery information visit our website at www.usps.come Ln rn Postage $ s:.,. a �j m �+a` --'4=z,1� G m Certified Fee Return Reclept Fee �' Ostmark (Endorsement Required) (�JUN. fS- ere l Restricted Delivery Fee i t( '2003 im (Endorsement Required) Irl t1 CI Total Postage&Fees $ S 4,.� rl c av o ocentro Lucy Neudecno her N btreet Apt.No.; or PO Box No. P.O. Box 537 City,State,Z►P+4 Mattituck, NY 11952 PS Form 3800,June 2002 See Reverse for Instructions U.S. Postal ServiceTM M CERT( !D MAIL. RECEIPT r-a (Domestic Mail Only;No Insurance Coverage provided) 0 For delivery information visit our website at www.usps.corno Lii .i- OF CAL, . ;! m i Postage $ m Certified Fee • , fr 0 Return Reclept Fee P ark t 2��•� mere (Endorsement Required) � 7S I �1 0 Restricted Delivery Fee I I._ 9 m (Endorsement Required) J til ,, ,AC% Total Postage&Fees In o: A cavo 0 Sent To 0 Mr. & Mrs. Thomas Hilliker N Street,Apt.No.; orPOBoxNo. P.O. Box 244 City,State,ZIP+4 Mattituck, NY 11952 PS Form 3800,June 2002 See:• er - .r In. ' U.S. Postal Service-rM o Er CERTL D MAILTM RECEIPT D (Domestic Mail Only;No Insurance Coverage Provided) D - For delivery information visit our website at www.usps.coma OFFEICOAL USE m it Postage1111 , �� =1 Certified Fee J !�- 4�r D �Ili�fi� 1 P p Return Redept Fee (Endorsement Required) i He •EOM• 2003 D Restricted Delivery Fee \ V D (Endorsement Required) - M `Total Postage 8 Fees � ,ag§206-ano D Sent To Lambros 51d�ra�c-Ts` D c/o Nancy Nikolis It.No.; t orPOBoxNo. 130 McKinley Avenue Cdy,State,ZIPz•4 Albertson, NY 11507 PS Form :OO,J ne 201 -e R- er -t• In ru • L. •41 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD:NEW YORK x In the Matter of the Application of Michael Pisacano AFFIDAVIT OF (Name of Applicants) MAILINGS CTM Parcel #1000- 113 - 7 - 19.11 COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) STATE OF NEW YORK) { I, Melissa McGowan residing at 555 Marlene Lane, Mattituck , New York, being duly sworn, depose and say that: On the 17th day of June , 2003, I personally mailed at the United States Post Office in Southold , New York, by CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED, a true copy of the attached Legal Notice in prepaid envelopes addressed to current owners shown on the current assessment roll verified from the official records on file with the (x) Assessors, or ( ) County Real Property Office , for every property which abuts and is across a public or private street, or vehicular right-of- way of record, surrounding the applicant's property.j / ,7�-u1 L•� ✓) h„, Melissa McGowan ture) Sworn to before me this 17th day of June , 2003 ( otary Public) MARGARET C. RUTKOWSKI Notary Public,State of New York No. 4982528 Qualified In Suffolk County PLEASE list, on the back o1�RI r 48�1° 'ahle#of paper, the lot numbers next to the owner names and addresses for which notices were mailed. Thank you. • plete items 1,2,and 3.Also complete A.Sig ature III 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. X • ,, n Agent • your name and address on the reverse • °�`1I 0 Addressee at we can return the card to you. B. Received by(Primed Name) . C. Date of Delivery III Attach this card to the back of the mailpiede, tg'2-1^4 or on the front if space permits. D. Is delivery address different from item 1? 0 Yes. 1. Article Addressed to: if YES,enter delivery address below:_ ❑No Catherine Jarres 64-41 ',^74th Avenue ; . Glendale, NY 11385 3. Service Type • I ®Certified Mail 0 Esipress Mail 0 Registered 0 Return Receipt for Merchandise 0 Insured Mail 0 CAD: 4, Restricted Delivery?(Extra.ee): 0 Yes• 2..Article Number --� _(Transfer from service label) • _ i , _ ;7,003' [;5, ; , ;0 003, 4.3 4 ;•228 PS Form 3811',August 2001 ' ' 1' Dornestic'Return Receipt 2ACPRI-03-13-4081 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVI ' sT E t --lassi1118' R Z, .•.I IDPog -e Fees C9 i -e�tslo=C710 Q �� c o JuN • Sender. Please printf roux m Address,aWZIP in "s .ox. PATRICIA C. 1i!MOORE ATTORNEY AT LAW 51020 MAIN ROAD SOUTHOLD, NY 11971 Swing 0. 4 Si!{lit4 !Itf lttliti ! S4 ! 4214! Ii !44!I!i�34F:!!it�l • Iete items 1,2,and 3.Also complete A. Signature if Restricted Delivery is desired. t �� /• CIA!-nt ■ our name and address on the reverse .ddressee so that we can return the card to you. II Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, B. Rec•ived f(IVnt d Name) • .:to of I=livery or on the front if space permits. P - il( ..,0 1. Article Addressed to: D. Is del =ry address different from ite 1?' If YES,enter delivery address below: No Mr. & Mrs. Kevin Milowski P.O. Box 779 Mattituck, NY 11952 3. Service Type ®Certified Mail 0 Express Mail 0 Registered 0 Return Receipt for Merchandise 0 Insured Mail 0 C.O.D. • 4. Restricted Delivery?(Extra Fee) - 0 yes 2. Article Number 7003 0500 0003 4345 0952 (Transfer from service label) PS Form 3811,August 2001 Domestic Return Receipt 2ACPRI-03-P-4081 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE First-Class Mail Postage&Fe 'd USPS Permit No.G- Sender.Please print your name,address,and ZIP+4 in this box • PATRICIA C. MOORE ATTORNEY AT LAW 51020 MAIN ROAD SOUTHOLD, NY 11971 Pisacano ' t -E' ': COMPLETE THIS E •v tKelt watoI mrsnxnommemsea>.Plan- ■ C ete_ items 1,2,and 3.Also complete A. signature - it if RestrictedDelivery is desired. X I` x ! ,;=nt ■ Pn our name and address on the reverse .4/.144 Al f iL it ■ Addressee so that we can return the card to you: B. Received by fPrinted Name) C. at:of De 1463 ■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front if space permits. 1. Article Addressed to: D. Is delivery address different from item 1? 0 Yes if YES,enter delivery address below: 0 No Eleanor Wanat 1475 Cox Neck Road Mattituck, NY 11952 -3. Service Type ®CertifiedMail ,❑Express Mail ❑ Registered 0 Return Receipt for Merchandise ❑Insured Mail 0 C.O.D. - ,4. Restricted Delivery?(Extra Fee) ❑'Yes 2. Article Number • 7003: •05011 :001:13, 434.5• 0112. - . (Transfer from service'mile!),, • ;• - • •• •- PS Forrn`3811,'Atigtist 2001 ' ' 1 ' `Domestic Return Receipt 2ACPRi-o3-P-408t UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE First-Class M Ill II I Postage&Fe id USPS Permit No.G- e Sender: Please print your name,address, and ZIP+4 in this box ° PATRICIA C. MOORE ATTO R N EY AT LAW _ 51020 MAIN ROAD SOUTHOLD, NY 11971 Pisacano . • • itttiitttilititti:ltltttlltittltlimttihlittttltll .ttt,ldi -- KU1rr ialiIii.7MIX•1 YLUJ- • . yX61161,6101 1,11M- ■ Clete items 1,2,and 3.Also complete A. Signature it If Restricted Delivery is desired. X !i //� ❑Agent • Pn your name and address on the reverse �J� ❑'Addressee so that we can return the card to you; B. Received by(Printed Name) C. D to of slivery ■ Aoran thisf cardnti topathe backof the mailpiece, /4iG1' f y �.6� 03 or on the front ifs ace permits. D. Is delivery address different from item 1? 0 es 1. Artible Addressed to: if YES,enter delivery address below: 0 No Mr. Sc Mrs. Michael Neudeck - P.O. Box 537 Mattituck, NY 11952 - -3. Service Type El Certified Mail 0 Express Mail- ' 0 Registered 0 Return Receipt for Merchandise 0 Insured Mail 0 C.O.D. A. Restricted Delivery?(Extra Fee) Er Yes 2. Article Number -- (Transfer front service label)i ; ; : ' i :=7 a a 3 a:5 o a i.0 O,l 3: ;!4!3 4;5;):1411;1, 5 PS Form 3811,August 2001 ` I' Domestic Return Receipt 2ACPRI-03-P-4081 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE First-Class Mail Postage&Fees Paid USPS Aft Permit No.G-14.Sender. Please print your name,address,and ZIP+4 in this box • PATRICIA C. MOORE ATTORNEY AT LAW 51020 IVMAIN ROAD • SOUTHOLD, NY 11971 Pisacano Y_4l1•gairawigextlotommi 'mixilr[•eacivinaiti% i' ■ ete items 1,2,and 3.Also complete -A. Signa it if Restricted Delivery is desired. / ElAgent I Print your name and address on the reverse X A ` 0 Addressee so that we can?etUrn'the card to you. B.';eco by Printed C. D. Of `ivery IIAttach this card to the bask of the mailplece, - or on the front if space permits. . -P 1. Article Addressed to: D. Is delivery address different from item 1? El Yes' if YES,enter delivery address below; 0 No Ms. Alexandra Jones 1625 Gull Pond Lane Greenport, NY 11944 3. Service Type ®Certified Mail ❑Express Mail ❑ Registered ❑ Retum Recelpt for Merchandise ❑Insured Mail 0 C.O.D. 4. Restricted Delivery?(Extra Fee): 0 Yes 2..Article Number, . . 7003 0500 • 0003- :434 0044 1. (Transfer from service!alis, - - - PS Form 3811;August 2001 Domestic Return Receipt 2ACPRI-03-P-4081 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE m4D PS r PM �1 ---�" ern t! .lura > ..�. ® Sender. Please print William D. Moore, Esq. 51020 Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Passudetti IIIIIIttIllltl!Ih!IIIIIIIIII,I!ll7Il!tIIIIII,lIIIilltttJIhIl I :ENDER: COMPLETE THIS SECTION Wire aaraiirmtr rgxvarc.AvinosagEMY • CAMplete items 1,2,and 3.Also complete A. Sigtura MP if Restricted Delivery is desired. XL_ 0 Agent • Print your name and address on the reverse 0 Addressee so that we can return the card to you. B. eived by(Printed Name) C. Date of Delivery IN Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, (�j. w 1 1V Lc y, or on the front if space permits. D. Is delivery address differen 1 I�m 1? -0-Yes. 1. Article Addressed to: �% if YES,enter delivery ad i:2 below~. ❑No Mr. ,,Mrs.' James J. Bissett, III 'JUN 1 82093) & P.O. Box 386 Holtsville, NY 11742 3. Service Type �_ 2...---'' ®Certified Mail 0 Express Mail ❑ Registered 0 Return Receipt for Merchandise ❑Insured Mail 0 C.O.D. 4. Restricted Delivery?(Extra Fee) 0 Yes 2..Article rfroms umber (Transfer from-service ervice latieq- •', •. ; ;7003 0500 .0,003 -4345 ;0945 , 1 PS Form 3811,August 2001 % Domestic Return Receipt 2ACPRl.03-P-4081 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE First-Class Mail 111111 Postage&Fees id USPS Permit No.GAR. • Sender. Please print your name,address,and ZIP+4 in this box • PATRICIA C. MOORE ATTORNEY AT LAW 51020 MAIN ROAD SOUTHOLD, NY 11971 Pisacano • i<<�liti��lll,1,�i�,►l�,tll�i„1,1`I���,�ll�ii����i�lii���,sl�li ■ rlete items 1,2,and 3.Also complete A. Sig ture- n 4 if Restricted Deliveryis desired. ❑.A ent ■ Print your name and addres on the reverse Ai0 Addressee so that we can return the card to you: B. eeeived by(Printed N C atep� f Delivery • Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, /� "r or on the front if space permits. b!/ 6(~ £wit � / 1. Article Addressed to: . Is delivery address different from item 1? ❑Yes if YES,enter delivery address below: 0 No Mr. & Mrs. Theodore R. Wells, Jr , 1575 Cox Neck Road Mattituck, NY 11952 3. Service Type ®Certified Mail 0 Express Mail 0 Registered 0 Return Receipt for Merchandise ❑Insured Mail 0 C.O.D. 4. Restricted Delivery?(Extra Fee) ❑ Yes 2. Article Number 1 (Transfer from sQrvice label) .. l: =7 0 0 3 0500 : 0003 4345 0136 PS Form 3811,August 2001 Domestic Return Receipt 2ACPRi=o3-P-4o81 UNITED STATES POSTAL SER VIC Frst�Class,Mail � d - USPS z v PemYifNo:G=1 - °� E9 JUN o Sender: Please printyo1 , address,and2IP+4-in this bolo PATRICIA C. MOORE ATTORNEY AT LAW 51020 MAIN ROAD SOUTHOLD, NY 11971 Pisacano • ler,llll►IJhIIIII,.IIIIJIII1l1=IIIIIIIIIIlIIII�l,IIlIlIIIItII IDE': •MPLETETHIS SECTION tK•IulIX0a4 IAS:Mercarr•MrMOUM• • glikplete items 1,2,and 3.Also complete A. Si.•- r i1illr4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. X , ❑ ■ Print your name and address on the reverse ((( ddressee so that we can return the card to you. rec ed by(P ed Name) C D. e o l elivery • Attach this,card to the back of the mailpiece, �to S ' &-c-gel , or on the front if space permits. 1.'Article Addressed to: D. Is delivery address different from item ? • Y if YES,enter delivery address below4No Mr. & Mrs. Thomas Hilliker P.O. Box 244 Mattituck, NY 11952 - 3. Service Type Certified Mail ❑ Express Mail 0 Registered 0 Return Receipt for Merchandise 0 Insured Mail 0 C.O.D. 4. Restricted Delivery?(Extra Fee)- 0 Yes 2..Article Number 7003 0500 0003 ,4345 01.43 1 (Transfer fromer service label) ;_ - PS Form 3811,August 2001 Domestic Return Receipt 2ACPRI-03-P-4081 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE First-Class Mail Postage&Fees id USPS Permit No.G-1 MP • Sender. Please print your name,address,and ZIP+4 in this box • PATRICIA C. MOORE ATTORNEY AT LAW • 51020 MAIN ROAD SOUTHOLD, NY 11971 Pisacano hidi„iIlirildmindi,i„i,ili,,,,li,iiimillliumidi ' 41110 S i PATRICIA C. MOORE Attorney at Law 51020 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Tel: (631)765-4330 Fax: (631)765-4643 June 30, 2003 Zoning Board of Appeals Town of Southold P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 RE : Michael Pisacano Premises : 1457 Cox Neck Road, Mattituck, NY SCTM: 1000-113 . 00-07 . 00-019 . 011 Dear Sir or Madam: Enclosed please find three (3) signed return receipt cards for the above referenced matter. Very truly yours, 7)9ovi Patricia C. Moore By: Melissa McGowan, Secretary /mm Enclosures r • PATRICIA C. MOORE Attorney at Law 51020 Main Road Southold,New York 11971 Tel: (631) 765-4330 Fax: (631) 765-4643 Margaret Rutkowski MeliscaMcGowan Secretaries June 17, 2003 BY CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED Neighbors Re : Michael Pisacano 1457 Cox Neck Road Mattituck, NY 11952 SCTM# 1000-113-7-19 . 11 Dear Neighbor: I represent Michael Pisacano with regard to his property located at 1457 Cox Neck Road, Mattituck, NY. He is seeking a reversal of the Building Inspector' s amended November 8, 2002 Notice of Disapproval, based on Section 100-24 (a) for construction of a single family dwelling. Enclosed is the Notice of Hearing and a survey of the premises . The hearing on this matter has been scheduled for Thursday, July 10, 2003 at 6 :45 p.m. at Southold Town Hall . If you have any questions, or you wish to support this application, please do not hesitate to contact me . Ver Truly yours, Patricia C. Moore PCM/mm Enclosures yI I „e I FENCE cl ,_Ullk RFNCE _' —•-----. 0 JAS 0 L E/W. _ .....�.�.tr�.l 5,,,--ii ` FOUND CONC.NON ,,�' FOUND COM 0 e'S.0 J'E P MON 0 J'5 Z N O O C ( q P co • co `°9Sur cl O O. o 0 S.C. l-, *1 QOM El bt�� i ,,, ......:+,..-, WOODEDCD FOUNED PIP0 4'N A.55654:3" w N 63 5. 0 • 1.4 Z q0 FOUND WHO MON 0 Cr, CD p ID a I°C 1. I - I--�.�..". 0 rt '1 s N l\ o 0 h f �] —. o FENCE I.0.E '�`t•\ D No .. !'7: O OCO to co w �� ..._. to n NN o R k G R \,..„4„...g J o'E. • x 5 a ji -� - - ) 1 PIPED STOCKADE FENCE � I FENCE 0 e'S�� SfOCK/D(FOD 2e'E S 89.00'20" W 125.001'4'S VINYL STORAGE I TENT O 41 8N/O/F THEODORE R. WELLS o_ & RITA WELLS n 2 �b ''xi '• ` FOUND CONC MON.0 J'H. 'l N/O/F KEVIN MILOWSKI J In & LESLEY MILOWSKI J Ot - .P FOUND �•'CONC MON OUr SES ' UIRITT POLE 25 '6 16' 4 NTT 115 Eng W O ID t i FOUND C011C. R0Q11A'r • 312• 6 MON, row' j3•Ao • IC�i OF WAY, 1 A• u A • 50• wroE R A to O t0 n 41 UNATHORIZED ALTERATION OR ADDITION 33'A° TO TSECTION 7209 FIS SURVEY STHE NEWT YORK STATE 5ION OF 1 A•• EDUCATION°AW. COPIES OF THIS SURVEY MAP NOT BEARIN. ''��" THE LANG SURVEYOR'S INKED SE CL OR SI TO L HELC NOT BE CONSIDER TO DE A VALID TRUE LOPY, CERTIFICAT1ONS INDICATED'HI EON ONLY TO THE PERSON I IS PREPARED,AND ON i TRU COMPANY, GOVERN 1. THE EXISTENCE;_OE-RIOHTS^0,WA'( , LENDING 1L75'TTRRIOF,LIS a r • r- • A • ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS -- - TOWN OF SOUTHOLD:NEW YORK x In the Matter of the Application of AFFIDAVIT Michael Pisacano OF SIGN (Name of Applicant) POSTING Regarding Posting of Sign upon Applicant's Land Identified as 1000- 113 - 7 - 19.11 x COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) STATE OF NEW YORK) I, Michael Pisacano, residing at • 1040 Nakomis Road, Southold , New York, being duly-sworn, depose and say that: On the 27th day of June , 2003, I personally placed the Town's official Poster, with the date of hearing and nature of my application noted thereon, securely upon my property, located ten (10) feet or closer from the street or right-of-way (driveway entrance) -facing the street or facing each street or right-of-way entrance;*and that I hereby confirm that the Poster has remained in place for -even days prior to the date of the subjecthearing date, My, (d s shown to be July 10, 2003. �f (Sig ature) Michael Pisacano Sworn to before me this '1`0day of June , 200'3 . • 1c.�er�.ula1/: 1zc , Nota MELISSA McGOWAN (Notary Public) Notary Public,State of New York No.4995913 Ouatified in Suffolk County Commission Expires May 4,20„2 *near the entrance or driveway entrance of my property, as the area most visible to passersby. - • i PATRICIA C. MOORE • Attorney at Law 51020 Main Road Southold,New York 11971 Tel:(631)765-4330 Fax::(631)765-4643 June 27, 2003 Zoning Board of Appeals Town of Southold _ P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 RE : Michael Pisacano Premises : 1457 Cox Neck Road, Mattituck, NY SCTM: 1000-113 . 00-07 . 00-019 . 011 Dear Sir or Madam: Enclosed please find the Affidavit of Mailing, nine (9) Certified Mail Receipts, the Affidavit of Posting and five (5) signed Return Receipt Cards for the above referenced matter. We will forward the balance of the signed Return Receipt Cards to you upon our receipt of same . Very truly yours, iil ritc ti. (3.7)7oohe Patricia C. Moore By: Melissa McGowan, Secretary /mm Enclosures rilift------- ivED-7 Pi v° .i.0 ,,,, JUN 3 0 2003 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS LEGAL NOTICE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS THURSDAY, JULY 10, 2003 • NOTICE is HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Section 267 of the Town Law and Chapter 100 (Zoning), Code of the Town of Southold, the following public hearing will be held by the SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS at the Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, P.O. Box 1179, Southold, New York 11971-0959, on Thursday, July 10, 2003: 6:45 p.m. Michael Pisacano #5381. Location of Property: 1457 Cox Neck Road, Mattituck; Parcel 1000-113- 07-19.11. This is an Appeal requesting a Reversal of the Building Inspector's amended November 8, 2002 Notice of Disapproval, based on Section 100-24(A)for construction of a single family dwelling. The basis of the Notice of Disapproval is that this 73,616 sq. ft. area is not permitted in the R-80 District because it is not a recognized lot by any of the following four code standards: 1) The identical lot shall be created by deed recorded in the Suffolk County Clerk's office on or before 6-30-83, and the lot conformed to the minimum lot requirements set forth in Bulk Schedule; or 2) Lot was approved by the Southold Town Planning Board, or 3) Lot is shown on a subdivision map approved by the Southold Town Board prior to 6-30-83, or 4) Lot is approved/recognized by formal action of the Board of Appeals prior to 6-30-83. The Board of Appeals will hear all persons, or their representatives, desiring to be heard at the above hearing, and/or desiring to submit written statements before the conclusion of the hearing. The hearing will not start earlier than designated above. Files are available for review during regular business hours. If you have questions, please do not hesitate to call (631) 765-1809. Dated: June 10, 2003. Lydia A. Tortora, Chairwoman Southold Town Board of Appeals OFFICE OF ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 53095 Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Email address: Linda.KowalskiATown.Southold.nv.us http://southoldtown.northfork.net (631) 765-1809 fax(631) 765-1823 (alt. 9064) COVER SHEET FOR TRANSMITTAL FAX#765-1756 TO: Legal Publications, L.I. Traveler DATE: June 10, 2003 SUBJECT: Legal Notice for Publication 6/19/03. MESSAGE: Please publish the enclosed Legal Notice in the next available issue, for Thursday, June 19, 2003. Also, would you please confirm receipt of the attached by signing at the bottommof this sheet, and returning it to us by fax, telephone confirmation, or by email. Thank you. Received by L.I. Traveler 61 /03 When possible,please return an initialed receipt of this request to us at 765-9064. Please feel free to call if you did not receive all information. Thank you. Attached: (1) • Al OFFICE OF -= b ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 1 cl91‘ `d 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 Emails: Linda.KowalskiaTown.Southold.ny.us or Paula.Quintieri(a�Town.Southold.ny.us Jessica.Booer(afTown.Southold.ny.us (631) 765-1809 fax (631) 765-9064 n.5---/-A, 9/3 June 10, 2003 Re: Chapter 58— Public Notice for Thursday, July 10, 2003 Hearing (M. Pisacano#5381) Dear Mrs : Please find enclosed a copy of the Legal Notice describing your recent application. The Notice will be published in the next issue of the Long Island Traveler-Watchman newspaper. 1) Before June 23rd: Please send the enclosed Legal Notice, CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED, with both a letter including your telephone number and contact person, and a copy of your map filed with this application which shows the new construction area, to all owners of land (vacant or improved) surrounding yours, including land across any street or right-of-way that borders your property. Use the current addresses shown on the assessment rolls maintained by the Town Assessors' Office (765-1937) or the County Real Property Office at the County Center, Riverhead. If you know of another address for a neighbor, you may want to send the notice to that address as well. 2) Before July 2nd: Please make arrangements to place the enclosed poster on a sign board such as plywood or similar material, posting it at your property for seven days; the sign should remain up until the day of the hearing. Securely place the sign on your property facing the street, no more than 10 feet from the front property line bordering the street. (If you border more than one street or roadway, an extra sign is available for the additional front yard.) If you need a replacement poster, please contact us. 3) Before July 2nd, please either mail or deliver to our office your Affidavit of Mailing (form enclosed) with parcel numbers noted for each, and return it with the white receipts postmarked by the Post Office. (Also, when the green signature cards are returned to you by the Post Office, please mail or deliver them to us before the scheduled hearing, if possible.) If any signature card is not returned, please advise the Board at the hearing and return it when available. These will be kept in the permanent record as proof of all Notices. 4) By July 9th, please file your Affidavit of Posting with our office as proof that the sign has been posted for seven (7) days. If you do not meet the deadlines stated in this letter, please contact us promptly. Thank you for your cooperation. Very truly yours, Enclosures Zoning Appeals Board and Staff aNSMISSION VERIFICATION REPORT I� TIME : 06/10/2003 15:22 DATE,TIME 06/10 15:20 FAX NO./NAME 7654643 DURATION 00:01:12 PAGE(S) 02 RESULT OK MODE STANDARD ECM 11 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERSo'#1 SUFFOLc �' ' spy Southold Town Hall Lydia A. Tortora, Chairwoman ;' c 53095 Main Road Gerard P. Goehringer ; y 2 ; P.O.Box 1179 George Horning O .S�� Southold,New York 11971-0959 Ruth D. Oliva aO��i'� ZBA Fax(631)765-9064 Vincent Orlando =,1Jig �;,''� Telephone(631)765-1809 http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD June 2, 2003 Patricia C. Moore, Esq. 51020 Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Re: Appl. #5381 — M. Pisacano Dear Mrs. Moore: This will confirm that $250 payment for the $400 filing fee was paid by Mr. Pisacano, regarding the recently filed Appeal #5381 (Appeal for Reversal). As requested, a credit was permitted in the amount of $150 because the new Application (#5381) replaces Appl. No. 5264. Therefore, Appl. #5264 for a Lot Waiver under Section 100-26 is noted as canceled and void. A July 10, 2003 public hearing is expected to be calendared at the June 5, 2003 meeting and will be confirmed by separate notification. Thank you. Very truly yours, Linda Kowalski OFFICE OF 1146:1'11(,0 91(1 ��?JI° BOARD OF APPEALS • Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road Southold, NY 11971 765-1809 tel. 765-9064 ZBA.fax. ***, ***, x******* ,r******* **,err w**x*, * k*** **** k****** ******,*r******* r 144 7 6,S= 164 ie,3 REPLY FORM Dated: m oz 9 nZd 03 (10,4416c3i/ TO: O aue:cu go 4i 1)4 Your application is incomplete for the reasons noted below. ( ) It is requested that the following be forwarded as soon as possible (within about 7 days, if feasible). The advertising deadline is 22 days before the meeting date and the information is necessary for review and advertising purposes. You may forward the information by fax at 765- 9064, however, please send the original by mail. Thank you. ( ) The appeal was not filed within•60 days of the decision of the Building Inspector. (4 Missing information - please see missing information checked below. Please submit all the documentation, together with information noted below. If you have any questions, please call us at 765-1809. Thank you. Information requested: ( ) Notice of Disapproval issued by the Building Inspector after his/her review of this • particular project map. t¢' -yoo T6-id coN‹ 0 (* ea 0 /6131, Vizi-a/to& 4-4 • Check payable to the Town of Southold totaling $ ate• IN ( ) Signature and notary public information are needed. `^, ei2P sa64 � ( ) An original and six prints of the map were not included. (Preparer's name and date of preparation to be shown.) ( ) Setbacks must be shown for the subject building to all property lines, with preparer's name. ( ) Six (6) sets of a diagram showing the doors, number of stories, and average height (from natural grade). ( ) Ownership Search back to April 23, 1957 for the subject parcel and all adjoining parcels, certified by a title insurance company, and insuring the Town for$25,000. ( ) Copies of all current deeds and tax bills of the parcels back to ( ) Other: i _e i TRANSMISSION VERIFICATION RE ' L Z TIME : 05/29/2003 11:13 DATE,TIME 05/29 11: 12 FAX NO./NAME 7654643 DURATION 00:00: 39 PAGE(S) 01 RESULT OK \ MODE STANDARD ECM