Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-07/10/2003 HEAR SOUTHOLI> TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS SPECIAL MEETING TP~kNSCR[PT OF HEARINGS HELD JULY ~ 2003 (Pr~ed by Jess~ca Boger) Present w~e: Ch~om~ Lydia A. To,ora Member V~ncent Orl~do Memb~ Gerard P. Goe~nger Memb~ Ruth D. Ol~va ClerkPaula Q~nfie~ ~ ~ ¢ 2¢~ Absent were: Memb~ George Ho~g PUBLIC HEARINGS: 7:09 p.m. AppL No. 53§~ - MI[C~{AEL PISACANO. Location of Property: 1457 Cox Neck Ro~ Ma~ek; Parcel 10~0-113-07-19.1L T~s is ~ Appeal reqnest~g ~ Reversal of ~he Bu~d~g Inspector's amended November 8, 2002 No,ce of per~ed ~ the R-gO D[s~[c~ because ~ is not a reco~ed ~o~ by any of the fo~ow~g four code s~andards: ~) ~e idenficfl Iot shfl~ be ~eated by deed recorded in ~e Suff¢lk Cowry Clerk*s office on or before 6-30-83, ~d the lot ~nfo~ to Ce ~m lo~ r~ments set fo~5 in Bulk Sched~e; m 2) ~t w~ approved by ~e Souihold To~x P]m~g Bored, or 3) Lot ~s shown on a subdivision map approved By the S~u~old To~ Bored prior to 6-30-83, or 4) ~t is approveWreco~z~ by focal action of the Bored of Appeals prior to 6-30- 83. CHA~WOM~: ~ someone here who wo~d l~ke to spe~ on beh~f of the ~¢plic~t? PATRIC~ MOORE, ESQ: O~nally I did not represent ~. P{sac~o. t had r~resented ~e prior own~s, the Chudi~s. But Mr. Pisac~o recently refaced me to tmke en because t'm fami]{m Mth the case. ~a* I've done is ~fyou t~e ~e first piece of pap~ that I gave, t subdued a packet to you, w~ch is i~ addition to evening else ~at you ~re~y have in yo~ fi~e. ~at I did is I took a tax map ~d ~at tax map has colored I~nes on ~t. ~at I ~en did is a bis/ofic~ ~stou of ~e subdivisions of those proposes. ~d what I idenfi~ed with... Southold Town Board of Appeals Specie2 Meeting P?,lic HeeMng MEMBER ORLANDO: Oh, color coordinated. MS. MOO~: ~ tell you, [ did my ~omework. ~d yes. ares and crafts at my today. ~at l did [s~ [denfiEed :he eo[ors next to ~zhe subdhv?~shons~ or ~s they ar~ ~d that way you can follow ~!ong. To be~2 vdth. {i~{s p~ece ofprop~ o~naily, yo~ c~ have one house on one piece of prope~, obv:_o~s~y. You have this prop~:zy onginally had the ~otential to be developed as one lot Then. let me sta~ off Milowski setoff March of '84 the Pia~ming Bo~d (?B} created 19,8 and. 2e1 m~ w_ake s~e I have tee ~; one. Miiowsld, ~o, Fm so~, 20. 19. i8. That's !he that is adjacent rc ~ne ROW. That lou when it was approved, also got 280A app:oval ~om the ZBA. Your appeai =3243, ~5~at appeal was due ~o the fac2 ~:at this lot was beir_g sewed by tP~e ROW. And ~.ey pt that K, provaL So thzt's i2 '84. ~en in '85. S Chudh~ had ofi~n~2iy 3wried t~s who!e ~ea. Ckad~ak had soid to S~mdch&~ , piece of prope~. That's the p~ece on ~he no~&. ~nd ~h~fs the~ ~at's higHer, ed resolution appro~ng the s~>divis~on of Si~chck. ~d you 0~% see that tha! piece s~7or~ds ~n p~, 5ze szbjecl prop~. So the PB had created tee. karl sp/ht o~n a 5 subd~s~on. 5 1o~s. ~ behove. No S~mhc~c2, somebody ~s st~ng 4.4~ 5 behove ~ :I~s case it was 5. You're ~t~ 4, 4 lot subdivision. X We yo~ ~ed~t credit is ~e. 4 subdivision. Lot ~! o~ tko S~icich subd~sion, fl~ w51I be dhs~zssed in a rhome~ because ~:at becomes s~bd~vhde4 again. But the S~25cich rabdh~sho2 k~d e covenax~, Oho PB had imposed a cov~ant ~ you c~ see 5'o~ ~e PB resot-a~on ~at 22~s prop~:y c~mot be ~2er subdMde& The appHcmt ~ied a coven~t ~ thereaher~ ~n '99. addressed ~s prope~ ag~n. But [et me go on ~z c~zoxoio~. 2~ *85 Chudiak m~es a~e~mt Mt2 Wells~ Beck~, Zab~dw~ ~d ~s ~t W~et? Yes~ rmw 2's sho~ o2 map ~ M~lows~. Excuse me, you s~d you were~_ CHA~WO~N: We have to have a v~ clean record 2ere~ So phease do not ad&ess ~y ~f ~e spe~<ars. Please ad&ess ~e char ~d state y~r n~_e for the record. Fm so~, brt we need ~o kayo a v~ cle~ concise~ record. MS. MOO~: Th~{ yo~. F2 truing ~s ~om ~e s~weys tha~ Fw had 52 ~y ~nd the subdvis~on m~ps ~at X c~ see. Now th,ze~s bean exeh~_ges or s~ies 4~at t~e, so my, I show Wanat i2 one map ~d i showed Milowski 02 g~cther, And ~.derstand tihey a~e relaed, So ihay may or may not be f:he c~e, Bu¢ thg~s wha11 have based on the info~ation that ] could gather, 2~ ~y case, you have ~e pieces thai m Dec.&er of '85, the PB took action on the applications, Each of these, as I ~he i~t time I was here. the tot line-applications were ind~endent app]icat{ons. Each had -co present a map. Each h~ io prese~ a ~Hng fee. ~d eac~ had to be considered on o~, ~at ~e PB did was ~ey imposed a coronet on hhe approval tha was the of their re~ew 1hat they said when the deed was convey~ from Chudi~ ~o !he p~ch~er of~e pgoel~ ~nether it be Welis~ Beck~, Zabic~, or W~at~ thg there woz~d be a coronet tha! ~e ~o p~ceis would merge. ~hat was done. ~e W~_at p{ece. E~e Wells piece were merged, and Ce convey~ce took place. ~.d as you know, the Page 2 of 26 Southold Town Board of APpeals Special Meeting Public Heating Becket 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 Camiulti. There was a title report done at the time. There was no covenm~t vdth respect to preventing the sale of that property. It would have been somewhat unusual to place a covenav, t on property that unill 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 municipalifies~ they don't even require ?B 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 tiffs instance, the PB said, no, no, no, because I gave you the letter last time, wiffch was Amelie Depetr~s 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 sa/d, 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 act[on. They took action in this property and they created the additional sized lots on the Wells and the Milows~ piece, excuse me, the Wanat piece. They took action on those two pieces malting them more conforming. And thaJ; was appropriate, that was fme. CHA1~RWOMAN: You are referring to 1918 as the Wanat piece? Or the Milowstd piece? MS. MOORE: No, Milowsld is 1918. 19.8, I show on my survey as War, at. Olq, Mi~owski used to be a Wanat or Wanat sold or~ well, they are all local. They are related, so they'll probably clm4fy 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 Wa. nat is in fact, the owner is Milowsld. MS. MOORE: I thouglqt that was the case ali 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 War_at and Milowski family were related in some way. CHAIRWOMAN: That may be but... MS. MOORE: For your purposes... CHAIRWOMAN: Our records are quite blear because the ZBA granted 280A access to the Milowski piece. MS. MOORE: Is that 19.87 Page 3 of 26 Sonthold ToM Board of Appe~ls Special Meeting ?'abide r~TemSng CHAIR¥-rOMAN: 19.8: yes. MS. MOORE: Okay, beck, se yom~ decision didn't have a mx ma~ number 'Friar. f didnq find it. so... CHALRWOMAN: It did have a ma~... b/iS. MOORE: Good, ~ didn't have/?-,e map. Ti~ank ye'& Please ce~ec? my record reject ~at ~r:at f show ~ Wanat fs M~iows~d, and what ~s sho~: as Milowsk5 is 5 stand co=acted, i'm so~. [ was ~ng to piece '&e jigsaw ?~zle Crud clafi~ing who emus what. ~ ~y case 2he end result ~s Cae s~e. We ended up with a m~ger oftSe lot line chmnges, 2 p~cets to the s~uth. ~d the 280A went to Mflewsk{. And you kava ~om your records. ~t ~ also rotund fs as ~ wzs doing rese~cla fn this area t~at as you rec~L my me~Xfon~ng ~e Simicfch subdi~Ss~on up on the n~. tiqat created somewhat ended up getting subdi~ded agar_. ~d this. this u~se:s me because the PB had h:t~fered wf[~ our development of ti~s piece. ~nd mea~!e, the Simfcfch properry~ i99% J~um~ '97~ ~ie Foster creme :n and got subdf~sfon approval for tlae p~ece, lot i. ftys not show~g ~n o~. on ~e SC t~ maps. The photocopy ] made was of the most recent SC tax map. But the subdivision Fve attached so that you would see there's a record of it. [ don*i ~ow what ire, whether t~e comnV hasn*t reco~lzed some deeds, or Gay never did ~he deeds ultimately: but ~e Fost~ go~ $ 2-1al s*K~di~sien where no lots ~e s~¢posed re be ~her created. ~d as ma inducement re ~e PB allow it. he ac~iy ~eated ~ drsinage ~ea the~ is show~g on ~e r~xbdi%sion ma: as 2OK~ a~ost 2[K sq. f:. &afnage ~ea which fs ~t next co Cox Ne& Road. So pesStion that, you ~_ow, here you have a case where a :evener fs fi~ed of no ~her subdf~sian ~qd they subdi~de, grad ~_ey ~eat us ~equa!ly Mth a condStien ~fi~at we csm't develop [ais piece, me,while drmre's ne covenmil filed. So there*s u'e~en: here to say the le~t. ~ [~< ~he record is pre~y cie~ that ~e c~de wmqfch says thsl a lot {s to be recog4zed thexou~2 PB: if it's created by PB action. Here you l~ave a that was p~ of l{ke m~y ¢5~ f~ tots in ~e area that's balgnces of pieces ~at gez conveyed out over time. You are loo~ng a~ an gea of Chudf~ ~at he om~ed ~om %0's ~d ~50's, 60's because ~ f~er fn ~s area. Over fime~ pieces go: ca,ed out~ and then the ve~ final project that he was ever involved in was the hmdsh~ke dog be~eer~ th. ese prop~ own~s to ~ve ~ ~dftfonal l~d, T~e t~s prope~ mhd ~ve ~ addi~on~ l~d. Fo:¢~ately, he 1e2 be~nd a large enou~ piece of propehy that Mr. Pisacmno went re put a kuflding ~zvelope on ~t ~d to get ~leali~2 Depm~em Koproval for ft. he me,rs all of the cAte:da he~ t~ou~ the bo~d of renew he ac~ai!y: ~d fire neithers had m oppo~ity, once agar, re Co,ce theSr opimon. The bo~d of review ~gnted ~eir approval because they :oo said ~2ey got the m~no ~6m the PB. you dfd~ sa~ng "well we nev~ intoned to ~ave t~s prop~y developed, we expected that all of it was going re be cop~eyed o~at re the adjgcenr owner". But again~ cov~qm:ts, it was just he,say ess~ly. ~ere:s not ev~ a ~ranscnpt of reoords. Sc ~. Pisacgmo has end,ged a goat deal of s<:ess ~md ag~awt{on tb~ou~ tkJs whole thing. ~le wgs ~der contract with us for at least 8 months. ~ ~i~ we got close ~oa yegz of just Page 4 of 26 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 afier 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 mound l~ere. 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. 'S~, 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 Lq theft '81 map. And ii'your property doesn't match the '81 map, they ask questions, how did t-ids 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~ '817 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 smalIer 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 cmn, a subdivision requires the owners of the properties to join in. These are all split ,ap and there are no co~mhon om_ers. 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 regulatow 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 an3ahing. 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 OLtVA: 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 OLD/A: 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 wl,-ole transaction... Page 5 of 26 Soutlaeld Town Beard of Appea~s Special Meeting Pub!Sc Heafir~g MS. MOORE: I ~ow what you ~e sa~ng. MHMBER OL~A: Property o~_~s ]us~ d~dn't go ~oa~n. So i~'s ;ust ~ike hmaging ~here. MS. MOORE: If ypu ~ake a piece of prope~y that's ex~st~g, because you have a pre- existing, you have. lots tlna~ ~e ~eated p~or to '83 by deed. okay, we reco~2~ze, beca~se ~nat's ,vhat was done back then. ~e's ~ots ~ f :hem ;~n town, ~hey 5nz~hy, the created a provis~on for them. If yon have a p~ece of prepay, ~d you:ye got it thee_ the PB t~es a little cNxp of it. yon D~ow, ~d you end u~ cuFJng off a corz~, and ~ou~: another ici line chmge, yo~ cul off~e other co~x~ ~he PB has acted. Because ~nat ~ey've done is When ~lxey are t~ng LEe piece 5:om here. tlzey ge 2eating balmnce of~qe pxece. You cmn't look a~ il in ~ vacu-~ You look a~ O~e w?mle. So what ~e PB, ~d my ~,~enz is. yon cmn't, yes the lot used to be like this. but you PB= yora approved each of ~e pieces tha~ cu~ back the lot *&zou~ se?~are, ind~aenden~ homing, tlne Mqole process. [qe whole snbdi~sio~l process. So a lot ]ine ohmnge t~es on the sa~e oroced~a2 re~airehenrs as a ~11 snb~visior% as a major or a airier subdi%s2on. You have to m~e the application. Yon have 2o notice it~ You lhave to, you ~ow~ ge~ final gioprov~. ~nd then you submit acim~Jlv in ~e lot lb_e chmge, the 5=_al st~ of tlne process is that you We them deed sho~g, you ~ow, Ge merg~ of Ge ~o pieces, ~d th~x the chgi~mn sh~s off okay, you've merged i*, okay, I'll s{~ off on it. I ~ow of the probl~ we ~e having is that lf~is was a 100 acre piece, you wou!dr?t be asking me ~at question. You ~ow, because you chic ~we~ h~e ~d you ch!7 away there, fact hhat's it's i.6 or 1.7 doesn't ch~ge the fact that the lot o~ng]y was gn existing legal ici. And tinct Ge PB cNxpping away zt it doesn't n~1i~ Ws o~nal staffs as g on ~e prepay; exc,~e me, as a lot in tine To-~ of Soul, old. :hex ~ Ncorsistenro wo~d ~ybody do a lot line ch~ge, if ah~ R~e lo* 15ne clnmge, you're considered ~o s~eN]ized the piece tha~ you've p~c!pated in. %at j-asr doesn't ~:~e sense. Even ~Jnor subdivisions. 25e ide~ is yo~ ~e piecing away m create mzo~er~ yo:z ~:ow, you have, here you have ~he big piece. You ge goi=~g re piece away ~d o:ea:e 2 of ~ese so ~hey c~ put a house o2 eacl of ~. ~_gi's the st~d~d subdivision~ ~ lot line chmnge is a r~:uch different creaV~e. 2's just a boradmU tine a~e~::en=. And as I said in the old days, I ins; loo]<ed a~: one today w~ere, geez, fqe proce&ges to go *&oz~ s~ple bo*~dg~ tine age~en~ ~e just, ~e so tedious *h~1 yon wonder wk.y anfoody wo~d do it. But, you imow. it's done nonei~e~ess. CHARWOMAN: Let's see if anyone N O_e audience has ~inir~g to say. Is ~_ere ~yone in 2ze audience who would like to spe~ for or aUg!asr Ce gp!zlicant? Yie~se slale yo~ n~e for ~e record. THEODORE WBLLS: My name is Theodore Wells. I spoke Ge lasi time. Bu! what you were as!~ng about, Virtny, about the Bo~d of r{ealth 5BOI~D~ ~ed C:PMs go~ng ~o get up ~n a l~i~]e bi~ and ta~i{ about this. ~ad slae~s go:ag ~o ~v~ y-o:~ some n~s. ~d you're going io read ~?~at rea] creedal ~d Ymd ou~ Mint was s*fomit~ed th~ for ~n application. Now just on the BOH alone, $iou~ a ye~ or so ago, they c~e ~ my bac~d, backed up ~d s'~mled ~o &opa well. 5" casing, in the comer of ~y Page 6 0526 7-40-03 Southold Town Board of Appeals Spedial Meeting Public Hearing property and a corner of this property. So t went out and [ asked him. He says we're purring in a well here". I said, "really"? [ see you know where ail the cesspools are. "Oh yeah, we know where ali 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 raeasurer, 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 i~, drop it, we're in a hurry, get it dene". 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 fight 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 submkted w/th a whole portion of these lots that were subdiv/ded subdivision on it. That's the BOH. The other thing that was brought about, Artie Foster. Artie Foster was the last one to b~fild 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 lit~de connections. He said to the town, I'll tell you what Fll do, "if you let me have 2 acres to build one more house for myself, I'll gSve 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, fight 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. Ohginally was 4, then it went to 5 because Arfie sneaked another one i~, on 2 acres. We have a problcm~ hack 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 hank it, where does the water go? Because when a subdivision, when Arfie Foster put/t in, it was a big hole that ran ail the way across there. So he ~lled it in and put a drain pipe under there, which beh/nd Hilliker~s house that runs effthe 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 £oC~h down tha~ road, a~d comes In there. [t washes out. I£ [ didn't keep the ROW f}lled In, we could not use that ROW. So we keep filling it in, keep filling it in, so we can get through. If the ~rees are taken out, any of those trees are taken out, that's even worse yet, because now the root syste~ is gone. Just take it Ln~o consideration. And I didn't know that you could build on a ROW, hut [ see they are using all the property as this building lot because there's less than h's of an acre that the house is actually going on. So [ 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 Kev/n, but Fm not. Unfort'anately that's the way it goes. ' CHAIRWOMAN: [s 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 every~g for the end? Page 7 of 26 So,athold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting PCslic HeaAng CHAIRWOMAN: Left s save eve~hing ~er {ae end. CHiS HILLI~R: My nmme is CPis HiH~km. my prep~:y gsuts Mici~aeFs p:eper:y. Just ~ cor:p~e of t~2ngs Fd like to say. Yes~ Fao [e+2~ we go~ in the mal~ ~s regsd~ng ¢e Milowsk~mnat ch~ge of prope~ies. Se that noff~caffon was Sta~ing in Ap:d] of 1984. Mr. Chudi~ sold some prope~y ro Kevin M~]owsk~ md his w~fe. 2-acre zoning was akeady ~ effect at [%a~ point in 2me. In May 1985: ~,adi~ ad. sos Ce PB ~hat he has a long standing age~ent Mth prope~ies ffonffng ff~e west side of Cox Neck Road_ Zabicky, Beck~. Wells. and W~at. He requests auh~sfiza{o~ convey~ce imnd to g~e a{gcent p~rce]s Mthout formal ~ppi!cation g~s Pat sa~d. The PB drected him to make 4. fe~al appi~cations in order for Ere PB action on the ~ot Hne ch~ges. He gets !eg~ r%aresentation. None of this was done hgphgsdly; dl accor~ng to ~e l~w mhd ~nfonmative. Mr. DePe~s sends a letter on Octob~ h i985 re the PB stating in accordance M~ yo~ leper Augast i4. 1985. enclose herewhh 4. applications for lot line chgmges. Fee is b~cu~ed ~here. We ~derstmnd that when approved~ thee Mi! be a req}Jrement {~at a cover_mt be 5led to the effect eat each of ~e p~ce~s will merge with continuous psce~ to ff-~e east which floras on Cox Neck Road. ~xd we M~I assmme that the approva'. Mil 5e made conditional ripen such ~Hng md ~%e coven~ts will be filed once the ~pprov~ ins been ~ven. Novem_ber 7e, I985, once agdm. from ~. DePe~s to the PB, ~md this is reg~ding the cevenm~:rs ~so. ~Js pm{c~Am~ po~t of interest ~s reg~dhng the ~venants ~id~ ~x with fire land~ which [ believe ~s pertinent M~ ~s pmiculs s~ation. P~ accerd~ce w~{: our tei~hone conversation today, ¢e following is ~e iron,age of the cov~:~t which we h~t~ to ~ns*l ~n any deed made by ~e Chudimks te the o~ner ef~e z6d~cen~ pmk. ~d we ~d~stand ~mt ~y approval by tlne PB of 2xe lot line chmnges w~il be sxbjec{ {re the r~u~r~ {~at the deeds~ ~rdch convey ~e Chudiak prepe~ contain th~s T~s coven~m is snbl act re ~e following C&R~s wlic>~ shall pen with the Ired. The pm'col hereby conveyed shall merge with premises of E~e p~s~ree conffg~ous thereto ~&e east m~d the 2 pm'ceOs sh~l tltere upon be de,ed on p~rce] for pmpose of the zoning ordn~ce of the Town of Southo~& Just to confmue on. oPty I residence toge~ accessow s~c~es may be mns~cted ~d maln:~ned sport ~e said 2 parcels which ~e merged ~nto ~ pm~eel J~t ~ m speed t%ls up a liS:ie bit jus~ a !iS:Ie ~nfenn~tion coroners. R~s a p~ b~nding ~tself -re the exist~ce of g preston state of f~s as represe~ed or m the 5a~e perfo~gnce of some act. So h doesn't se~ l~ke there's a p~cu]zr limitation on whm the promise is m be k%pt~ Ail l~.d use ceven~:s sha~l ran Me Ce l~d mad con, hue in peqset~{Gurless inedited or t~inated in accordance applicable ~aw. Nothing w~ ever ch~mged or modified after ~nose coroners ~nd lot l~ne ehm~ges were prefectS. Let me just go re tPis now. Now t}is ~s eom {~e PS m Mr. DePe~s. ~. Chnd~g~'s armmey regarding the Zabicky prope~ December 1T ~985. Resolved tlnat ~e PB approves ti*.e lot line ch~ge to add 25K sc. ~. ~om {~e prope~ C~aki~ to the prope~ now or for~eHy of Zdp~c~ located at Ma~c&, subjee~ re ~he following conditions. No. ~ that the property of Chud~ak be conveyed to ~d merged M~rh the confi~ous house lot m :he east now er fe~:a!!y of Zabhc~ that only one residence {oge~ Mth accessow s~crges may be cons~gcted m~ntalned upon 2 p~cels w}ich Mil become merged into one. That the g~ove ceven~z~s ~nd tenth,ions be ~nc~uded 5n Ge deed ~d on the smwey map for tlne lot line changes. ~nen we Page 8 of 26 7-10-03 So~thold Town Board o£Appeals Special Meeting Public Heating receipt of the axaaended surveys as requested in condition No. 3, the chairman w/il 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 nn file from December 139 i985~ CHAIRWOMAN: That's the map, Mrs. Hilliker, that the ZBA has in our files. MS. HILLIKER: I wonl~, just like to point out that it does show the lot line changes from Chnkiak 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 proper~¥ 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 wb~ich would be merged into one. That is en 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, wtSch 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, !9A5 and 19.17. Again the 2~acre zoning was ~ 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 requ/rements. And again, tls reinforces bSs or/g/hal promise and covenant, which is already dually noted. He was maintaining the warrantee o£ these ~ parcels to have some sort of a buffer for the future. I'd like to also just state that the ?B~ HD, local attorneys have ali stated their opposition to this becomSng a building parcel. From the PB August 13, 2001 from Vaierie Scopaz~ there is a notation that she does discuss the matter w/th the PB at it's worksessio~ Monday, August, 6. Two of the members present were on the board during 1985. And they emphasize that the intent of the tot line applications was to merge la~d and expand size of existing lots, not to create new brdlding lots. The record indicates that the subject lot on ~Ss memo, ~9.11~ was intended to be merged with 2 adjoining lots and not to be retained f~r sale as a building lot at some fu~are date. August 22, 2001 fi.om Wickham, Wickham, & Bmssler addressi~g the Building Department (BD) tax lot 19.Il 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 Chndiak to Wanat were also approved. And those ta:ansfers were made now tax lots 19.18 and t9.19. Tb~e PB approval has probSbited cons~action 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 proper~ on record with the SC Clerk's Office. The PB has previously stated that the lot is not a recognized lot. Tb~e property is not shown on an approved subdi¼sion 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 of~Sce of the tow~ 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 1~, 2001. The ?B Mshes to go on record as opposing any variances on this property. PB or, ce, April 1~t, 2003 Page 9 of 26 Seutho!d Town Boa-d of Appeals Special Meeting Pu~slic Hea{ng ~om Berme~ Or!ows~ to Lind~ ~d ~e memb~s of the ZBA. T:~e PB did not a'atho~ze the crea~on of this parcel as a s~ate buildiug lot Z~e PB, by request of ~:he intended to ~low the property own~ re sell Es proper~ in 4 separae parcels :o adjacer:c property owners for the pupose of morons wign pre-existing lots. ~d once agan, notnication i~om ZBA. BD's denial. BD's Not~ce of Disapproval ~'OD' for of a single-f~ily dwelling. The basis of the NOD is thai ~e pscel 2s P~or pe~i~ed tk~e RS0 dis{~c~ because it is not reco~ized by lot. by my one of the z. code st~dads. None of e~. So there's q~ie a 1ot of opposition thee. J~st to ge: batik to the HD hearing or whatev~ you wac to c~l that A lol of false ir_fmTalJon was submilied to the HD, one being a letter ~om Pat Moore stat~g ~at ihe prope~ was over 2 acres ~n size. That's dated March 13~ 2002, m response to yo~ no~ce dated Mach 8m. 2002 please be advised ~a¢ the subject property is over 2 acres in size. ~d on the following page, Chudi~ pasco! made *he improved adlac~;c pm~ce~s 1sger ~d retained the s~a~ect 2 pscels wkicb comply with yom- reqt, Jremerzos, ~.d, again, Sk4di6{~s 2-acre pa-coL That's incmxecl info~ation. I happened to be ar that HD ke~ng~ ~:d there was also some addk~onal 5mprep~ info~afio~ submi~ed. If ye2 wo,~d look at 5ndings and facis. whidn is No. 8, a~d ii stipulates iots 19. i0. i9.1i, i9.18 ~d t9.19~ 2hose~ one of ~_ose p~dcnlar lots is mine. So if you were ~o look at one of those 4 iots {hat were presented tV~e HD, it zm~e it Kook Hke the W~.at prop~, ti~e Wells propers, my prepay, ~d Mr. Pisac~o's prope~ ~ey w~e c~!ing somewha: of a subdiv~sieno Well yes~ We!ls~ Wazat, and m~elfhad houses on ¢~. So if you were {e this& ~zat ~his oth~ parcel was the 4t~ parcel of tko s~nbdi{sion, of co,se you would say that pace1 should be abie to have a house on it Tko! w~ L~prop~ info~abon. ~d jus'r go back a littie bit f~&_er Gat the 198i SC maps obviously you couidrft use ~nose maps because ~ey w~e ad&essing improp~ prope~es there. ~d 2olinLng she-aid be able be g~dfa*&ered because of that. So aceaaHy I t~l:i< tl~e HD heaing should nor a~Jss~ble at ail even tPsu~ they did have Oe foresight to put the on,as back on the for your finai approval. Okay, Fn a~ost done. Basicaliy: we have a yeU s25siandard lo* here. 2~s proteded by e~er innxsed covex~ts which se s{il! iniact 2's less than 2 a~es i2 size, md if you sub2act the ROW, ~t m~{es the building ~velope even smaner ~m ~e total owners~p package. We have evading ex record 5ol Oe PB, ~2e tocg a~omeys and ~imons nei~bofuood coalition ail agecing ~hd prokib2ting new b~lding lot. So I'd reaIlyjusl i~ke ?o fits& you for yo,~ cooperalion and cozc!ude ting a decision ~o dray these appeals ~s proper. Th~k you. CH~WOM~N: Tha~r you. ~s MS. MOORE: t do have to respond to one t>Jng because ~he HD is so. { have to for ~2e bo~d w>Jie ~I~8 ~esh in my mSnd. ~e HD ac¢~aily :~ev~ had a re,rd of $~icict s~odivision. So ~ney ac~gaily imcoz~orated ~he Hill~ker lot which is prope~, she was there. A~mally put {t on the map thamselves and 2hoop*ergo i~. ~nto the de,sion mm~ng. Amd gave h~. essentially ~dfath~ed h~ developme:c plan. So:xehow, well the s~bdi~sbon was approved ~n '85. Their maps are from 'SI. ~d as you ~ow, ~e was a pe2od or,me {n the *80~s tea H~, M~i!~ they required fil~ng of minor subdivision maps~ ~e PB did not direct people to do ~a. ~ey weren:t awe:e tho reqmremenL So there ~e many subdi~s~ons in the Town of Sou~oid ~J~a Page ~0 of 26 7-I[0-93 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearkqg 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 uot aware of the minor subdivisions having to get HD approval. So that's wlTy 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 subdi¼sion. Chudiak had nothing to do with it. But, Pisacano, in a sense, this proceeding that Mr. ?isacano went through actually benefited Mrs. Hilliker because the HD incorporated and recognized her property. She akeady 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 fi.om 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 o£a lot within the tuwn's judsdictinn. MS. MOORE: I understand. T~ey 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 MilowskL The one that we were mixed up on the lots here. MS. MOORE: Sorry about that. MR. MILOWSKI: That's okay. We are ali local, but we're not ail 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, t was the first one to get a piece of property. That's when the ROW was created whidn 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, ~ approached the town. ~ 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 ½ 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 fi~e fi.om the pr[or 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. Ln fact it doesn't show, it shows that piece as being part of what was lot t2, wt~ch was what Mr. Milowsld's piece was or/ginally 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. Fm going to make copies for the fiie, but at any rate... MS. MOORE: What year was that? Page 11 of 26 CHAL~WOIVL~N: Ttrs was 1984 wken Mr. Milowski applied to tre ZBA for 280A access. ~d this w~ t~_e ce~ty t~ map at ~e time. ~d ~ even ~ave a copy oft~e iett~ ~em ~e PB ~nd~cefing wl~t let it was. Se it's ve~- k~terest~ng that ~-xe cem~1 mx that tfme~ shawed that :he~ what you ~e describing as the Msac~ ~ieee ~s being lot 12. Thais one th~ng. A~_d t~e ot~ thing is I dd go back ~nd czrer~lly look at the file as ro wha exactly the be~d had approved when they ~pproved Mr. Milewskf's ROW. ~d ~s indicated on the file: 15~e boa% approved ~ccess to his propen~ znd cle~ly out e resection in the decision saying ~et ~y ~lner subdNisfon oz th~X road would require that the zppHcmnt came b~ck to t~e bo~d for 280A access. [ had not se~. the map or wlta~ ~e board had %*proved, So ~ thought well. pan of what ti~e bo~d approved mi~at hal{e bordered on tlae Pisacaao piece, f does noa fine board only approved 312' IFs w~Ren on the decision, Ifs shown on the map, k wis appears be 40' into the Miiows~ piece, So Fll s~smit ali fha for yegg review. 5ut fr_e botto:T line is {~a the 280A access {~e bo~d approved for the Mitowski piece did no~ emgend to ~. Pisac~o's piece. I just w~':ed to let you ~ow t}_a for ~e record. MS. MOORE: You ~derstand fha 2g0A is only required if it's a ROW. If you P~ave fee gtle: k's no~ required. So as fa- as Pisacalo~s piece. Ch~,diak owned the road, and o~eed ~e pmce. So [~e is no... CHA~WOM~N: Fs a ROW. MS. MOORE: No. ~ beg ro difTer. 280A to~ law is strictly for access ov~ ~nmpmved ROW. ~:ere you have flee title ~t rakes yo~: re the road: re a read. m a p~bHc ro~d, k:s not 280A. So ~ flagged 1~% for exmmple, does ~¢r ge~ 280A be:~us* has fee tkle t~ a public r~d. So when f discussed this mud I presented it to t~e be~d the last time: m~d l explained that wh~_ V~l~e made a ' ~ ' po:hr o~ sa~zg~ on, you ~now need a 280A for m~y ~her re{ow, x~e[L {here is ne e~er~ Che Pisae~o ~siece has fee t[~ie re Cox Neck. ~at is as of ~% ~ access~ IS_ere is no p~ssien requ[r~ ~em ~yone~ You get a bu[[dk~g pe~[t If M[iewsk[~ on ~he o{her h~d P~ad a ROW over Chud[~k mud ~herefere ~_a%~s w}~y 28CA was required. Town law 280A s~s if you have access m a punic road... CHAIRWOMAN: Access {o a s%leet.. MS. MOO~: Title to a public road.. C~WOM~N: Well actaaliy: ft says access ro a public re~L MEMBER OLWA: Yes, CHARWOMAN: 280A does ~o% [~k ~out fee t[~!e. ~ne word fee ~t[e doesnl eDpear in 280A access. ~d P~ge 12 of 2fi 7-10-03 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing MS. MOORE: t respectfully disagree that as a matter of iaw, 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 req~frre 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 *-he fact that you have a ROW is not the issue. The fact is whether or not you have access. CHAIRWOMAN: So you'~e saying that because he owns the road, that he does not need 280A access? MS. MOORE: Absolutely. CHAIRWOMAN: Well, I'1t tell you, we'll have to check with legal counchl about that. MS. MOORE: Go right a~aead. 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 otI~erw/se have. Ct-LAE~WOMAN: That would be wonderbaI. 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 jmisdiction to hear that case. You would not have jurisdiction to hear that case. F~rst of ail, it was Milowsld and not as a covenant on the property. So if you want to ~apose 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 jvxisdicfion. When you get a building permit, you would get a building perrrfit ouMght. You would not requke 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 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting ?cb:lc Hearing MS. MOORE: Exactly~ for Mi~ows!sd~ yes~ for yom Exactly. R skows ~a~ ~he setoff '84. ~ was o~e of ~e 5rs~ ones. ~d K~p~ntly CP~dS~< o~:ed -~t, 22 acres_ t~e bMm~ce of ~b_e p:ece. MR. MILOWS~: I t~io~ it was like 28 aores acraally. CHARWOMAN: Okay, we'll get ~hal issue cleared up. E'sjus~ ~Eat Ce old MS. MOORE: I don'~ t~h~ ~at's g~maliy, the ~ map may have bee~. ~e t~ map used may ixave been no: iz p~nt It jusx doesn't 1ook 5~t Akk~ou~ i2' 8~, Oat was probably or_e of the first. 7f you'd go back to my histo~% '84 was the 5rs! of t!ze subdS~siols, then you go Sim2cich is a separme piece~ MR. M~LOWSF~: ~ ?~ave a copy of my o~na] smwey, I don': ~ow if you would ~hat or, it has ~le ROW on it also. CHARWOMAN: Does it? MR. M~LOWS~: Yes. MS. MOORE: We don't dispute ~at Mr. M~lowsM has a ROW. Absolu$eiy. Ke ~2~ a deeded ROW. CHAIRWOM~N: Xt's prexy much ~e s~e ~ap ~ I have. ~ yo~. MS. MOO~: For ~ile record, I ~ivl< you ~d ~ re&ed. Someone had tamed me ghoul ~le~ it was Welis. okay. ~. WelIs professed ~at he was speaking, Z ~ess, {nat you had t~ked and ~ere was a conce~ about you iosing yom' ROW or ,~s blod~ng ~. M~ DWS~: No that c~'t be done. Beeg'ase t?~at's in my deed. that's always... MS~ MOORE: I don't ~ow ~ing about ~at, b~at ~ay, ~tha'e's no dispute t~at he has a ROW. CHA~WOM~N: Is there ~yone in Ele audSence wk~o would ~2~e to s >e~X for against the applic~t? MR~ M~OWS~: ~ jusl. one o~er question, c~ ~ address ~-~ Nsac~o? ls tb~e lot for sa!e? CF~WOMxAN: Yo~* c~n ~k me, m~d F!~ ~ him. MR. MrLOWSKI: Because d~ng th~s wSoie l;~xe, I g~ess ever~ before Mr. Pisacano bo~i it since 115ye ~t there, eve~:*ody Chat w~ coming 5n from_ red estates always seemed, r Eeit like i w~ the rea! estate. ~ had sow.~oody come last So,day sa~ng ~hey were looking for ~e iot tha?s for s~e. ~2d ~-om wiqat Mr. Pisaeano oaid. for k dzey saic Page 1~ of 26 7-10-03 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Heating the price has increased considerably with ail permits in tact. I said, you know, I didn't ttgnk tha~ was... MR. ?~SACANO: There's a lot of people I didn't contact yet to let them know it was off ·: · the market. MR. MILOWStG: Oh okay, because they were there, and t 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 thir~k 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, t mean, 1[ can drop a well anywhere. As far as Mr. Foster got any favors done, I wouldn't mLnd one myself, if the town does that. The contours, the HD is requk,4ng me to get a topograpl'fical su,wey 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 pm-mit 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 fight now. And ifs not going to change. It's gding to go into the ground. They did test wells, test samples, soil samples, and there is sufficient sand. So I don't th/nk the drainage is gding to be a problem. And that's about it. I mean I don't know if that's going to effect ar~y dec/sion on whether it's a lot or not. I don't th~nk that really has to do with anything that's going on here as far as whether it's a lot or not. ~t 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 tLnk 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. PIS~CANO: It wasn't. I didn't have intentions of that/n the beginning, but I really wouldn't want to be there fight now. I don't think I'd be welcome. I don't tb2nk they want anyone else really living there other their own little families. CI4~AIRWOMAN: 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 comnty of Suffolk, is that correct? Page 15 of 26 7-I©-03 So,~:thold Town Board of AppeaIs Special Meeting Pubhc Heatdng MS. MOORE: W'nfch covenants are you talking about? CHAIRWOMAN: Tie no MS. MOORE: Tze merger covenants? CHAI[RWOMAN: Yes. MS. MOORE: VVt~_at ti'xey did fs and we still i:ave the same procedure with the ?B today. Yet: get the lot ~ine change approval. Then you do a deed. You have to do 2 deeds~ or~e deed from le?s say here it was Chudiak to Wells. And ~daen a 2~ deed. a deed. You gar covenants, yoz rocor5 the cove?~mnts. ~ [~s insilco acOaaliy each of the deeds had the coven~*: l~:age as pe.n of [he deed. So it wasn:t ~venan~s and res!:dcfions as we sometimes see independently of the deed. They w~e covenargs :~posed on [he deed of convey~ce. Se Wells, when ~e deed came ffrom convey~ce deed to Wells. [hat deed has a l~age that the PB imposed. So ~ey comply Mth ~e condition of the lot line ci~nge. You ~cow that a -,arson c~ come ~d ask for a ~mdmce ~om you. ~d they c~n ~2oose nor to b'a~}d. happ~s. If you doit( 5u~ad, yet7 don't have ~y reason to have a w~nce. CHAIRWOMAN: ~ ~ess ~_e dhfhcdt ~dle fha': ~'m having mhd so=_e of 4ze o~er board mambos ~e ha~ng is that we go to the issue of if the lot was ~eated by ~d in tiiis c~e. no. was ~Js p~ival~ lot created? MS. MOO~: But... CHA~WO~N: Excuse me. MS. MOO~: Go ~2ead. CH~WOMAN: Was ~is p~cul~ ici ~ealed? No ii was?r. Is tlds the on~2~ lot lines tiat were created and reco~fzed by tie PB? No. fiey ~e r.o'.. Now... MS. MOORE: Waft. w~t. wait. v~t me co=oct ~&at bec~ase.. CHA~RWO~N: Exc-ase me. excuse me. [ would like % MS. MOORE: CHAIRWOMAN: f gave you tremendous cou~esy whm~ you msde a preserXat~on... MS. MOORE: You're fi~ht, ?m so~. CHARWOMAN: [ didn't intenmpt you, please ~ve =~e the same co.rosy. Tiey not the s~e ofi~nal lot lines. ~2e[xer Sa1~y di&7't set! to Bill or Bhl didn't go Page 1~ of 2fi Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearkng 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? Taut 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 may be 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 heatings on tbAs. And throughout the title search on this piece of property, it refers this lot is in part of XYZ lot. Part or'As 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 tots, would ~ 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. A~d the way that the lot was created was by subsequent subdiv/sions 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 ~0 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 subdivhsion 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 tbAs as a 10© 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 tifie compmties when they do a title search will look for the last deed of record. If that Iast deed of record has a schedule A that includes more than that piece that you're presenting to thmn, 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. Thcre's no obligation in law or in the town code to force an owner to do a deed. Taere's no legal requlre~nent 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 SoutJs_oid Town Board of Appeals Spedal Meeffng P?iic Heafi2g deeded origin~Iy Eom iffs o~2al acqu~s~on in tko 20*s ~a~ are st!Il show~ng ~s {~e ong~n~ convey~zce ~z6 it's eu'~m'cels. Essen~dly ~t's fi%e balance o~ what was behind as oth~ p~eces were conveyed our. ~affs what h~pened kere~ Yo~ had a p~ece E~gt Mr. Mi~owsk2 says, ~geez, Mr. CinudLak used to owr_ 28 acres out here'*. He E~en a p~ece away to S~r~cich. S/m~c~ch ~)asx have had e~ ~east ~0-25 acres te do a 4- subdivision. ~at ~nece, that deed, worx to S~m~cich. jus~ Eke the deed that went to M21owskL ~nat deed went to. you ~ow a deed for ~&_e :*~ece that Miowsk~ owns wen: Mi!ows~. Chud~ nev~ had other deeds ~:o folIow tk~ou~z. He owned Ge whole He was st2! the owner o?:he prope~. Under real property law~ the fact that you donh do convey~ce deed doesn't me~ that you've Wen up what you atready own. You ~nd of. you know~ lefts !cch a bna pic~e mud as yo~ t~e. you ~ow you cut slhhe:m away ~om that b~g p~c~e. You still o~ tlze p~ct~e, you still have the 'aaderl~ng, over~l d~mens~ons of what yo~ had before. CHAIRWO~N: I understand that. MS. MOORE: 2's ~s~ating to me because I Msh I co,a!d solve C~WOMAN I don't tmd~st~d that wh~ the 2~ergers d~d not t~e place, that Chudi~ did nor come b~ck to ffze PB ~d say "lcok~ the csvenants ~d rest%cfions go wit1~ t~is piece carrot hold because.. ~ MS. MOORE: Fm so~, ffxere ~e no coven~Tts ~d res~cffsns for ~e pieces thst did Do't get conveyed. CI~W0~N: Excuse MS. MO0~: It's just f. msiafitig because you have to resd t2ae Iangaage. CH~W0~N: Excuse :he. ~e pieces that did not get conveyed when he saw that ~ey were 2o~ getffng ~nveyed, wb~ di&a~: 2e come back to the town ~ say "look. they ~e not gong to be cor:veyed. Fm going to be left with ff~is piece, the Pisses. no piece." ~y didn't he seek to ~ to legalize MS. MO0~: No. let's :zot ss~ legalize it because you're coming to a conclusion l is not co,eot. You wmnt to have it left essenti~ly, you w~r ro have it reco~ized post lot line ciaages. ~affs what you are sa~ng. And jzst like the PB skzould have done what ~ey wmnted, whic~ is ~mnose a covenant. ~ey siozfid have done. instead of 4 lot line changes: had they done ff~fis as 1 lot lir_e dnmnge approval that incozTorated the 4 aspects of it, then yes, you would not 2ave been able to do I without doing 2he 4. ~d the fact tkat ~ey screwed up, they're blaming Ciudi~( ~2d Pisacano. Fm senna', you ~iow, real prope~ law ~.d the ~de ~d zor~htg laws 7c~ against the drafter. ~n ag~nst ~e bo~d that s~ews up. Ifs not to. ~e re~ prope~~ ~s of the ~ndiv~dtm] aren't eliminated because, you ~ow. wishful ti~fing. Well geez. we wish we could have done. you lmow, just like you say: wouldn't it have bee2 r2ce if Ciu~s& 2ad come back ~d said m ~e PP. ~well Pecker c~n't buy became he's sick and Zabicky is no longer Page i8 of 26 7q0-03 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing there. I want to keep this to myself and this is the piece Fm going to have." That would t'~ave been wonderful, but that wasn't required. That would have made ow jobs a tot 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 t can't... CHAIRWOMAN: I'd like to kind of wrap this ,ap. One t3fing, 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: T2e survey has the lot size right on it. Mr. Orlando? MEMBER ORLANDO: No other questions. CHAIRWO~: Ms. Oliva? MEMBER OLD/A: No questions. CHAIRWOMAN: [s 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 f;n:st one, I believe that was a separate piece of property, k wasn't of the 28 acres. It was be~nd those houses, the line changes that they did. That was like a separate, because when I bought, you know, mine, Mr. Chud~ak 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 thLnk all 4 lots together wasn't big enough to build a house on. That's why ][ 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. Milowsld. Fm going to make a motion to close the hearing and reserve decision. PLEASE SEE MrNUTES FOR RESOLUTION Page 19 of 26 Souihold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Heating 8:25 p.m. ~xppl. No~ 5323 ~ ~llGtNIA and CH~STOPHER CO~E CHAIRWO~N: Is someone here who would like lo spe~ on behgf of ~he MS. MOO~: Just me. ~d you'll ge~ 5d of me soon enough~ ~a~ I did is I trded ~ve you ~ys a H~e more '~d~ding of Kuts, g ~eas% my 7 osition wi~h regards to ff~is co=age. ~g I d{d ~s, the histo~ ~s ixat Kqere was a minor s~division. ~he cottage, s~c~e was on ~e propemy wh~e {~ preser~y exists~ And it shows on (~e subdivision ~aps. So thee is a pre-exisffng s~ac~e ~ere. We fhi~ it was a hmngonr, bu~'h could have be~ a residence m thg point We jus': don'~ ~ow boca-asa it's too far back. Threes nobody alive %o tell ns. Then in '?6 the prope~ was s~,di~ded. At [~a~ zoning only requked 1 acre ocr !o?. T~s was a 3.68 acre prope~. S% whg I behove occu~ed is ~ha~ when my clients, ex,asa me, ~he predecessor. 86~g~ b~li z house in i978 on K~s proper~y~ ~e co,age was gJ~owed ro remain ~ere as a dweE{ng becmase ~e ~creage of ~e prope~ has so fg exceeded the zoning requ~eme~cs. The code speaks ~th respec~ to 1 dwelling for 40K sq. ~. mud here we had 3.6 acres. I ~abmi~ed bogd Cite CO for the house. ~d ~he BMOd{rig Dept (BD} wmt back in 2002. Mr. I ~ess geeing ready ro sell ~e house, gm a pe~h for g~ "as-b,Mb' deck add{fion to his s~ngle f~Jly dwel!~ng. At ~zg t;~e~ the conage was there. T~e BD went Ohm the prope~ once, c~:M~y when the bu~!d~ng pe~k and CO was issued in ~78~ ~d again 2002, never m~de an ~ssue of ~he co~age~ The conage w~ used by the p~5or Schur~ we ~ow ~Js because: one~ I have ~_ a~da~t ~om~ t rotund ~ough several ohone c~is~ cha{n of phone cg~s~ I fo*~d out ~a~ Lm~ Liso bu{it th{s touse~ ~nd rem~b~s the co,age, ~%g re~bers thg~ ~he Sc~fg fm~5iy w~. used ff~e co~gg~e, was H~ng ~he:e w~[e the house was ~dm' conslmcfion. And we leww thai ~e Scl~ son was l~ng in/i~e co,age. ~ believe he was work~ng a: TI Tr~srn~ss~on. We had io ~MI he rotund ~ p~ace re ]{ve before we could close. So tlne co?:age was occup{ed ~ou~out t~s time. CHARWOMAN: ~_en d{d Mr. Schzx ]~ve Gere? MS. MOORE: He built the house in '78. He was the ofi~ngl He bought ~om Bayley~ [t was ~e Bayley svIdivision in '76. And Sch~ was the first owner oflh[s parcel CHA~WO~N: Of ~e house. MS. MOO~: Of the one who bnih ~he hot, se, yes. CHARWOMAN: So he occupied t~e main dwe]Eng, did he also Hve in the co~age? Page 20 of 26 7-10-@3 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meet/ng Public Heating MS. MOORE: His son lived in the cottage. His son was old enough, in his 20's. The cottage was used. It was used for family. And it was used for guests. And t'm very disappointed that the board didn't get a chance to go inside. I think it's imperative that you go inside the cottage to look at it. I mean, because from the outside it just iooks an old shed. lit hasn't changed very much. And inside when you go in, you wdll see it's pretty much in it's o~ginal condition, ddcor is from the 70's, and everything has pretty much stayed the same. The reason Mrs. Coyne had wanted to get, do an addition, renovation of it was because the inside hadn't been changed, certainly in 20 years, so, 30 years. We think you should see the inside before you make a decision because I think when you go in, it will be so apparent. That this cottage was obviously used, and it's a very cute, little, I ti,ink it was a bedroom, a bathroom, full bathroom, shower, and living, dining area. Ail one side of the house is iiving, dirfing, vdth a Iittle kitchenette area,, little kitchen, stove, and refrigerator. It's very cute, very clean and maintained. But mainta'med by way of the old building materials with just paint. But still weli ma~nta'med. CHAIRWOMAN: Since t978 then, they've used it kind of as a guest cottage? MS. MOORE: Yes, it's been a guest cottage. Wh/ch is what we were willing to have a condition placed on the approval that it be as a g'aest cottage ancillary to the residence becanse they weren't necessarily interested in renting it. They don't want anybody corrfing to rent the cottage. They have a young fanfily. They don't want strangers there. And for the most part, people that buy a significant home aren't going to be renting, this is not a waterfront cottage where they could rent it for a significant amount of money. TbJs is a nice, accessory dwelling for the guests and the farn'xly and teenage, young, adult ctfild, or in the Coyne's case, it was her mother, that they want to live on the same property, but not necessarily on top of each other. CHAIRWOMAN: The Coyne's, t~he clients that you are representing, have not owned the house a year, is that correct? MS. MOORE: Right, we bought it in 2003~ CHAIRWOMAN: And when you bought tl,~e house, you bought it with the understanding that it did not have a CO. Your client was aware that the cottage did not have a CO as a dwelling, but rather as an accessow bn/!ding. MS. MOORE: Actually turned out we had the application. We had made th_e application for a pre-CO, but couldn't get one in time. The Schur's, tl~e sellers were not willing to g~ve us the time for the pre-CO. ~t was obvious, you'know, apparent, obvious to us as it would be obvious as you go look at it that it's ex/sting and pre-dates, we didn't th/nk it was a significant risk. Then when we finally got the BD to do the inspection, Boufis says, well I'm not guing to make a decision on the use. I'1I g~ve you non-occupancy structure CO. No, that's not what we wanted. So we appealed, we came right to you for an appeal. That's all Boufis was willing to make a decision on. No matter, I gave him Page 21 of 26 So~:tl,~old Town Board of Appeals Special Meefi:ng Public Heai?_g the afbdav[t. I gave i~[m ~-~e storeys. ~d I would th[p2~ thal somebody whose Eyed here. Ce~a[niy a co-apSe of BD people kayo [bred o'~ 5ere long ex~o=~% yorx imow... CHA~WOM~N: ~a: d~d 5~e coa~act ofs~e say when Sch'~ sold il ~o Co~e? MS. MOORE: We di&~'t have... CKAIRWO~N: Thee w~s no con~ct of sale7 MS~ ~OORE: No. no. r~o. we didn't: have a contingency to allow ns ~o get ~ pre-CO? CHAIRWO~N: ~a did tke con~act ofsaie state? Does 2 sta~e tl~ere is i Does the con~ract of sale say ~n~e's 2 dwe~k~gs? MS. MOORE: Doesn't say ~ow mmny dwell~_gs. C[4AIRWO~N: I% does~ refer to tony dwellings on the prope~ wP_atsoever? MS. MOO~: ~'s a st~_d~r~ imz~age of~ co~ac~ t[a s~ys sellk~g.. MEMBER ORLANDO: Does it ac~ow'~edge that it exists? ~So MOO~: Obviously ~ey s~d it was there, ~md they d[dnk wenl to be bctkered~ ~ZMBER OLWA: K's nor men~oned 5n the co~ct ofs~[e? ~S. MOORE: ~dan me~ ~MBER OL~A: ftys ~ot ment:~o~ed in the contrac~ of s~e? MS. MOORE: Not mer_tion~ ~ the con~act of sale as a cottage. ~ffe would not m~e a~y r~reser2etions. Let's put it tha way. MEMBER O~ANDO: ~en it doesr~'t exist. ~ey don't aclmoMedge it as MS. MOORE: You have a seller 'O~at says t~e it or leave it, or get out of my face i~e of [efing. ~d my clients rez4ly w~ted t?~e hot:se, ke s~d. ?mn going 'to ~ve you g0 days ~d we~m going ro close. ~d ['m goir_g ~o ~ve you a CO for the ~.ain dwelEng: b-~t not going to be obligated to ~ve you a CO for ~ny addi~or~al s~mc~e. So therefore, shed. we were nor ~ble to get a CO for t~e shed beca~se tha required a v~r~ce 5'om bo~d. We ~uldn't get ~ CO -ore-CC even tho:a~n we ~ed ro get ~ pre-CO before closing for ti~e cottage. We coul~k do tha either. C~WO~: So she bou~t it L~oMng, Mght ~way, 'dhat sine karl r~o K~ar~tees this co,age was m~2~Eng other th~ m accesso~ shed. co:rage. Page 22 of 2~ 7-I[0-03 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing ME_MBER ORLANDO: Now she's moving. MS. MOORE: Now she's got the house on the market because her husband got relocated. But now she has somebody who~s going to come and maybe not be as willing to take the house without, I mean the cottage is there. It's been used as a dwelling. So we want to legalize it. MEMBER ORLANDO: (inaudible) MS. MOORE: Well, if you say no to the addition, the more important thing is to get an acknowledgement that it exists and a CO for the structure as a habitable dwelling. CHAITRWOMAN: That's the issue. And as far as a habitable, it doesn't even meet the definition of a dwelling unit. MS. MOORE: I'm sorry. I'm getting so frustrated because pre-existing structures are pre-existing structures. Tt-~s structure, you've said before is a pre-existing structure. It became non-conforming oniy when, in 'Sg, there was a zoning change that made it nonconforming. The use is, have you forgotten all our zoning principles? Pre-existing, our code is, fight from the begL~'ming, says structures that are existing prior to the date of the ordinance are pre-ekisting non-conforming. There is no obligatiun to have a certificate for, ifs existing. CHALRWOMAN: Yes. What existed though? You're maintaining that a dwelling existed. MS. MOORE: But it was, it was occupied as a dwelling. A dwelling is a place where people live and sleep. CHAIRWOMAN: It was also a bar and a kind of place where people gathered. MS. MOORE: When we started, how old ii is, alright, in the 50's this building was built. In the 50's, early 50's, maybe in the 40's, this building was built. It was used as a hang- out, as a social club for the farmers that owned all the acreage. There were no houses. Sound Shore Road, and I spoke to Terry Latham today because I saw Latham, did, he mined, his father actually mined south of this property. So I was trying to gather infonr, ation from old timers to see if anybody remembered the existence of f-~is cottage. And he tells me there was nothing up there. In fact, there was, his family mined and did sand mining off of that area until the town dump was built and they put him out of business because the dump needed to open up a pit and all the sand was being sold for 5 cents a cubic yard instead of what the mining operations, Latham Sand, you know from Orient. So eventually the sand pits were eliminated. CHAIRWOMAN: Okay. Page 23 of 26 7-1@-©3 Sou¢~old Town Board of Appeals Speci~ Meet:.x% Public Hoeing MS. MOORE: Okay. Se we:ye gar a histou 5ere. ~e f~ct that, so ~:pay, tPis residential use. The dwe!is~g itself is a resfdenf~! use. It's beer: G~I w~y: ~d c~dnly :hat w~y ~oup_ou~ {2e time t2~t Sci~~ owned it. And S~nuz. 5re zebus dnmges that would have made it nen-confe~ing as a second dwelling on ~ pre~ ~r~ or~y took when 2-acre zeni2g c~e imo effect. Because then you needed 4 a~es for 2 dwellings: ~gN~t~ ~d we had 3.6 acres here. But the fact is {l~at it was pre-existing. So you're used {e tki~king of pre-existing as pre-1957, this pre-existi2g acc:ss ~r ~ny t[r2e that there ms ~ e}:~ge ~n the zoning ordinance. We're about m de. if we de the 5 ~cre zoning, are you telling me that eveU 2 ~cre lot G~t has a N_euse on ~t. sudde2ly gars eliminated? Of ce~se not. it hermes pre-existing~ nen-cenfo~fng. If you have ~ lot~ yo~t c~ still b~.fld on it. R's pre-existing non-conFo~ing. Here yozz have a coinage that was Miowed ~d was occupied, ft becmm~e pre-exfsing, non-confo~2g ~n ~83. Not before, and it's beer~ ii, at way ev~ since, f would ask t2at 5effete you c~_ose ¢~fs go out and t~e a look i~side. Mrs. Co~.e was yeU upset. She~s not here today bec~ase she was so uoses a-: the last hea~ng tF_at you m-e m~mg decisions over ~e eimina~oz so:morning that's so im, o~r. a cottage. I memx, we have ve~ val~ag*le prop~ies here tha~ 2ave co,rages o~ ~em. There m'~ goLng to be major lawsuits if the bo~d elim;mating th~: mud 2o'r reco~2z~ng tbs. ~ey are existing, they ire pre-existing. ~d ~e fact that there are ch~ges made re the prope~ should not effect a pre-existing co,age. A pre-existing use is a v~id. existing use mxless ~tenfion~ly abmdoned for peiod of time. ~:at was not the case h~e. We had ~ continrous use ar_d the f~ily stfE ~n~nues ~o use it for her ~aesrs. ~d w~!i confir, ue to use it. ~d tee fact is i~it doesn't gar legalized, yo;:'re jus~ going ,to create s~Oaatfo~s wh~e s~cr~es exis~ our ~5~ere Mthout the legal blessing of tlze to~. And they ~'e gong to co~lnue to be rased. not ree21y the p~oses here. Tk~e ZBA sits to create, maTrer exslmqa~on, to ~ve re!iai to people ~d to ~ve pe~fts when the BD. in their world of black and white, cmn~: do ~e BD coz:ldn~t see past ~5~at. They di~_'t have to look 5ack at ~57. You o~2y had look to t!~e point wh~e it becme non-confo~ing. ~nd ~at was ~n '83. g~d you 2ave bo~2 papers now. MEMBER O~DO: I thou~t you were going to be r2cer~ tbds t2me, you said. MS. MOORE: I'm ~stra/ed because yon ~ys ae v~ intelHgenz. You :~ow. ~ mean if you were la,ers si2~g Ka tEere_ yon would be ME~ER OLWA: I don't ~derst~d how t~e Co~e's bou~t tke prop~ ff~m t2e Shore's_. MS. MOORE: MEMBER OLWA: Schur's. not i~ow~ng they had 2 CO's on tke prepe~ MS. MOO~: 2 k~pe2s al! 'abe fi~me quite Page 2z~. of 2fi Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Heating MEMBER OL1VA: It wasn't done through a bank. I take it. It was a casl~ Because a bank, if they have to go through a mortgage, usually insists that you have the proper CO's. MS. MOORE: The bank didm't reqnire, the house value, some banks are now giving away money, they don't make a big deal out of, it' they see th~e's a CO on the house, because there was certainly a CO on the main dwelling and that was one of the biggest and nicest houses built up on that road at the time. ~ mean~ when I spoke to Larry Liso, Larry Lisa said yes, that was one of the big houses at the time. That was equivalent of the old manor houses. But yor* have to ~nderstand in a sellers market, sellers can tell you to scratch, take it or leave it. And you, as a buyer, assess the situation and go well, you Lnow~ you can't, it's here, I see it. Any reasonable person would see it too. MEMBER OLFVA: But then you're stuck '~Ath the problem. MS. MOORE: But it's the same Mth the shed sitting in the front yard. Where else is going to go? MEMBER ORLANDO: Well Pat, you answored my questhon, but I have to ask it anyway for the record. Say we denied this, what would they do with that dwell/ng? MS. MOORE: They'd keep using it, come on. If it's not then it's going to be someone down the line. MEMBER ORLANDO: They are using it as we speak. The bed was evan made when looked in the window. MS. MOORE: You guys really should come and look, she really wants you to come and look inside because you must see the/nside. When you look Lnside you'll go, oh, this is a no brainer. CHAIRWOMAN: We have looked through the property. We looked through the windows. Ruth, Vin~y, Jerry and I have looked, it's up to you. Do you want to see ~nside? MEMBER ORLANDO: I looked arom~d. I looked in the windows. ~ can see what need to see. MS. MOORE: You can see it's a 1970's ddcor and nottfing much has changed. CHAIRWOMAN: Do you want to leave this heating open, or close it? MEMBER ORLANDO: WelI, there's orgy ~ of us, we should Ieave it open at least so George and Jerry. Page 25 of 2~ Southold Tow'ox Board of Appea}s Special Meeting Public Hea~ng MS. MOO~: 5f ~ey w~m ~o come see ~e ~ns~de oTk by ~H me~s. If you're going d~y it, I don't ~derst~nd. But I tiiri it re~ly req~res~ yo~ go ms,de, k's so ci~ it's MEMBER O~ANDO: I tki~ you should ~eave i~ open bec~se there's 2 people missing. CHArWOmAN: Ooer unti~ wieng ~e next meetingg MS. MOORE: Ln ~i~e ~xe~tim% see if they wa~r re do a~ i~spection, go inside. E's insuring m a property owrer, something so impo~n-~. ~d the ~ast meeting she w~s here~ the re~c~on and ~he comments 5eat were m~de were Eke~ yo~ ~.ow. wE~ c:o you Threes no co~age ~nere. Come and look inside. ~ere~s no do~bt that ~his is a Htt~e, dwe~5~g. Fs ~here. [Ps existirg, ifs been used. ~ve -~s the behest of }ooking [=side it C~WO~N: ~y don~t we }eave i~ open m~d taik about k Mlh George ~d ~nd see i~ *hey want re dc ~ inspec~on. It w2~ have ~c be ~F~e ~u~s~ meetirg, 2i. MS. MOO~: If you !~_ow yo;;'re coming let ~s ~ow ~d we'H leave it uriocked. MEMBER ORLANDO: ~ don~ ~i~r ~y ne!~bors c~me. MS. MOOP~: T~ere w~e :~o neighbors ~t time. ~ere~s no oppositio~n i~e. Fs a~e prop~cy. ~on how. nobody cares~ MEMBER O~ANDO: We c~ dose it ~d discuss k on ~he 24~ when evez~body~s here. MEMBER OLWA: Close it MEMBER O~AN~O: We c~ dose 2, ~d ti~ speK< to Je~. George ~il he here 2 weeks~ Cr~WO~AN: I~tF~ev w~r ~o~ tI:ey MiL MS. ~OORE: riyou're con~nced, yox don't reed to iook a~ iL CHAIRWOMAN: Fm s~ng 5~ey are going re m~e ~ decisiom N! make a cIosing ~e Seining. PLEASE SEE ~'TES ~OR RESOLUTrON 8:50 pm P~Nic HeaPing Page 26 of 25