Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
5419
'111 APP 5BOARD MEMBERS ��, SOS �C. Southold Town Hall Ruth D. Oliva Chairwoman - ,��h�0 Oy 53095 Main Road Gerard P.-Goehringer ; P.O.y Box 1179 Lydia A.Tortora : �` Southold,NY 11971-0959 Vincent Orlando : T' ft Tel. (631)765-1809 _� '. � James Dinizio,Jr. � `a� ' ' Fax(631)765-9064 http://southoldtown.northfork.net . - BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD June 3, 2004 By Regular Mail and Fax Transmission Mr. John Hurtado do Abigail A. Wickham,Esq. Wickham Bressler Gordon&Geasa,P.C. 13015 Main Road,P.O. Box 1424 Mattituck,NY 11952 Re: Appl. No. 5419—CTM 1000-13-1-5.1 (Orient) Dear Mr. Hurtado and Mrs. Wickham: As a follow-up to Mr. Hurtado's inquiry today, this will confirm that the attached were the recommendations issued by the Suffolk County Soil & Water Conservation District in March and May during 2003 concerning this property, and part of the ZBA review and conditions issued April 8, 2004 by the Board under Appeal No. 5419. Additionally, there were two subsequent letters which were considered as part of the entire record of November 5, 2003 and November 24, 2003, with similar recommendations. They do not appear to be in conflict, and therefore should be followed. It is suggested that the Suffolk County Soil & Water Conservation District be contacted in the event of any questions regarding the County's letters of evaluation and recommendations for preparation in the final planning stages. Copies are attached for your use and reference. Thank you. Very truly yours, L02_, Ruth D. Oliva Chairwoman Ends. cc (w/ends): Town Clerk/Records Management 134.1 /1tti. £dn& bell (61.4))Lel- a , APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS �' l� OG',, Southold Town Hall i�' Ruth D.Oliva,Chairwoman �� ' ® � : 53095 Main Road Gerard P Goehringer �Ry, F �= P.O.Box 1179 Lydia A.Tortora x t t r• 44, Southold,NY 11971-0959 Vmcent Orlando ;' ®���, Tel.(631)765-1809 • James Dinizio,Jr. =_ 1 +,,' Fax(631)765-9064 • http://southoldtown.northfork.net • BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF APRIL 8,2004 Appl. No. 5419—J&C HOLDINGS. Contract Vendee (Edna Doll.Owner) Property Location: 590 North View Drive, Orient; CTM 1000-13-1-5.1 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. - PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: The applicant's 41,907+-sq.ft. described parcel is vacant,with 129.50+- ft. frontage along the north side of North View Drive, 327.89 ft. in depth along the westerly side line, 315.20 feet along the easterly side line, and 137.71 feet along a tie line at the high water mark of Long Island Sound. The distance between the front line and the top of the bluff line (upland area) on the east side is 120.95 feet, and 161.92 feet along the west side. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Building Department's November 7, 2002 Notice of Disapproval, amended August 6, 2003, citing Section 100-239.4A.1 and 100-30A.3, in its denial of a building permit to.construct a new dwelling with setbacks: (a) less than 100 feet from the top of the bank or bluff, and (b) less than 50 feet from the front property line. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on November 20, 2003, December 18, 2003, and February 26, 2004, 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: AREA VARIANCE RELIEF REQUESTED: In applicant's August 7, 2003 request, setbacks were.proposed for a new single-family dwelling,32 ft.deep by 65 ft wide, at approximately 50 feet from the top of the bank and at 43 feet from the front lot line, as shown on the survey of June 26, 2003, revised July 28, 2003 by Hillebrand Land Surveying, P.C. By letter with enclosures submitted November 19, 2003, the applicant's attorney submitted information fora redesign in the plot plan, repositioning the driveway to the east side of the property, adding a retaining wall for the west side and drywells to prevent runoff onto adjacent lands. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION/AMENDED RELIEF: On November 5, 2003, a site evaluation was submitted, based on the 1-1/2 story design proposed by applicant, from the Suffolk County Soil &Water Conservation District, indicating the bluff face appeared stable without evidence of erosion. During the November 20, 2003 hearing, the board requested information to show the conceptual design and layout in this variance application. On November 24, 2003, the Suffolk County Soil &Water Conservation District submitted an additional evaluation regarding a concern for the large volume of fill, and recommending that the large volume of fill should be compacted in 6" lifts to eliminate future settling, • t . :;�,1 Page 2-X18,2004 - - - AgpL No.5419-J&C Holdings " - GTM 1000-13-1-5.1 . • • • • • • •with vegetation of all bare soil to be done immediately with'a quick germinating grass seed mix or a fast- • • • :. On December 11, 2003 the'applicant submitted a conceptual`plan confirming 1 .,681. • first floor, with 1,188 sq.ft. living area on the second floor, and 360 sq.ft.for agarage.sq'-ft. living area on file • Puling the D®oemtei 18, 2403'pUtilic hearing, disaiisslons continued, and the a licaht' • •• applicant's intentions to move up to 10 ft. depth of fill from the existingso $eogte h Clarified the ; -..1 -. final re-grading of the remaining yard areas, increasing the ground elvation at south feet to the house for the .. four ft. high retaining wall at the north/westeraly 9 feet, adding a . � . elevation above mean sea level, at its highest contour. The applicant also at the east side of the house to 90 e • • " would result in a lower grade, after removal of soil from the front to the backyard ed that the front of the house y . . .: On February 5,... 004; the applicant siibmitted'a"revised 1127/04 plan With u- cat • • drainage. Other details were confirmed, stating that the retaining wail will be built in e an crib layout for ' :at a height at 3 feet, rather than 4 feet, that the garage was relocated under the fia standard crib layout and • • • west side, precluding the 6 ft. wall setback that was in the previous plan (dated 12/29/03);floor of the house • [.se on the proposed house was revised to a maximum 30'4"feet to the top of the ridge from the finis at theaheight of the finished grade. . . ':In considering the 1/27/04 revised plan, Board Mefnbers determined.that a 10 ft.reduction oil the . the house to a length of 49 feet (instead of 59 feet or 62 feet) will increase the setback east sida of •:provides a minimum that the Board will allow. • • from the bluff and • :REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: • •• •• - - • •• • 1n accordance wlth"the review standards set forth in the �"oirvn Law 267-63 . considered the benefit to the applicant if the variance is granted, as weighed aiinst Cesd theriboard t dee . health, safety and welfare to the neighborhood and community by such grant, and herebythe detriment variances to the as applied for,with grant of alternative relief, and determining that: denies the *1: A) Grant df alternative relief will not produce art undesfrable'clian a in tfi a detriment to nearby properties. The applicant redesigned the dwellingliwith 1-1/2 e stor 6f the lowering the h d or -from finished grade to the top of the ridge to 30'4"maximum. The garage moved drio the westg the under 'the first floor of the dwelling. The retaining wall was lowered to a maximum of three (3)feet. The was to side, under 'granted by the Board will lessen the degree of the requested nonconforming setbacks and will re 'visual impact to nearbyalternative properties. The property will contain d reduce the Contain water, preventing runoff, and mitigating MNelts and must be properly re-graded to g gpoor-drainage conditions of the soils. • (B) - Oram of the alternative' relief will not produce'tin undesirable . neighborhood or a detriment to nearbychange :in the character`of tha -~. properties. The new construction will be similar to setbacks established • for dwellings existing in the immediate area of this sound front community. The dwelling to the west is at least •.-100 feet from the applicant's proposed dwelling; the dwelling to the east is at least r• proposed dwelling. The two adjacent dwellings are situated further from the street 75 feet from the applicant's . than the proposed..dv�ielEing. 2 Page 3—April 8,2004 .. AppI.No.5419—J&C Holdings CTM 1000-13-1-5.1 • • The applicant is proposing a 1-1/2 story design with garage underneath, and must provide erosion control to . properly retain water into drywalls at the landward side of the dwelling. 2. The benefit sought cannot be achieved by some method,feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance. A dwelling could not be placed without area variances in any location with the current code restriction for a 100 ft setback from the top of the bluff and 50 ft setback from the front(street)lot line. 3. The alternative granted herein is substantial, resulting in a 45% reduction for a 55 ft. bluff setback instead of the Code's minimum of 100 feet, and 16% reduction of the code's minimum 50 ft.setback 42 feet from the front property line,at its closest points. 4. The difficulty was self-created. Although the upland area of the lot is limited for building purposes, the code setback requirements have been in effect for many years. 5. The alternative relief will not have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood. The setbacks from the bluff will be increased from the requested 50 feet to 55 feet on the • east side. The applicant ensures extensive landscaping with maintenance of bluff vegetation after construction,as well as erosion and sedimentation control during construction activities. 6. Grant of the alternative relief is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of a dwelling, while preserving and protecting the character of the neighborhood and the health,safety and welfare of the community. RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD: In considering all of the above factors and applying the balancing test under New York Town Law 267-B, motion was offered by Member Orlando, seconded by Chairwoman Oliva, and duly carred,to DENY the variance as applied for,and to GRANT Alternative Relief,with the following modifications and conditions: 1. That the dwelling be reduced in length to 49 feet, increasing the setback to at least 55 feet from the top of the bluff on the east side at its closest point, at least 70 feet from the opposite (westerly . corner)of the dwelling to the top of the bluff, and centering the proposed dwelling with 37+-ft side yard setbacks. . 2. That the setback from the front lot line be a minimum of 42 feet. • 3. That the applicant and future owners follow the recommendations given by the Suffolk County Soil and Water Conservation District dated May 9, 2003. 4. That vegetation be maximized along the westerly yard area,adjacent and along the length of the proposed retaining wall. 5. That no yard or other debris be placed on the bluff face or adjacent areas. 6. The Board reserves the right to inspect all phases of construction and enhance,plantings for erosion prevention on site and to prevent water runoff prior to issuance of a C.O. .�_. , Page 4—April 8,2004 '. • App!.No.5419—.1&C Holdings . CIM 1C00-13-1-5.1 .. • • 7. This review is to be coordinated With engineer and with Building Department prior to issuance of a -: : • ' • C.O. • This action does not authorize or condone any current or future•use, setback or other feature of the subject•prdperty that . • • may violate the Zoning Code, other than such uses, setbacks and other features as are expressly addressed in this action. Vote o f the Board: Ayes:- Members Oliva (Chairwoman), Goehringer, Torto-a, Orlando; and Dinizio:-:This ' Resolution was duly adopted (5-0). • . • • . .6-12A---73),:;) A. 01 ' • - • • . . . . . . . .. . . . • • - • -- - • , . - - . - • . . . . . . • . . . . RUTH D. OLIVA, CHAIRWOMAN • • Approved for Filing 4-12-04 - • . . . • .. - Y v. J 1.0\0%.1.101 a.i yr .�v r r JJJL , CrL • 3./`_ /03 6'19 ""� + rt1410 41)14t--- .144-7i64 ROBERT J. GAFFNEY SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE SOIL AND WATER Thomas J. McMahon CONSERVATION DISTRICT DISTRICT MANAGER FAX: (631)727-3160 (631)727-2315 Lydia A.Tortora,Chairwoman Southold Town Board of Appeals PPe Z4(a- P.O.Box 1179,53095 Main Road 9 16 3 Southold,New York 11971-0959 March 12,2003 Dear Ms.Tortora: As you have requested,I have made a site inspection on March 12,2003 at 590 North View Drive in Orient. This parcel is known as the Tassone/Doll Variance Request. While I was able to review the slopes of the lot where it had been cleared for the house,I was not able to see the Bluff Face or the Toe of the Bluff from the subject parcel.Along the bluff edge it was heavily vegetated with briars and other materials that inhibited my access to the bluff. The neighboring property to the west gave me access to the bluff top edge,where a deer path runs right along it.I was able to see that the face is as heavily vegetated as it is above the bluff and briar continues down the bluff face.I was still not able to make out the toe of the slope from above and saw no access down to the bottom.It was apparent that the topographic lines shown on the survey are somewhat accurate.A bank does run along the bluff top edge barring any surface water from flowing over the bluff face on the subject parcel. However,slopes on the parcel to the west are channeled directly over the bluff face. Along North View Drive the parcel boundary has a small berm keeping road runoff from entering the lot.It appears that towards the western side of the lot,road runoff may have the opportunity to enter it. Since the ground is still covered in snow,that may be false.However,if a driveway access to the parcel was put in,then care should be taken so as not to allow any road runoff from entering the parcel. The proposed driveway location will likely increase surface water runoff entering the neighboring lot and 423 GRIFFING AVENUE . SUITE 110 . RIVERHEAD, NY 11901 i increase the existingbluff r shown. Water will sion. the enclosed low spot shown on the to`a I e 6 pond in that area until it overflowsp �P�c survey exists as erosion.Any structure placed on the lot will onto the neighbor's lot, contribute one hundred percent nand may then enclosedcoe depression and the neighboring lot,therefore, the roofOfftO the should be collected runoff downspouts and contained in ff by gutters and drywells. The slope p of the lot where the house is proposed is very We recommend p p steep. The surae mmend that an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan be re Y does not show a problemsrgrading ply that may arise from prepared and implemented to curtail any construction activities.Bear in mind that with the bluff edge(only 39'comparedthe shortened distance from then the house could be to the required minimum of 100' endangered from �'and the bluff is actively eroding, withoutemerely one or two storm hazard. This would be dependent events or may stand for m from the topographic on whether the toe of the bluffY years P graphic survey only,high tide does appearnot is actively eroding.Judging storm tide event would certainly to reach the toe of the bluff, reach it.As the toe is undermined, however,a thereby causing the topbluffthe bluff face tends to slough off to erode and the set back of the of average erosion rates house would be reduced. while es�nates ofavedependingon manyp in the past,it actually variables. One Y ranges drastically from site to site past study took the average recession of the bluff to be about ��Y,however,that could ran has been able to range up to as much as twenty feet or two feet accurately predict this rate of erosion,nor more in one storm event. slowed down has the erosion been able to be stopped,No one with the use of hardening now noed longer recommended rang sees,such as;Bulkheads only g mmended due to severe loss of beach fronts as long Rip Rap, t occurs,etc- utlook for platin � which are g the house on this parcel is g shore drift occurs. tomovethe house erosion does and only may be a short lived The nowhere cause the bluff top to erode back. proposition. There is nowhere If you have any further questions please feel free to contact us again. Sincerely, /Li d- i.+IL Paul TeNyenhuis,Senior Soil District Technician Idol y ��xm 11=»tom lm u, Il - W J 1. -. E �lilll�lllj�l�lW 11: II t et Q Q ' I n�n,sua • I 1 0 COawl �11 m Q .0 JJ �w��I l�ll=t w�mil 0 Q I11�✓AI7_71S=dW=ftr= y , • .... .-4— QI __�Cli�i mr=v FAIIII=y�1 / to lid=tmunaraN 1p� te' �111>rninr! cr) co o 0. mriNnemmm'11 - � I- J1:t 41:°( • ----1 _.-.--.2-_...--: -... �\l > n r—SCI_)♦/ rtRI111 111 11.1 —f.1�iirIMMIIMMIliC�11111�— 0. 1 co / Z D. a al ch N Q 0 o- UW .a n � b �i . ~ i <4o `— --�_ me t.,,7 I131 t ;9. 4. ••••40 E D a ( � _so IFIV h IaN • Ihb IR a:V P I 1 Z IA 0 a 0. ► i 0 Z I f ' i oWIX t t 1 ' I rR II -‘7.,„ 0 • 0 . \ \I 1III I I ' J1r \/' J t 1 , ` \ l 1 I I ( ' IJ � Ire t1 l i � ` 1t i . • cn oZ- to t I t �� r " z .r \ ' l W W O • ._ J 1 � I ' ' I J Oulu, p 1 mt I It • w w® o N I r a (p•-tpe0o< Ww — Q LAS QaN LL Io0 0 z n �IMO o E CC iWO 0 ' z la wvddd,iO a voa 9NINO2 'Vida' JNINOZ O:mO , 4 e J Q • � z , ce Oa 9e addM1 o o I.' • t . 0 co u. 0 W, - �' ' • ,:,,,,r,,,,,,,,,::".,:,"::::71,7, r t'Y` PLAN • u:.x .: ,_ : .‘:, . . ,v, .„,.:,....: i + .%'.a f''"'i4' ',fir S,•'n,ifJl 6S 'Drainage Calculations • • ;°'' ' ° Ni . Dwelling: :�' Dwelling„Footprint •=130 ua[o f = ` 't' r Rear Porch 3sq feet- �,<: ,; ?' Tpotprint =344 squgre feet.- •° ; `,.',;_:: ' '�° Frontpri t'=501 squaref �```•i` • Porch Fopt n eat ' ';Y;• F;'5`,,,-',.,4;` :;T_,�,�,, - Total =2.144 square,feet- .:1,:,,••, „ :, X"1=1;;44� ' Design standard: 2”(0.166')rainfall - _ }i 4XY�11Y11'b 2144 x 0,166=357.33 cu - i, w,4 t`4� cubic feet ..Z.,:` -'%. •V4 Drywell capacity (8'x 4'cylindrical leaching pool)=200.93 cubic fed' "'� 4Y BALE DETAILUse two 4'x 8'leaching spools { . (NTS) Driveway: Gravel Parking Area: 1780 square feet y' Design standard: 1"(0.08')rainfall . - ��I. ,t F a '1 1780 x 0,08=148.33 cubic feet a_ i li i y ! '; `v i Snow Fence Vv_ Use one 4'x 8'cylindrical leaching pool s` Silt Fence :,,,...:''..:_,.,...,.:.,,.;: ..;3:1,•,,,,,,5,,,,,,,,c,,,,,, 1■ Iy a {�' jIl€ 15:4I _ _$ ,arff II 311'3' [! c>llh llf i ,'IN gU - viiiii €il <--+ray Balek"illll1!gIII � 04 IIII ,h3i r53 sit I� ,if�� u m uls_I I _ Road Catchment. • Stake Itri ' Course Gravel } (excavate 2'x 2'x 14') 5r •'..."i,,,',1 Stake. Raised Curb.(4") (back fill with course gravel) Raised Curb,(4"�) • - '"t KN rAIA.r..hI,,.,..R.iwka•.- • .tV(.'lAiYrfl►fVlelVi'k►lKlw " ";:r,�i; ''.: X00 • •.... • • . ... . .:••. . . ,.• Cf••00•G•GIO Go .. Ct; T•1 Slit Fence S ce �� ,4 I((I KII ' ,r t-.:, ..i...: 4i Ix- Leachin Pool Perforated Pie 8"diameter 'y Bale - _ _ - - Snow Fen• ce B p ( ) _ , . ,.,• iii I=I (4'x8'diameter;6"slab) Y` ;,.II .III r '£I1• IIA{ STABILIZATION DETAIL . , :. �e (NTS) I — ' . •.401 II . . 1 .>t :}•S Cedar lalling and ' `''''4, balustersv' r, • _rF'' - , ,?... '. • ' - + i -. :.,I.e. • COURSE GRAVEL • PROPERTY OF NULTY-TASSONE R ; OPOSIED ,�+�_1\4_./r =.•='�"rfi7`=`"='"I (----- ' SITUATE; NORTH VIES DRIVE,.0 w h`cuR6RiEhtT AIMIMVLDfY0 `sock support peersr '4J2Q03 , , '>e; , /+`:';',*1'.':,..'‘.4'.,41'. lbAT6 AW1 .•r � PREPARE.D.BY:`S�FOLK ENViRO MENTAL' ONSU1tl► i f` —"' k'Concrete loowg for 1 I BRWGEMAMPTON T IK - c..�•L l'z,,: new brick support piers r�rriwautNgwr{ =':r • SCTM , 1 00-13.01•x.1 #�1 = ''; ; ! Y J `u\Cu""Q I •••.•�i•r.s ur' SUFFOLK I [• \.>!>(--1;? r.�2 ROBERT J. GAFFNEY SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT FA7t: (631)727-3160 Thomas J. McMahon DISTRICT R (631)727-2315 Lydia A. Tortora, Chairwoman � � Southold Town Board of Appeals E® P.O. Box 1179, 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971-0959 MAY — 2003 May 5, 2003 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Dear Ms. Tortora: We received the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan Tassone property on April 28th, regarding Consulting Inc. 2003 from Suffolk Environmental the g The following is a review of that Plan for_ your consideration. Measurements shown on the Erosion and Sediment Co `Plan' ) now have the setback from the bluff edge tenof Plan further away.. This is better from an erosion standpoint, (the ' -• believe the measurements should actuallyg feet (10' ) f the bluffthedge, tthnearesthowever I.-:, g , not on an angle as shown. My .m to themes are point • forty-seven feet (47' ) for the Porch and fifty-three the DwellingMY .measurements are , taken from the `Plan' . Y-three feet (53' ) for A- Stabilized Construction Entrance should be ins from being tracked onto the roadwa tailed to keep itself, if installed first, could Y• Perhaps the gravel drivewayoils Entranceact as the Stabilized Construction Using a hay bale/ silt fence combination to keep onathegthe building site is good plannin However sediments from 'Plan' is not the g• the detail shown Itn Chet placed in a du proper way to install the hay usf can'tbeg trench so that sediments and bsurfaceale rwater ruescape underneath the bales. drawing showing the proper method of installation it u engineering i mind that this is ion. by no h than a temporary measure and the bales lneeremovedd stot bbek seeded immediatelymonths. The site must be then filled and after removal. 423 GRIFFING AVENUE • SUITE 110 RIVERHEAD, NY 11901 ' } The `Plan' shows no mention of temporary seeding during construction. Any bare ground that will remain bare and undisturbed three days or longer should be seeded to a temporary mixture of annual and perennial ryegrasses to protect the slopes from erosion. Placement of Drywells for the Roof Runoff isvery good. Sizing of the Drywells for a two inch (2") rainfall event is. below that of a one i (1) year frequency event which is actually two point seven (2. 7") inches of rain. The USDA recommends a ten (10) year frequencyeve which is a five (5") rainfall for a .minimum design standard.yI don'if the Town has a minimum requirement. The Drywellt same size for the Driveway runoff rated at a one-inch (1") ran is the event. While the Drywell can contain all the runoff for thata1"fall rainfall, it is even further below the USDA minimum recommendation. Stabilization below the Deck is an excellent practice. This w' greatly reduce the impact of rainfall bysul protecti If you have any further questions ng the soil surface. again. please feel free to contact us Sincerely, Pa..4,11 Paul TeNyenhuis, Senior Soil District Technician cc: Bruce Anderson, M.S. , President PFCEIVED MAY - 8 2003 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS a" I .._ • !C V , i' Figure 5A.8 PIVED Straw Bale Dike Details MAY - 8 2003 / •ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS �v FLOW ,''"t_'" 1 2 • I 14 ------4. VERTICAL p FACE 4 BEDDING DETAIL DRAINAGE AREA NO MORE THAN 1/4 AC. PER 100 FEET OF STRAW BALE DIKE FOR SLOPES LESS THAN 252 ANGLE FIRST STAKE TOWARD PREVIOUSLY LAID BALE 0. 1 11111 FLO{l . ��'J "--ct/ ,...-----#--- :;.,z ' . • BOUND BALES PLACED v- ON CONTOUR 0110 IIII'lll' - 2 RE-BARS, STEEL PICKETS OR 2'x2' STAKES 1 1/2' TO 2' ANCHORING DETAIL GROUND, WITH BALES,STAKES FLUSH NOT TO SCALE CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS 1. BALES SHALL BE PLACED AT THE TOE OF A SLOPE OR ON THE CONTOUR AND IN A ROW WITH ENDS TIGHTLY ABUTTING THE ADJACENT BALES. 2. EACH BALE SHALL BE EMBEDDED IN THE SOIL AND PLACED SO THE BINDINGS ARE HORIZONTAL MINIMUM OF ( 4 ) INCHES, I 3. BALES SHALL BE SECURELY ANCHORED IN PLACE BY EITHER TWO STAKES OR RE-BARS DRIVEN THROUGH THE BALE. THE FIRST STAKE IN EACH BALE SHALL BE DRIVEN TOWARD THE PREVIOUSLY LAID BALE AT AN ANGLE TO FORCE THE BALES TOGCTIIrR. STAKES SHALL BE DRIVEN FLUSH WITH THE BALE. 4. I,rSPECTION SHALL BE FREQUENT AND REPAIR REPLACEMENT SHALL SE MADE PROMTLY AS NEEDED. 5. BALES SHALL BE REMOVED WHEN THEY HAVE SERVED THEIR USEFULNESSSO AS NOT TO BLOCK OR IMPEDE STORM FLOW OR DRAINAGE_ � J.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICESTANDARD SYMBOL SB SYRACUSE. NES YORK STRAW BALE DIKE — _ _ _ D _ -- - _ — . / New York Guidelines for Urban Erosion and`Sediment Control Page 5A.18 April 1997-Fourr&Priming ( 1 PFCEI. J '. D Figure 5A.9 _ Silt Fence Details MAY - 2003 ( [u niter ,4 t4 F APPEALS WOVEN VIRE FENCE IMIN. 14 1/2 GAUGE, MAX. 6' MESH SPACING) 10' MAX. C. TO C. •••II■isammnia ��� ■■■■■aiim OSTS, ��-� ORIVENNMIH. 16'. FENCE INTO neterll� GRDUND W � � : L o co' I,, (i.'!1.//1 . 0' MIN. z PERSPECTSVE V=Et„T 36' MIN. FENCE FOS MOVEN VIRE FENCE IMIN. 14 1/2 GAUGE MAX. 6' MESH SPACING) f WITH FILTER CLOTH OVEF 'UNDISTURBED GROUMO / FLOW 20' MIN. / i COMPACTED SOIL r'.. EMBED FILTER CLOTH 1 16' MIH, MIN. 6' INTO GROUND , I SECT=p Nt CONSTRUCTION NOTES FDR FABRICATED SILT FENCE 1. WOVEN WIRE FENCE TO BE FASTENED SECURELY TO FENCE POSTS WITH WIRE TIES OR STAPLES. POSTS: STEEL EITHER 'T' +"n 'U' 2. FILTER CLOTH TO BE TO BE FASTENED SECURELY TO WOVEN VIRE TYPE OR 2' HARDWOOD FENCE WITH TIES SPACED EVERY 24' AT TOP ANO MID SECTION. FENCE: WOVEN WIRE, 14 1/2 SA. 3, WHEN TWO SECTIONS OF FILTER CLOTH 6' MAX. MESH OPENING - THEY SHALL BE OVERLAPPED BY SIX INC I S &ND ACH ER FLTER CLOTH: FILTER X. FOLDED. MIRAFI 108X, STABIL/NU4. MAINTENANCE SHALL BE PERFORMED AS NEEDED AND MATERIAL PREFABRICATED UNIT: REMOVED WHEN 'BULGES' DEVELOP IN THE SILT FENCE T140N OR APPROVED EQUAL. GEDFAB, ENVIROFENCE,_OR APPROVED U.S: DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE EQUAL, NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE �TANDAAO SYMBOL SYRACUSE, NEW YORK - New York Guidelines for Urban Erbsion•abd Sediment Control page 5A.20 ' .. ' April 1997-PoutIi Printing • COUNTY OF SUFFOLK • ^\t Tvt. : Joi )4# 0: ROBERT Z. GAFFNEY SOIL AND WATER SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE CONSERVATION DISTRICT Thomas J. McMahon FAXs (631)727-3160 DISTRICT MANAGER (631)727-2315 2003 November 24,2003 v074A Ruth Oliva Southold Town Board of Appeals 53095 Main Road P.O.Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971-0959 RE: ZBA File No.5419: J&C Holdings/Doll' Dear Ms. Oliva: No limitations were found regarding the construction of a 1 'A-story dwelling upon review of an additional survey plan dated July 28,2003 for the above subject parcel. The main item of concern is the large volume of fill required in order to attain the proposed grades in the rear yard. The most effective method to stabilize this fill is to compact it in 6"lifts. This will help to eliminate future settling. To further stabilize the site all bare soil should be vegetated immediately with a quick germinating grass seed mix or a fast growing groundcover. Currently,the topography is sloping from the east/southeast to the northwest into a small depression. A portion of the runoff is bypassing the depression on the west and flowing onto the western neighboring property where it flows over the bluff edge. The majority of the northern most portion of the bluff is sloping inland away from the edge until the retaining wall is reached. The proposed construction will not increase the surface water flow over the edge of the bluff. In fact,surface water flow will be reduced by construction of the retaining wall. All runoff inland of the retaining wall is to be graded towards and discharged into any one of the four drywells. Runoff on the bluff side of the retaining wall will,for the most part,follow its pre-construction path. In conclusion,construction of a 1 'A-story dwelling will not increase erosion of the bluff. Should you have any questions regarding this matter don't hesitate to contact this office. Best regards, Nico a Spinelli Soil District Technician Cooperative Extension Building 423 Griffing Avenue, Suite 110. RIVERHEAD, NY 11901 COUNTY OF SUFFOLK a pp,QaLoa • NOV2003 f ! L .47 '✓ ROBERT J. GAFFNEY f< SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE SOIL AND WATER Thomas J. McMahon CONSERVATION DISTRICT DISTRICT MANAGER FAX: (631)727-3160 (631)727-2315 November 5,2003 Jessica Boger Southold Town Board of Appeals 53095 Main Road P.O.Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971-0959 •_ RE: ZBA File No. 54 : J&C Holdings/Doll Dear Ms.Boger: • As per your request,a site investigation was conducted on November 5,2003 at 590 North View Drive in Orient. This site is the location for the proposed new construction of a 1-1/2 story dwelling. No limitations where found. The entire parcel is extremely over-grown,except for the excavated area. The dense vegetation made it difficult to fully survey the site. However,it was possible'to access the bluff by way of a neighboring property. The bluff face itself appears to be stabile with no evidence of erosion. The bluff is completely vegetated, consisting mainly of weeds, grasses,some shrubs and small trees. It is recommended to leave the bluff as is with existing vegetation in tact. It was not possible to view the bluff toe through the dense vegetation. A quick inventory of the site revealed the following aggressive weeds:privet,bittersweet and pokeweed. It is inferred from the supplied drawing that the subject property will be filled,where the ground slopes down to the northwest,and brought to level grade. The land should be graded so that all surface water runoff flows away from the bluff edge. During construction surface water must also be prevented from flowing over the bluff edge. This maybe accomplished as shown(on the supplied drawing)with properly installed silt fences. All bare soil should be stabilized as soon possible, in order to minimize erosion. This can be done with vegetation, mulch or geotextile materials. Vegetation is optimal; either a grass seed mix or native vegetation may be utilized. It is evident on the supplied drawing that four dry wells will be installed and the roof and driveway runoff discharged into them. This must be done in order to minimize excess surface water runoff. Overall the subject parcel will meet its intended use for the new construction of a 1-%2 story dwelling. Should you require further assistance in this matter,don't hesitate to contact this office. Best regards, ' ( q Nicole Spinelli,Soil ' trict Technician Cooperative Extension Building 423 Griffing Avenue, Suite 110. RIVERHEAD, NY 11901 91- ea. :11:1,511111 COUNTY OF SUFFOLK ( 0-vi - t‘, ttl, ) ' et,� J \q \--Ob STEVE LEVY SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE �"�CFIaMa LEs, AICP DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING I' q N April 26, 2004 SAY 5 2004 Town of Southold zoiviNG Ana 0, Zoning Board of Appeals --�; Pursuant to the requirements of Sections A 14-14 to 23 of the Suffolk County Administrative Code, the following application(s)submitted to the Suffolk County Planning Commission is/are considered to be a matter for local determination as there appears to be no significant county-wide or inter-community impact(s). A decision of local determination should not be construed as either an approval or a disapproval. Applicant(s) Municipal File Number(s) J & C Holdings* 5419 Trencheny, Joseph 5453 Stufano, Mark 1 5461 Mangus (Gary) and Meyer/..1 (Miriam) 5475 Bancroft, Martin J. Jr.** {. 5484 Suter, Don &Irene 5489 Willot, Richard&Nancy 5491 Ventura, Arthur and Ruth** 5495 Setaro, Joseph &Frances 5496 *Alternative relief appears warranted consistent with appropriate developmental restrictions, particularly as set forth by the Z.B.A. **Premises should be encumbered by appropriate developmental restrictions,particularly as set forth by the Z.B.A. Very truly yours, Thomas Isles Director of Planning S/s Gerald G. Newman Chief Planner GGN:cc G\CCHORNYIZONINGIZONING\WORKINGILD2004WPR\SD5419 APR LOCATION MAILING ADDRESS H. LEE DENNISON BLDG.-4TH FLOOR ■ 1 P 0 BOX 6 100 ■ (5 16) 853-5190 100 VETERANS MEMORIAL HIGHWAY HAUPPAUGE, NY 11788-0099 TELECOPIER(5 16) 853-4044 • APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS /����®�®� 00Southold Town Hall Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman 53095 Main Road Gerard P. Goehringer • • " P.O. Box 1179 Lydia A.Tortora ut. ^7 ��� Southold,NY 11971-0959 Vincent Orlando ' ®l��� Tell. (631) 765-1809 James Dinizio, Jr. _.tjig +010 Fax (631)765-9064 http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS RECEilVE®r TOWN OF SOUTHOLD / "� / 1Y1 FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION Apit, 13 2004 MEETING OF APRIL 8, 2004 � � ,q 'r Appl. No. 5419—J & C HOLDINGS, Contract Vendee (Edna Doll, Owner) Southold Town Clerk Property Location: 590 North View Drive, Orient; CTM 1000-13-1-5.1 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. PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: The applicant's 41,907+- sq. ft. described parcel is vacant, with 129.50+- ft. frontage along the north side of North View Drive, 327.89 ft. in depth along the westerly side line, 315.20 feet along the easterly side line, and 137.71 feet along a tie line at the high water mark of Long Island Sound. The distance between the front line and the top of the bluff line (upland area) on the east side is 120.95 feet, and 161.92 feet along the west side. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Building Department's November 7, 2002 Notice of Disapproval, amended August 6, 2003, citing Section 100-239.4A.1 and 100-30A.3, in its denial of a building permit to construct a new dwelling with setbacks: (a) less than 100 feet from the top of the bank or bluff, and (b) less than 50 feet from the front property line. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on November 20, 2003, December 18, 2003, and February 26, 2004, 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: AREA VARIANCE RELIEF REQUESTED: In applicant's August 7, 2003 request, setbacks were proposed for a new single-family dwelling, 32 ft. deep by 65 ft. wide, at approximately 50 feet from the top of the bank and at 43 feet from the front lot line, as shown on the survey of June 26, 2003, revised July 28, 2003 by Hillebrand Land Surveying, P.C. By letter with enclosures submitted November 19, 2003, the applicant's attorney submitted information for a redesign in the plot plan, repositioning the driveway to the east side of the property, adding a retaining wall for the west side and drywells to prevent runoff onto adjacent lands. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION/AMENDED RELIEF: On November 5, 2003, a site evaluation was submitted, based on the 1-1/2 story design proposed by applicant, from the Suffolk County Soil & Water Conservation District, indicating the bluff face appeared stable without evidence of erosion. During the November 20, 2003 hearing, the board requested information to show the conceptual design and layout in this variance application. On November 24, 2003, the Suffolk County Soil & Water Conservation District submitted an additional evaluation regarding a concern for the large volume of fill, and recommending that the large volume of fill should be compacted in 6" lifts to eliminate future settling, Page 2—April 8,2004 Appl.No.5419—J&C Holdings CTM 1000-13-1-5.1 with vegetation of all bare soil to be done immediately with a quick germinating grass seed mix or a fast- growing ground cover. On December 11, 2003 the applicant submitted a conceptual plan confirming 1,681 sq. ft. living area on the first floor, with 1,188 sq. ft. living area on the second floor, and 360 sq. ft. for a garage. During the December 18, 2003 public hearing, discussions continued, and the applicant's engineer clarified the applicant's intentions to move up to 10 ft. depth of fill from the existing grade at south side of the house for the final re-grading of the remaining yard areas, increasing the ground elevation from 74 feet to 79 feet, adding a four ft. high retaining wall at the north/westerly yard area, and adding fill at the east side of the house to 90 ft. elevation above mean sea level, at its highest contour. The applicant also confirmed that the front of the house would result in a lower grade, after removal of soil from the front to the back yard. On February 5, 2004, the applicant submitted a revised 1/27/04 plan with updated engineer calculations for drainage. Other details were confirmed, stating that the retaining wall will be built in a standard crib layout and at a height at 3 feet, rather than 4 feet, that the garage was relocated under the first floor of the house on the west side, precluding the 6 ft. wall setback that was in the previous plan (dated 12/29/03); that the height of the proposed house was revised to a maximum 30'4"feet to the top of the ridge from the finished grade. In considering the 1/27/04 revised plan, Board Members determined that a 10 ft. reduction on the east side of the house to a length of 49 feet (instead of 59 feet or 62 feet) will increase the setback from the bluff and provides a minimum that the Board will allow. REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: In accordance with the review standards set forth in the Town Law 267-b3 "area variances", the board has considered the benefit to the applicant if the variance is granted, as weighed against the detriment to the health, safety and welfare to the neighborhood and community by such grant, and hereby denies the variances as applied for, with grant of alternative relief, and determining that: 1. A) Grant of alternative relief will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The applicant redesigned the dwelling with 1-1/2 stories, lowering the height from finished grade to the top of the ridge to 30'4" maximum. The garage was moved to the west side, under the first floor of the dwelling. The retaining wall was lowered to a maximum of three (3) feet. The alternative granted by the Board will lessen the degree of the requested nonconforming setbacks and will reduce the visual impact to nearby properties. The property will contain drywells and must be properly re-graded to contain water, preventing runoff, and mitigating poor-drainage conditions of the soils. (B) Grant of the alternative relief will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The new construction will be similar to setbacks established for dwellings existing in the immediate area of this sound-front community. The dwelling to the west is at least 100 feet from the applicant's proposed dwelling, the dwelling to the east is at least 75 feet from the applicant's proposed dwelling. The two adjacent dwellings are situated further from the street than the proposed dwelling. - ,i i� Page 3—April 8,2004 J Appl.No.5419—J&C Holdings CTM 1000-13-1-5.1 The applicant is proposing a 1-1/2 story design with garage underneath, and must provide erosion control to properly retain water into drywells at the landward side of the dwelling. 2. The benefit sought cannot be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance. A dwelling could not be placed without area variances in any location with the current code restriction for a 100 ft. setback from the top of the bluff and 50 ft. setback from the front (street) lot line. 3. The alternative granted herein is substantial, resulting in a 45% reduction for a 55 ft. bluff setback instead of the Code's minimum of 100 feet, and 16% reduction of the code's minimum 50 ft. setback 42 feet from the front property line, at its closest points. 4. The difficulty was self-created. Although the upland area of the lot is limited for building purposes, the code setback requirements have been in effect for many years. 5. The alternative relief will not have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood. The setbacks from the bluff will be increased from the requested 50 feet to 55 feet on the east side. The applicant ensures extensive landscaping with maintenance of bluff vegetation after construction, as well as erosion and sedimentation control during construction activities. 6. Grant of the alternative relief is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of a dwelling, while preserving and protecting the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community. RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD: In considering all of the above factors and applying the balancing test under New York Town Law 267-B, motion was offered by Member Orlando, seconded by Chairwoman Oliva, and duly carried, to DENY the variance as applied for, and to GRANT Alternative Relief, with the following modifications and conditions: 1. That the dwelling be reduced in length to 49 feet, increasing the setback to at least 55 feet from the top of the bluff on the east side at its closest point, at least 70 feet from the opposite (westerly corner) of the dwelling to the top of the bluff, and centering the proposed dwelling with 37+- ft. side yard setbacks. 2. That the setback from the front lot line be a minimum of 42 feet. 3. That the applicant and future owners follow the recommendations given by the Suffolk County Soil and Water Conservation District dated May 9, 2003. 4. That vegetation be maximized along the westerly yard area, adjacent and along the length of the proposed retaining wall. 5. That no yard or other debris be placed on the bluff face or adjacent areas. 6. The Board reserves the right to inspect all phases of construction and enhance plantings for erosion prevention on site and to prevent water runoff prior to issuance of a C.O. Page 4—April 8,2004 Appl.No.5419—J&C Holdings CTM 1000-13-1-5.1 7. This review is to be coordinated with engineer and with Building Department prior to issuance of a C.O. This action does not authorize or condone any current or future use, setback or other feature of the subject property that may violate the Zoning Code, other than such uses, setbacks and other features as are expressly addressed in this action. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Oliva (Chairwoman), Goehringer, Tortora, Orlando, and Dinizio. This Resolution was duly adopted (5-0). 612.„),,, Al cak,, RUTH D. OLIVA, CHAIRWOMAN Approved for Filing 4-12-04 I COUNTY OF SUFFOLF TAP tL F • 4IA a,9 �� . • ROBERT J. GAFFNEY SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE SOIL AND WATER Thomas J. McMahon CONSERVATION DISTRICT DISTRICT MANAGER FAX: (631)727-3160 - (631)727-2315 RECEIVED Lydia A. Tortora, Chairwoman Southold Town Board of Appeals MAY - 8 2003 P.O. Box 1179; 53095 Main Road , Southold, New York 11971-0959 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS May 5, 2003 Dear Ms. Tortora: - We received the Erosion and Sediment Control PlanVregarding the Tassone property on April 28th, 2003 from Suffolk Environmental Consulting Inc. The following is a review of that plan for your consideration. Measurements shown on the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (the `Plan' ) now have the setback from the bluff edge ten feet (10' ) further away. This is better from an erosion standpoint, however I believe the measurements should actually be taken to the nearest point of the bluff edge, not on an angle as shown. My measurements are' forty-seven feet (47' ) for the Porch and fifty-three feet (53' ) for the Dwelling taken from the `Plan' . A Stabilized Construction Entrance should be installed to keep soils from being tracked onto the roadway. Perhaps the gravel driveway itself, if installed first, could act as the Stabilized Construction Entrance. Using a hay bale/ silt fence combination to keep sediments from leaving the building site is good planning. However the detail shown on the `Plan' is not the proper way to install the hay bale barrier. It must be placed in a dug trench so that sediments and surface water runoff can' t escape underneath the bales. Enclosed is an engineering drawing showing the proper method of installation. It must be kept in mind that this is a temporary measure and the bales need to be removed by no longer than three months. The site must be then filled and seeded immediately after removal. , 423 GRIFFING AVENUE SUITE 110 . RIVERHEAD, NY 11901 The `Plan' shows no mention of temporary seeding during construction. Any bare ground that will remain bare and undisturbed three days or longer should be seeded to a temporary mixture of annual and perennial ryegrasses to protect the slopes from erosion. Placement of Drywells for the Roof Runoff is very good. Sizing of the Drywells for a two inch (2") rainfall event is below that of a one (1) year frequency event which is actually two point seven (2.7") inches of rain. The USDA recommends a ten (10) year frequency event, which is a five (5") rainfall for a minimum design standard. I don't know if the Town has a minimum requirement. The Drywell design is the same size for the Driveway runoff rated at a one-inch (1") rainfall event. While the Drywell can contain all the runoff for that 1" rainfall, it is even further below the USDA minimum recommendation. Stabilization below the Deck is an excellent practice. This will greatly reduce the impact of rainfall by protecting the soil surface. If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact us again. Sincerely, d. Paul TeNyenhuis, Senior Soil District Technician cc: Bruce Anderson, M. S. , President covED MAY - 8 2003 ZONING SOAP[D OF APPEALS • pro PmCE1',(ED Figure 5A.8 MAY - 2003 Straw Bale Dike Details LZON1NG BOARD OF APPEALS si FLOW VERTICAL FACE q { BEDDING DETAIL DRAINAGE AREA NO MORE THAN 1/4 AC. PER 100 FEET OF STRAW BALE DIKE FOR SLOPES LESS THAN 25Z ANGLE FIRST STAKE TOWARD .44111104 PREVIOUSLY LAID BALE FLOW „ 'J diviwouirrl j - BOUND BALES PLACED ON CONTOUR IIi�I �II01 � — 2 RE—BARS, STEEL PICKETS $ — OR 25:2' STAKES 1 1/2' TO 2' IN GROUND, DRIVE STAKES ANCHORING DETAIL FLUSH WITH BALES. NOT TO SCALE CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS 1 . BALES SHALL BE PLACED AT THE TOE CF A SLOPE OR ON THE CONTOUR AND IN A ROW WITH ENDS TIGHTLY ABUTTING THE ADJACENT BALES. 2. EACH BALE SHALL BE EMBEDDED IN THE SOIL A MINIMUM OF ( 4 ) INCHES , I AND PLACED SO THE BINDINGS ARE HORIZONTAL. 3. BALES SHALL BE SECURELY ANCHORED IN PLACE BY EITHER TWO STAKES OR RE—BARS DRIVEN THROUGH THE BALE. THE FIRST STAKE IN EACH BALE SHALL BE DRIVEN TOWARD THE PRE:''IOUSLY LAID BALE AT AN ANGLE TO FORCE THE BALES TOGETHrR. STAKES SHALL SE DRIVEN FLUSH WITH THE BALE. 4. INSPECTION SHALL BE FREQUENT AND REPAIR REPLACEMENT SHALL BE MADE PROMTLY AS NEEDED . 15. BALES SHALL BE REMOVED WHEN THEY HAVE SERVED THEIR USEFULNESS SO AS NOT TO BLOCK OR IMPEDE STORM FLOW OR DRAINAGE. J.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE i STANDARD.SYMBOL NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE STRAW BALE DIKE SBD SYRACUSE. NEB YORK E I f New York Guidelines for Urban Page 5A.18 April 1997-Fourth'Printing n. Erosion and'Sediment Control 1 1 > J r pren G gD rcv Figure 5A.9 - MAY - 8 2003 Silt Fence Details { F APPEALS WOVEN WIRE FENCE (MIN- 14 1/2 GAUGE MAX. 6' MESH SPACING) 10' MAX. C 70 i C• \ 3E' MIN. FENCE POSTS, _ - ORIVEN MIN. 16' INTJ _ c\_'I ( GROUND IM 4 al I al -•®ii1 -. -.I� 1 I W 1 W - __,._ •.. NimmenEINI--.z-..-:.:1 •• .. ! -LD in v 64. v. .I. w .v F�o•� .`I 8' MIN. _ I PERSPECTIVE VIEW • 36' KIN. FENCE POST` WOVEN WIRE FENCE (MIN. 14 1/2 GAUGE- _T. UNDISTURBED GROUND I MAX. 6' MESH SPACING) f I 1 WITH FILTER CLOTH OVEF 281111, MIN FLOW::___ LO W f / ii COMPACTED SOIL . , 3 I EMBED FILTER CLOTH / 6' MIN. 1 11 MIN. 6' INTO GROUND I 'r p I 4' SECTSC]t'4 CONSTRUCTION NOTES FOR FABRICATED SILT FENCE 1. WOVEN WIRE FENCE TO BE FASTENED SECURELY TO FENCE POSTS POSTS: STEEL EITHER 'T' as 'U' WITH WIRE TIES OR STAPLES. TYPE OR 2'`HARDWOOD 2. FILTER CLOTH TO BE TO BE FASTENED SECURELY TO WOVEN WIRE FENCE. WOVEN WIRE, 14 1/2 GA. FENCE WITH TIES SPACED EVERY 24' AT TDP AND MID SECTION. 6' MAX. MESH OPENING 3. WHEN TWO SECTIONS OF FILTER CLOTH ADJOIN EACH OTHER FILTER CLOTH. FILTER X. THEY SHALL BE OVERLAPPED BY SIX INCHES AND FOLDED MIRA=I 10BX, STABILINMA 714811 OR APPROVED EQUAL. I. MAINTENANCE SHALL BE PERFORMED AS NEEDED AND MATERIAL PREFABRICATED UNIT GEDFAS, REMOVED WHEN 'BULGES' DEVELOP IN THE SILT FENCE ENVIROFENCE, DR APPROVED EQUAL. U S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE STANDARD SYMBOL NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE SILT FENCE SYRACUSE, NEW YORK , ^'..4`. New York Guidelines for Urban Page 5A.20 April 1997-Fourth Printing Erbsion.and Sediment Control FORM NO. 3 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT SOUTHOLD,N.Y. NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL DATE: November 7, 2002 RENEWED &AMENDED: August 6, 2003 TO J&C Holdings LP PO Box 1925 Southampton,NY 11971 Please take notice that your application dated August 6, 2002 For permit for construction of a single family dwelling at Location of property 590 North View Drive, Orient County Tax Map No. 1000 - Section 13 Block 1 Lot 5_1 Is returned herewith and disapproved on the following grounds: The proposed construction of a single family dwelling is not permitted pursuant to Article XXIII Section 100-239.4A.1 which states; "All buildings located on lots adjacent to sounds and upon which there exists a bluff or bank landward of the shore or beach shall be set back not fewer than one hundred(100) feet from the top of such bluff or bank." The proposed single family dwelling is located+1- 50 feet from the bank. In addition, the proposed construction on this conforming, 41,942 square foot lot in the R-40 zone not permitted pursuant to Article IIIA, 100-30A.3, which states; "No building or premises shall be used and no building or part thereof shall be erected or altered in the Low-Density Residential R-40 District unless the same conforms to the requirements of the Bulk Schedule and of the Parking Schedule, with the same force and effect as if such regulations were set forth herein in full." Bulk Schedule requires a minimum front yard setback of 50 feet. Plans note a front yard setback of 43 feet. This Notice of Disapproval was renewed and amended on August 6, 2003, and the location of the proposed dwelling has changed since the original Notice of Disapproval was issued. r 0 /C:::::‘,!" -Z____-_________ MI G- Authorized Signature Cc: File, ZBA Note to Applicant: Any change or deviation to the above referenced application may require further review by the Southold Town Building Department. Kowalski, Linda From: Heidi Hild [hheidi@us.ibm.com] Sent: Monday, March 22, 2004 4:09 PM To: Kowalski, Linda Subject: Orient Project Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals, Re: J&C Holdings, LP / Doll #5419 As you know I was unable to attend the Feb 26th hearing on the abutting referenced application. I did subsequently speak with Mr. Frischetti, the engineer hired by the builder, and although I have not seen the transcripts of the meeting yet, he told me: they will do the retaining wall our of some sort of concrete blocks. . . .not RR ties the runoff calculations for the drywells were done for 2 inch rainfall not 5 inch. . . 2 inch is the town standard. . . . vs. the 5 inch 10 year average rainfall I did discuss the attached item from my letter to the ZBA dated Feb 24 (excerpt below) , with him also, he did confirm that they are going to fill the depression located roughly 30-35 feet from the bluff, and that they did not intend to do anything to mitigate runoff from that location towards the ravine and bluff on my property as it will not be substantially worse than the current runoff. I spoke with my engineer, Michael Mapes, and he disagrees. I would like to ask that the board have the filling of the depression and the impact on runoff evaluated independently. my letter dated 2/24/04: 2. The area on the bluff side of the wall is graded toward the bluff from el 79 to el 74 to allow for a 5 foot elevation change. There is a small depression on the bluff side of the wall which will be filled in. This depression acts like a natural catch basin for runoff from the east to the west on the property. By filling in this depression runoff will be channeled toward the ravine on your property and could increase erosion. The Suffolk County Soil and Water group should study this design and address the issue of filling in the depression and it's effect of runoff on your property I appreciate all the work the board has done to ensure that this fragile land is protected. Thank you. Sincerely, Heidi Hild Sommers 1 ;ROM,: NRCS/SWCD Riverhead PHONE NO. : 6317273160 Nov. 25 2003 09:18AM P2 COUNTY OF SUFFOLK Buz S LIYo h ROBERT J. GAFFNEY SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE •SOIL AND WATER a1ThO8s J. McMahan CONSERVATION DISTRICT DISTRICTMANAGER FAX: (631)727-3160 (631)727-2315 November 24,2003 Ruth Oliva --- Southold Town Board of Appeals 53095 Main Road P.O.Box 1179 NOV 2 5 2003 Southold,NY 11971-0959 RE: ZBA File No. 5419: J&C Holdings/Doll -; Dear Ms.Oliva: No limitations were found regarding the construction of a 1 1/2-story dwelling upon review of an additional survey plan.dated July 28,2003 for the above subject parcel. The main item of concern is the large volume of fill required in order to attain the proposed grades in the rear yard. The most effective method to stabilize this fill is to compact it in 6"lifts. This will help to eliminate future settling. To further stabilize the site all bare soil should be vegetated immediately with a quick germinating grass seed mix or a fast growing groundcover. Currently,the topography is sloping from the east/southeast to the northwest into a small depression. A portion of the runoff is bypassing the depression on the west and flowing onto the western neighboring property where it flows over the bluff edge. The majority of the northern most portion of the bluff is sloping inland away from the edge until the retaining wall is reached. The proposed construction will not increase the surface water flow over the edge of the bluff. In fact,surface water flow will be reduced by construction of the retaining wall. All runoff inland of the retaining wall is to be graded towards and discharged into any one of the four drywells. Runoff on the bluff side of the retaining wall will,for the most part, follow its pre-construction path. In conclusion,construction of a 1 Y2-story dwelling will not increase erosion of the bluff. Should you have any questions regarding this matter don't hesitate to contact this office. Best regards, . Q Ni oI Spinelli 'Al Soil District Technician Cooperative Extension Building 423 Griffing Avenue, Suite 110. RIVERHEAD, NY 11901 COUNTY OF SUFFOLT `�u .M • \1/42///(t7 T.'004‘ ROBERT J. GAFFNEY SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE SOIL AND WATER Thomas J. McMahon CONSERVATION DISTRICT DISTRICT MANAGER FAX: (631)727-3160 - (631)727-2315 RECEIVED Lydia A. Tortora, Chairwoman Southold Town Board of Appeals MAY - 8 2003 P.O. Box 1179, 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971-0959 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS May 5, 2003 Dear Ms. Tortora: We received the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan regarding the Tassone property on April 28th, 2003 from Suffolk Environmental Consulting Inc. The following is a review of that plan for. your consideration. Measurements shown on the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (the `Plan' ) now have the setback from the bluff edge ten feet (10' ) further away.- This is better from an erosion standpoint, however I believe the measurements should actually- ba taken to the nearest point of the bluff edge, not on an angle as shown. My measurements are , forty-seven feet (47' ) for the Porch and fifty-three feet (53' ) for the Dwelling taken from the `Plan' . A Stabilized Construction Entrance should be installed to keep soils from being tracked onto the roadway. Perhaps the gravel driveway itself, if installed first, could act as the Stabilized Construction Entrance. Using a hay bale/ silt fence combination to keep sediments from leaving the building site is good planning. However the detail shown on the `Plan' is not the proper way to install the hay bale barrier. It must be placed in a dug trench so that sediments and surface water runoff can' t escape underneath the bales. Enclosed is an engineering drawing showing the proper method of installation. It must be kept in mind that this is a temporary measure and the bales need to be removed by no longer than three months . The site must be then filled and seeded immediately after removal. 423 GRIFFING AVENUE SUITE 110 . RIVERHEAD, NY 11901 The `Plan' shows no mention of temporary seeding during construction. Any bare ground that will remain bare and undisturbed three days or longer should be seeded to a temporary mixture of annual and perennial ryegrasses to protect the slopes from erosion. Placement of Drywells for the Roof Runoff is very good. Sizing of the Drywells for a two inch (2") rainfall event is below that of a one (1) year frequency event which is actually two point seven (2. 7") inches of rain. The USDA recommends a ten (10) year frequency event, which is a five (5") rainfall for a _minimum design standard. I don't know if the Town has a minimum requirement. The Drywell design is the same size for the Driveway runoff rated at a one-inch (1")- rainfall event. While the Drywell can contain all the runoff for that 1" rainfall, it is even further below the USDA minimum recommendation. Stabilization below the Deck is an excellent practice. This will greatly reduce the impact of rainfall by protecting the soil surface. If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact us again. Sincerely, Pa d• J.-iter-L--. Paul TeNyenhuis, Senior Soil District Technician cc: Bruce Anderson, M. S. , President PFCENED MAY - 8 2003 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 2. reg PFCEIVED Figure 5A.8 MAY - 8 2003 Straw Bale Dike Details I ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FLOW f{ VERTICAL FACE BEDDING D E T A I L DRAINAGE AREA NO MORE THAN 1/4 AC. PER 100 FEET OF STRAW BALE DIKE FOR SLOPES LESS THAN 25Z ANGLE FIRST STAKE TOWARD � PREVIOUSLY LAID BALE FLOW /-rr ,r . ice �,v BOUND BALES PLACED ON CONTOUR L,.v- ���(__'') - 2 RE-BARS, STEEL PICKETS OR 2'x2' STAKES 1 1/2' TO 2' IN GROUND, DRIVE STAKES ANCHORING DETAIL FLUSH WITH BALES. NOT TO SCALE CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS 1 . BALES SHALL BE PLACED AT THE TOE CF A SLOPE OR ON THE CONTOUR AND IN A RDW WITH ENDS TIGHTLY ABUTTING THE ADJACENT BALES. 2 . EACH BALE SHALL BE EMBEDDED IN THE SOIL A MINIMUM OF ( 4 ) INCHES , I AND PLACED SO THE BINDINGS ARE HORIZONTAL. 3. BALES SHALL BE SECURELY ANCHORED IN PLACE BY EITHER TWO STAKES OR RE-BARS DRIVEN THROUGH THE BALE . THE FIRST STAKE IN EACH BALE SHALL BE DRIVEN TOWARD THE PREVIOUSLY LAID BALE AT AN ANGLE TO FORCE THE BALES TOGCTHFR. STAKES SHALL BE DRIVEN FLUSH WITH THE BALE. 4. INSPECTION SHALL BE FREQUENT AND REPAIR REPLACEMENT SHALL BE RADE PROMTLY AS NEEDED. 5. BALES SHALL BE REMOVED WHEN THEY HAVE SERVED THEIR USEFULNESS SO AS NOT TO BLOCK OR IMPEDE STORM FLOW OR DRAINAGE. J.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE I STANDARD SYMBOL NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE STRAW BALE DIKE sr SBD SYRACUSE. NEB YORK I t New York Guidelines for Urban Page 5A.18 April 1997-Fourth,Printing Erosion and'Sediment Control rcv Cr Figure 5A.9 - MAY - 8 2003 Silt Fence Details "Zariffirallit:WireF APPEALS WOVEN WIREE FENCE )MIN. 14 1/2 CAUSE MAX. 6' MESH SPACING) -- 10 MAX- C. TO C `\ 36' MIN FENCE POSTS. OR1VEN MIN. 16' INTI ----T----.1 __ I GROUND W INIMMINIIMme:.1... t I l'""Z v pJ v- .v v. .v 'TY - i 0' M1N- z PERSPECTIVE VIE W 36' MIN. FENCE PDS'. WOVEN WIRE FENCE CHIN. 14 1/2 GAUGE UNDISTURBED 6RDUND 1 MAX. 6' MESH SPACING) f J WITH FILTER CLOTH OVEF 20' MIN. I FL 'I / COMPACTED SOIL - / , / 16' MIN. EMBED FILTER CLOTH 1 I MIN. 6' INTO GROUND 14• • t SECTION CONSTRUCTION NOTES FOR FABRICATED SILT FENCE 1. WOVEN WIRE FENCE TO BE FASTENED SECURELY TO FENCE POSTS POSTS. STEEL EITHER 'T' OR 'U' WITH WIRE TIES OR STAPLES. TYPE OR 2' HARDWOOD 2. FILTER CLOTH TO BE TO BE FASTENED SECURELY TO WOVEN WIRE FENCE: WOVEN WIRE, 14 1/2 GA. FENCE WITH TIES SPACED EVERY 24' AT TOP AND MIO SECTION. 6' MAX. MESH OPENING 3. WHEN TWO SECTIONS OF FILTER CLOTH ADJOIN EACH OTHER FILTER CLOTH: FILTER X. THEY SHALL BE OVERLAPPED BY SIX INCHES AND FOLDED MIRA=1 100X. STABILINMA T140N OR APPROVED EQUAL 4. MAINTENANCE SHALL BE PERFORMED AS NEEDED AND MATEERIAL PREFABRICATED UNIT. EEDFAB, REMOVED WHEN 'BULGES' DEVELOP IN THE SILT FENCE ENVIROFENCE. OR APPROVED EQUAL. U.S DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE STANDARD SYMBOL ,NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE SILT FENCE SYRACUSE. NEW YORK New York Guidelines for Urban Page 5A.20 April 1997-Fourth Printing ErOsion.atld Sediment Control } ' Y J 1 I t_ COUNTY OF SUFFOLK „, . „0, y OS ROBERT J. GAFFNEY SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE SOIL AND WATER Thomas J. McMahon CONSERVATION DISTRICT _ " DISTRICT MANAGER FAX: (631)727-3160 - (631)727-2315 a 003 Grp — 2 November 24,2003 V11 Ruth Oliva Southold Town Board of Appeals 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971-0959 RE: ZBA File No. 5419: J&C Holdings/Doll Dear Ms. Oliva: No limitations were found regarding the construction of a 11/2-story dwelling upon review of an additional survey plan dated July 28,2003 for the above subject parcel. The main item of concern is the large volume of fill required in order to attain the proposed grades in the rear yard. The most effective method to stabilize this fill is to compact it in 6"lifts. This will help to eliminate future settling. To further stabilize the site all bare soil should be vegetated immediately with a quick germinating grass seed mix or a fast growing groundcover. Currently,the topography is sloping from the east/southeast to the northwest into a small depression. A portion of the runoff is bypassing the depression on the west and flowing onto the western neighboring property where it flows over the bluff edge. The majority of the northern most portion of the bluff is sloping inland away from the edge until the retaining wall is reached. The proposed construction will not increase the surface water flow over the edge of the bluff. In fact,surface water flow will be reduced by construction of the retaining wall. All runoff inland of the retaining wall is to be graded towards and discharged into any one of the four drywells. Runoff on the bluff side of the retaining wall will,for the most part, follow its pre-construction path. In conclusion, construction of a 1 I/2-story dwelling will not increase erosion of the bluff. Should you have any questions regarding this matter don't hesitate to contact this office. Best regards, 5ct,__;ALC/S2 Nico e Spinelli Soil District Technician Cooperative Extension Building 423 Griffing Avenue, Suite 110. RIVERHEAD, NY 11901 r - COUNTY OF SUFFOLK c�/9f/�c f�¢ ll �� �,c01.%\ NOV 1 4 2003 44_,Locc-, Tract L �? ROBERT J. GAFFNEY SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE \-v SOIL AND WATER Thomas J. McMahon CONSERVATION DISTRICT DISTRICT MANAGER FAX: (631)727-3160 (631)727-2315 November 5, 2003 Jessica Boger Southold Town Board of Appeals 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971-0959 RE: ZBA File No. 541,9 J&C Holdings/Doll Dear Ms. Boger: As per your request,a site investigation was conducted on November 5,2003 at 590 North View Drive in Orient. This site is the location for the proposed new construction of a 1-1/2 story dwelling. No limitations where found. The entire parcel is extremely over-grown,except for the excavated area. The dense vegetation made it difficult to fully survey the site. However,it was possible to access the bluff by way of a neighboring property. The bluff face itself appears to be stabile with no evidence of erosion. The bluff is completely vegetated, consisting mainly of weeds, grasses,some shrubs and small trees. It is recommended to leave the bluff as is with existing vegetation in tact. It was not possible to view the bluff toe through the dense vegetation. A quick inventory of the site revealed the following aggressive weeds:privet,bittersweet and pokeweed. It is inferred from the supplied drawing that the subject property will be filled,where the ground slopes down to the northwest,and brought to level grade. The land should be graded so that all surface water runoff flows away from the bluff edge. During construction surface water must also be prevented from flowing over the bluff edge. This may be accomplished as shown(on the supplied drawing)with properly installed silt fences. All bare soil should be stabilized as soon possible, in order to minimize erosion. This can be done with vegetation, mulch or geotextile materials. Vegetation is optimal; either a grass seed mix or native vegetation may be utilized. It is evident on the supplied drawing that four dry wells will be installed and the roof and driveway runoff discharged into them. This must be done in order to minimize excess surface water runoff. Overall the subject parcel will meet its intended use for the new construction of a 1- '/z story dwelling. Should you require further assistance in this matter, don't hesitate to contact this office. Best regards, / /1U511_, — Nicole Spinelli, Soil "'strict Technician Cooperative Extension Building 423 Griffing Avenue, Suite 110. RIVERHEAD, NY 11901 i' , G' ELIZABETH A.NEVILLE tlIenutFFOLit ®� o4\ Town Hall, 53095 Main Road TOWN CLERK p t P.O. Box 1179 tioa Southold, New York 11971 REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS W +�► � . ® Fax Fax(631) 765-6145 MARRIAGE OFFICER : #4, 4 0° Telephone(631) 765-1800 RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER 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: August 8, 2003 RE: Zoning Appeal No. 5419 Transmitted herewith is Zoning Appeal No. 5419 J & C Holdings LP (contract vendee) by Abigail Wickham, for a variance. Also included is: Project Description; ZBA Questionnaire; Applicant Transactional Disclosure: Short Environmental Assessment Form; letter of authorization; Notice of Disapproval dated November 7, 2002, amended August 6, 2003 with building permit application; and survey. Ott(fr. APPLICATION TO THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF AF::- ;�r For Office Use Only -�([J Fee:$ __Filed_BY: _ - Date Assigned/Assignment No. `, AU1 7 2003 Office Not' J&C HOLDINGS (G. WICKHAM) 5419 VO NEW DWELL—FRONT PROP LINE & BLUFF �cs��!fac, 590 NORTH VIEW DRIVE, ORIENT 13-1-5.1 Parcel Location: House No. YID Strei?t= Pao/ Ow Q R,> Hamlet o iL iv T SCTNI 1000 Section /3 Block / Lot(s) Ss I Lot Size oa 0 Zone District I (WE) APPEAL THE WRITTEN DETERMINATION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DATED: AUG-UST / eZ 0003 Applicant/Owner(s): J 'f. C foo L D/�G S L P (co i/ iitAcr Address Pio, Bo? l9 S .,SOUT//ULD/ AftY, /1 9 7 Telephone: C 3 //7 6 5- a a 0 G 3//S 3 -- 1'3 / 9 awven; &DA/A 1o1.L % cyN//lnA SNYOEP DOG-Wooh IJR, AM,AA LLQ L14 G c8 1 NOTE: If applicant is not the owner,state if applicant is owner's attorney,agent,architect,builder,contract vendee, etc. Authorized Representative: AB / 6-A IL W I c/0A m/ I J S Q Address: /3 o15 MA OI R DA D /t''Ar/ r u C K '1/44X 10,5-.2 Telephone: 3// �0 �j63 J 3 F,A G 3/(49, �� - s5-(5"Please specify who you wish corr,spondence to be mailed to, from the above listed names: ❑ Applicant/Owner(s) C9"Authorized Representative ❑ Other: WHEREBY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENIED AN APPLICATION DATED p 0,3 FOR: [W3uiiding 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 X K �f( Section 100,39, Subsection A 111 A 30A A f3 Type of Ap eal. An Appeal is made for: IYA 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 ❑ Reversal or Other A prior appeal C9'haals❑ has of been made with respect to this property UNDER Appeal No ?7RYear II/1O7 2- Page 2 of 3 - Appeal Application T 4- C f-(OLD/it/ G-S L, P, 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: PI LS-cX/J T 6/NoiJ cc,AJ c)RM/N6- k o CRGATED PP.roK 7d SON/A/G- fS coils/STENT IN sr-Lpe-s/G."A-ND cf(A2A.c7M W/TN p7NeR N6 I 6N60n1416- L'TS 0 (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: PRO.-e-KIS%/1J& w I T/I NO 077-0 ALTeANA(1 o ; /ALSO, /MMt n1AlL= NCIG-14L30fi.fu e I_073 41W s/Ai/LAR /N S/-05 Dc: s/&-N AJJD CIARn-c7e2 (3) The amount of relief requested is not substantial because: Rep()(-11)6 %ycs 13LUFF SET- 8t1/40( ET 4/c( Tu S-OFr,CF/3on4 /00 f7) ANO 7 i fRoNT Sc�7L3AcK ro Y3 FT (FI of 50 FT) IS A co APf<orn rs([ /3 o / .5/ntI LAP To Al0-I6/d6OR/JC- Lc)7$ (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 ( 4 No. If not, is the construction existing, as built? ( ) Yes, or (vS No. IO2L�_ e-x (S 7/1J6-///04/- CoNFOZM I AJ6-, (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) %¢/L //Oose_s ®N 307-H SIDES ARC CcoSe To 7Ncf /3LvFf 1►Uo 7-(f6 OAST 407 11As,A cccL1 PAoivT YAAO (sEc-" su1veY) 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. THS P>ZDPoSC-D CoriS%RUcT`°A/ /s TyP ICAL /kJ 7116.1 AREA Ai4i THC $V 1 P OUND/4l(r 1,07_5 /-/Ave No%s )I.o1✓./ //4 10,e-cT S• ( ) Check this box and complete PART B, Questions on next page to apply USE VARIANCE STANDARDS. (Please consult your attorney.) Otherwise, pl-ase proceed to the signature and notary area below. -Siert e of Appellant or Authorized Agent Sworn to before me this +� (Agent must submit Authorization from Owner) day of . l, Crust 2005. (Nota 1;ublic) • ZBA App 9/30/02 BONNIE!.DOROSIO Notary Public,State Of Newlbrk No.01D06095328,Suffolk County Term Expires July 1,20,4 , C.)4(6- • PROJECT DESCRIPTION (Please include with Z.B.A. Application) Applicant(s): -t- C )-(oLnja.fc,—.2 e I. If building is existing and alterations/additions/renovations are proposed: 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: f II. If land is vacant: r Please give dimensions and overall square footage of new construction: Dimension/size: G S J 7 X 3 FT w/d lC/a- /.vC LUb .2C) GAO GC Square footage: , , 0 _ 6 - sT sz US ; L: s ♦ C Height: 1/43 C F �t 6.�/L� �9 p ruC� //A Liz `S7OR/LAS III. Purpose and use of new construction requested in this application: d,vcs /CAM ,L y 4e S,Dyl7/,4L IV. Additional information about the surrounding contours or nearby buildings that relate to the difficulty in meeting the code requirement(s): E)(f S T/A/C- SLOPES(14/Ht Cf/ MAKS%S WATER RUNOFF ovLTyyu,ESr ToW`ARDS ?, c- 8LWZF) /5 41 4111/6.Are.o ,4Y A RR TlC RLTA,N/wG- WfL-L kr/7/1 AGrzA2ff/'DAA/N APO RooF DR% 6_5L6 S J 77/6 GA/?A&(/ b/2/v6.5-In/"y VH.5 L,c, eATOD oil 7W1 ///6//1/i wcEST s/0(Ivo/ DI IUd'WA14I'Ro'v •N G AP AA-16 u)l /IZIULWA GUA76-2 C • UG, .c oNCs c'(188/1U6- AA)D A DR/w&LL, ALL vATlst /S ComTA,A16D Sou-TR of Thgr,- QR V. Please submit seven (7)photos/sets after staking corners of the proposed new construction. /?e7- u/A L L-°) (Sec k11kC //I15uity&Y/ 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, please contact our office, or please check with Building Department (765-1802) or Appeals Department (765-1809) if you are not sure. Thank you. • • c I OLp/A/'G-S L.P. ®n(G QUESTIONNAIRE FOR FILING WITH YOUR Z.B.A.APPLICATION A. Ise subject premises listed on the real estate market for sale? ©Yes No _- B. Aye there any proposals to change or alter land contours? gYes ❑No C. 1) Are there any areas that contain wetland grasses? /® 2)Are the wetland areas shown on the map submitted with this application? AID 3) Is he property bulk headed between the wetlands area and the.upland building area? 4) If your property contains wetlands or pond areas, have you contacted the office of the Town Trustees for its determination of jurisdiction? L•eitei& OF Nom-J OR'S DIC I/O° D. Is there a depression or sloping elevation near the area of proposed construction at or below five feet above mean sea level? AK) (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? /110A/4(. (If none exist, please state "none" ) F. Do you have any construction taking place at this time concerning your premises? //V Arg - 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? ,410 If yes, please explain where or submit copies of deeds. H. Please list present use or operations conducted at this parcel VWC�r6 '7 LA-IUD /2--171-0 and proposed use ®Nur FS M I[ y I2 S/0 ( V7(,c L- • SA/63 uthorized Signature and Date ti 0111° 11-0 \ct\VI ' qA• LAW OFFICES WICKHAM, BRESSLER, GORDON & GEASA P.C. 13015 MAIN ROAD, P.O.BOX 1424 WILLLIAM WICKHAM(06-02) MATTI`FUCK,LONG ISLAND MELVILLE OFFICE ERIC J.BRESSLER NEW YORK 11952 275 BROAD HOLLOW RD ABIGAIL A.WICKHAM SUITE 111 LYNNE M.GORDON ---- MELVILLE, N.Y. 11747 JANET GEASA 631-298-8353 --- TELEFAX NO.631-298-8565 631-249-9480 FAX NO.631-249-9484 January 7, 2004 tc Town of Southold Zoning Board of Appeals 1 - 53095 Main Road, Post Office Box 1179 Southold,New York 11971 Re: J&C Holdings,LP/Doll#5419 Ladies and Gentlemen: In response to the Board's concerns, our client has consulted with the engineer and surveyor and developed a second alternative plan (7 prints enclosed). This proposal reflects the following changes: 1) House length reduced to 59' (from 65'); 2) There is one retaining wall rather than two, and it is 3' high rather than 4'. It is located 3' from the property line, since the topography of the lot enables the garage to be located under the house, and the turning radius' in and out of the garage precludes a 6' wall setback as in the 12/29/03 plan. This plan reduces the house width, eliminates one layer of retaining wall, and reduces the size of the wall. We ask that you consider these last two alternative proposals in whatever procedure you deem appropriate. Very truly yours, f lam/ �L Gt,IG� AAW/dm Abigail A. Wickham encl. l/shdzba�� n , �� �-�-� /11 0 tf (�Yit GiG IX 1 E %l/li, PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER ✓1 G L41725 HOBART ROAD/PO Box 616, SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK 11971 I TEL 631-765-2954 • FAX 631-614-3516 • e-mail: joseph@fischetti.com i Date: January 7, 2004 Reference: J&C Holdings Zoning Board of Appeals Town of Southold Main Road Southold,NY 11971 Dear Ms. Chairwoman, With regard to the above referenced application, I spoke with the applicant after the last Public Hearing. I recommended revisions to the site plan to take into consideration the natural topography of the site. He was receptive to the neighbors concerns and we have made the following revisions which are shown on the attached site plan dated January 6, 2004. 1. We have relocated the garage to the west side and have placed it under the first floor. 2. The size of the building has been reduced from 65 feet to 59 feet 3. One tier of the retaining wall system has been removed. The remaining wall has been reduced from 4 feet to 3 feet high. 4. The home first floor and basement floor elevations have been lowered one foot.Note: because the garage is now in the basement area we can not lower the structure any more to keep the driveway slope manageable. It is now an 11% grade which is just about the maximum for a driveway. The remaining retaining wall is required to fill in the low area at the rear and still have all the runoff in the site to pitch away from the bluff. It is my opinion that this plan is the best compromise for the site by taking into consideration the concerns of the neighbors. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to . 1. Ver truly yours, J i sep Fischetti, P.E. Cc: J. Hurtado °- AO Nonhv,av rot aions to 7BAdoc 'APPEAp BOARD MEMBERS Southold Town Hall Ruth D. Oliva Chairwoman �0'0 y 53095 Main Road Gerard P.-Goehringer y P.O. Box 1179 Lydia A.Tortora I Southold,NY 11971-0959 Vincent Orlando ' Tel. (631) 765-1809 James Dinizio,Jr. 'y�-4 it."'�' ,,•' Fax(631)765-9064 http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD June 3, 2004 By Regular Mail and Fax Transmission Mr. John Hurtado do Abigail A. Wickham,Esq. Wickham Bressler Gordon&Geasa,P.C. 13015 Main Road,P.O.Box 1424 Mattituck,NY 11952 Re: Appl. No. 5419—CTM 1000-13-1-5.1 (Orient) Dear Mr.Hurtado and Mrs. Wickham: As a follow-up to Mr. Hurtado's inquiry today, this will confirm that the attached were the recommendations issued by the Suffolk County Soil & Water Conservation District in March and May during 2003 concerning this property, and part of the ZBA review and conditions issued April 8, 2004 by the Board under Appeal No. 5419. Additionally, there were two subsequent letters which were considered as part of the entire record of November 5, 2003 and November 24, 2003, with similar recommendations. They do not appear to be in conflict, and therefore should be followed. It is suggested that the Suffolk County Soil & Water Conservation District be contacted in the event of any questions regarding the County's letters of evaluation and recommendations for preparation in the final planning stages. Copies are attached for your use and reference. Thank you. Very truly yours, 09.w,-cL Ruth D. Oliva Chairwoman Ends. cc(w/ends): Town Clerk/Records Management /Jep+. Airs. £dna £ &U Ce1.61te-r I „, :„...,4 , _ LoNG ISLAND SOUND . N 84°47'50.E --_137.7/' ( TUE LINE 14 - -- _ -_ MGN WATER MARK 6/26/03 4 6 . Ch - ---- --- 6 } M _ -- O T rOM _j_____-- _— 10 10 ._-• - - "=-' X20 m _ �_ -_____ - _ _ ___ ` -_. a _ / o '� = -� d0 Q 20' ` - -i� - _ _� u • z i ' ----- ____ --- '� �`" ,---- 50 ' _ _u 40i - z - • a 60• �- —__ jj i 662 _� .--/ / 80 \ 6�i �--_ --__ `� //� ' � - jam, r, --- ,� / �''/'//�, 777..___ - ---..-- _., . ---\_____, , , L ._i , r A 0 As INEERS SCALED 55'\ r o I /IA ARD OP.R.R�/E RETAN/N ALL B 7. 0 i J / \x•-76 � ,�19g °o / r,� '3.41 L J ' 1 , f02 / o ••' ONE STORY �0 0�� � � / T .8 .0 / I l I Rcr s FRAME ��' ROP. �� ;)/32' 1.* . I l D11''4s�GY DWELLING _O L.86.5 _ 870 . .. ' ' ,per q8;� AVERAGE NATURAL GRADE ill, 'N"' B E 6 °° cAR. i` 1. , 1. 4p0�•' ` 11 81.40± '� G.91�.p \ I • NIM a. 2 ;ea e 0• BO VI /m V gi4 J 10• v, N \ m, 7 }' ,r�g/ 1 bD.S'E m Ek,,P ,'a. off J 0� _11,014 N / /:rI�I; 4 / ' .O� �.5 HALT CL-99.98 NL, RTH 12 Z r CL.99. PAVEMENT EP.100.16 A 8� \. / �, � CL g6 3 +EP.99.42 n. CO -1.7 ' - r :86.20��• CL,9.00 EP. 4 96.1 150.00 E ;� 2 WINES CL.86.41 +EP.9�-86 �� o FD. NYT-6 +CL.82.45 +EP.86.c 6 Otsi ®� W , Q MON. EP.82.35 tp 0� VIE �= + EASEMENTS AN/OR SL8SIIFACE STRUCTURES RECORDED OR LMRECORAED ARE 7J __ NOT GUARANTEES MESS PHYSICALLY EVIDENT AT THE TIME OF SURVEY. COC� 1 L THE OFFSETS OR DDENSIONS SHOWN HEREON FROM THE PROPERTY LIES TO ft 4 CO THE STRUCTURES ARE FOR A SPECIFIC PURPOSE AAO USE THEREFORE T THEY • N - - £77 r!MINDED S ADDITIONALMONUMENT THE PROPERTY LIES s c ANY o�i/TE°GUIDE a r YEA'Th7 I CO , GWAUTH ORIZED ALTERATION OR ADDITIONS TO TNS SURVEY RS A VIOLATION _ OF SECTION 7209 MED/VISION 2 OF TIE NEW YORK STATE EDUCATION LAM I COPES OF 7715 SURVEY MAP NOT MEAURO 77E LAAO SURVEYOR'S EKED W � SEAL ORR EIEOSSED SEAL SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED to BE A VALID TRUE COPY. _D , ,- CERTEICATIOA6 EDTCATED hEREON STALL RLE ONLY TO THE PERSON FOR ZE U.S.C. A G.S. DA TU�;I..PER 6 - COMP THE SURVEY Ls T-APARED AAO ON THEIR BEHALF TO LISTED HE '"COON TH VEVE IE PREPARED. ASD- THEIR 771ED NEPEON SUFFOLK COUNTY FEWER WORK&S D/ES �SE DA�S�T TRANSFERABLE TO ADDITIONAL ES71TL/AOMS OR L.:7-1-=...:::-..:-..7.'y SURVEY OF DESCRIBED PROPERTY AT ORIENT TOWN OF SOUTHOLD. SUFFOLK COUNTY. NEW YORK SCALE • l' - 40' SURVEYED: JUNE 26. 2003 PLOT PLAN: JULY 28. 2003 - I-6F PMES H/<Fo9� , I , v * SUFFOLK COUNTY TAX MAP DISTRICT SECTION BLOCK LOT cr 1000 13 I 5. 1 1' Nc.5OO?i �cJ ® HILLEBRAND LAND SURVEYING. P. C. BLAND S // CHURCHILL LANE. SM/THTOWN. NEW YORK TEL., -( 631) . 543-5/39 C41_J r.r%IWIa.i yr ..7vrrvJ.lst • 3 03 G' • 7--.404.bp-tu ice ROBERT J. GAFFNEY SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE SOIL AND WATER Thomas J. McMahon CONSERVATION-DISTRICT DISTRICT MANAGER FAX: (631)727-3160 (631)727-2315 Lydia A.Tortora,Chairwoman , Southold Town Board of Appeals 06A-- P.O.Box 1179,53095 Main Road MAR f !b 3 Southold,New York 11971-0959 March 12,2003 Dear Ms.Tortora: As you have requested,I have made a site inspection on March 12,2003 at 590 North View Drive in Orient.This parcel is known as the Tassone/Doll Variance Request. While I was able to review the slopes of the lot where it had been cleared for the house,I was not able to see the Bluff Face or the Toe of the Bluff from the subject parcel.Along the bluff edge it was heavily vegetated with briars and other materials that inhibited my access to the bluff. The neighboring property to the west gave me access to the bluff top edge,where a deer path runs right along it.I was able to see that the face is as heavily vegetated as it is above the bluff and briar continues down the bluff face.I was still not able to make out the toe of the slope from above and saw no access down to the bottom.It was apparent that the topographic lines shown on the survey are somewhat accurate.A bank does run along the bluff top edge barring any surface water from flowing over the bluff face on the subject parcel. However,slopes on the parcel to the west are channeled directly over the bluff face. Along North View Drive the parcel boundary has a small berm keeping road runoff from entering the lot.It appears that towards the western side of the lot,road runoff may have the opportunity to enter it. Since the ground is still covered in snow,that may be false.However,if a driveway access to the parcel was put in,then care should be taken so as not to allow any road runoff from entering the parcel.The proposed driveway location will likely increase surface water runoff entering the neighboring lot and 423 GRIFFING AVENUE . SUITE 110 . RIVERHEAD, NY 11901 increase the existing bluf , • r . • >sion The enclosed low spot shown on the topographic.. j shown, Water will and ' P in that area until it overflows onto the nei ,and maysthen existcauses as erosion.Any structure placed on the lot will contributegb►b°r's lot,and depression and the neighboring one hundredthethen oed lot,therefore, the roof percent runoff to enclosed downspouts and contained in drywells. Offshould be collected by gutters and if The slope of the lot where the house is proposed is We recommend that Erosion very steep. The survey does not show a gradin and Sediment Control Plan be g plan.. problemsthat may arise from prepared and implemented to curtail any construction activities.Bear in mind that with the shortened distance from the bluff edge(only 39' compared to the required minimum of 100),and if the bluff is actively eroding, then the house could be endangered from merely one or without hazard. This would be dependent on whether two storm events or may the toe of the bluffactively stand for many years from the topographic survey only, is era form tide event would certainly high tide does not appear dhow Judging PP az to reach the toe of the bluff,however,a thereby causingrtainiy reach it.As the toe is undermined, the bluff top to erode and the set back of the the bluff face tends to slough off of average erosion rates have been ahem use would be reduced. ofavedepending attempted in the past,it actually Whsle estimates on many variables, One Y ranges drastically from site to site paststudy took the average recession of the bluff ��y,however,that could rangeuffto be about has been able ao er accurately up to as much as twenty feet or two feet Y predict this rate of erosion,nor more in one storm event. No one slowed down�.� has the erosion been able to be stopped, the use of hardening structures,such as;Bulkheadsp .,which only recommended due to severe loss of beach fronts as long hoe drift occurs,etc.,outlook are for placing the house on g ore this parcel is dim,and onlyy occurs. The outlook to move the house to if erosion does cause the bluff topto be a shortak. lived proposition. There is nowhere erode back. If you have any further questions please feel free to contact us again, Sincerely, AL., 0- 1%IL Paul TeNyenhuis,Senior Soil District Technician aRCSIC,i i CfJ1VTFt.C,L_ I RECEIVED & 0 APR 2 8 2003 SITE P LA NI ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS ISL_A. NI SCUNC) 1 L..c)Ni� 136.7;' • HAY BALE BEAC" (NTS) — IO Kr rte, r TOE OF BLUFF _ r, �" tIiIiiIIIii ,........ zs =nuI;r� iui!=u .. AE=i I!UIJiIIt�Il A. '..► IV la riftIgt111 ��-__ mor ._ 3S GLIO I ill II I Iirs -- t r J. ....P. _• ^ _. _. so Stake — — _ — _ �. SS - . — 6D ' LS TOP OF BLUFE 1 ,.,��: 7Z 1 1 -'�. T8 g°8� 8+ 7� 11111 •ASTAL ER' 40WHAZ RD LIN I�W.. 4o Hay Bale -1.-1,:i 70 ) I I "IA 9Z ,;i 1111IINATURAL DRAINAGE AREA 7L , f9f TO RE(wA1N 'iluilla �P196 -K PORCH 1 / 199 LINE OF HAYBALESA., _ . .SED i G / , .,. LI G / /` • (TRAVEL DRIVEWAY lk / (0. PORCH � 1I IPROPOSED CURB �, , a5 ! l I- vie ga 98 t3 r ,r� . i 92 96 c� a v I o `; 8f 8. 9a W V R . it �' eb v1� • Ur LJON PROP '---. EP UPOil ,SURVEY PREPARED BY PECONIC _SURVEYORS LAST,DATED JULY 5, 2002 A. �0 L P LA � y�`",,.; . f.. Vii, 'i 441 .Drainage Calculations ,� M� Dwellin ` �: Dwelling,Footprint =1303 squa[e feet ,,: .°4 Rear Porch Footprint =340•square feet- • •, - ' 'J.-',,',-,,':;f1. ';"••4') FrontPorchs �`t Footprint=501 square feet '` < n` Total =2144 square feet "` ' - `",, , l", .F ;02'' , Design standard; 2"(0.166')rainfall ' ' ' ' ` ,'`'. ,_,..-',i4 2144 x 0,166=357.33 cubic feet i,` 0r . 5 :'R Drywellcapacity (8'x 4'cylindrical leaching pool)=200.95 cubic feet • :':{rr 4Y BALE DETAIL Use two 4'x 8'leaching pools . • 't ' %��, (NIS) Driveway: Gravel Parking Area: 1780 square feet r, Design standard: 1"(0.08')rainfall L( 1 1780 x 0,08=148.33 cubic feet - • - .• ;'y;*'z _ "1 i Iii 5 I,I1iIi - '. i! � Snow Fence 4 V� Use one 4'x 8'cylindrical leaching pool ': lIl I- Silt Fence N'cYt 1ttfIlIIIIi s i t � �- .� V g I trip` 1 - '' � �, 1101 t +—}-lay Bale "' ylil Ug�11 I;1!III . ;"� ilk' I • - Road Catchment. V • Stake I .i t P Course Gravel (excavate 2'x 2'x 14') ; i •`~r J ``tic ""Q j ....vin i i Vt•• SUFFOT - I' \:::7(4r? 1 ROBERT J. GAFFNEY 302E AND WATER SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE CONSERVATION DISTRICT FAX: (631)727-3160 • Thomas J. McMahon DISTRICT MANAGER (631)727-2315 Lydia A. Tortora, Chairwoman R1 Southold Town Board of Appeals A E® P.O. Box 1179, 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971_0959 MAY - 8 2003 May 5, 2003 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Dear Ms. Tortora: We received the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan Tassone property on April 28th, regarding suInc. 2003 from Suffolk Environmental e Consulting The following is a review of that consideration. Plan for. your Measurements shown on the Erosion and Sediment Co • = `Plan' ) now have the setback from -the bluff edge tenol Plan • further away.. This is better from an erosion standpoint, (the - believehethe g feet (10' measurements should actuallythowever - of the bluff edge, -be_ taken to the -nearest I • forty-sevenfg , not on an angle as shown. My feet (47' ) for the Porch and fifty-three measurements are paint- . the Dwelling taken from the `Plan' . feet (53► } for' A Stabilized Construction Entrance should be installed from being tracked onto the roadwa to' keep itself, if installed first, could actasStabilized soils Entrance, gravel Constructiony Using a hay bale/ silt fence combination to keep leaving the building site is good plannin However sedimentsha l on 'Plan' is not the g• the detail shown Itn thet placed in a proper way to install the hay ube dug trench so that sediments baleubarrier. runoffescape underneath the bales. and surface ingr drawing showing the proper method of installation ist must engineekeptring i mind that this is a temporarybytmeasure and the bales need edbe rem in seeded immediately The site must be then efilledband emoved mmediately after removal. 423 GRIFFING AVENUE • SUITE 110 • RIVERHEAD. NY 11901 The `Plan' shows no mention of temporary seeding during constru Any bare ground that will remain bare and undisturbed three days o . longer should be seeded to a temporary mixture of annual and yor perennial ryegrasses to protect the slopes from erosion. Placement of Drywells for the Roof Runoff is very good. Sizin Drywells for a two inch (2") rainfall event is point below that of a on the (1) year frequency event which is actually two ) e inches of rain. The USDA recommends a ten 10) yeaseven (?. 7") which is a five (5") rainfall for a minimum designr standard.frequenc'yedon' know if the Town has a minimum requirement. The DrI don t same size for the Driveway runoff rated at a one-inch (1") design is the event. While the Drywell can contain all the runoff for thata1nfa11 rainfall, it is even further below \the USDA minimum recommendation. Stabilization below the Deck is an excellent greatly reduce the impact of rainfall b practice. This will If you have any further questions �' protecting the soil surface. again. please feel free to contact us Sincerely, P0.01 d. JiLAFAL- . Paul TeNyenhuis, Senior Soil District Technician cc: Bruce Anderson, M.S. , President PECEIVED MAY - 8 2003 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS ". PFCEIVED { MV Figure 5A.8 Straw Bale Dike Details MAY 8 2003 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS C::: - j FLOW -- • � • --��9. VERTICAL I II FACE 1 BEDDING QETAIL !!' DRAINAGE AREA NO MORE THAN 1/4 AC. PER 100 FEET OF STRAW BALE DIKE FOR SLOPES LESS THAN 25Z ANGLE FIRST STAKE TOWARD AS:PREVIOUSLY LAID BALE I FLOW _r-1 .__-;-10_10; ,-,5 ‘410,----_,-- ' *______,,:___- _-___-_ -e- - BOUND BALES PLACED v- ON CONTOUR OR 2'x2'-BARS x2A STAKES 1L 1/2'PICKETS TO 2'i ANCHORING DETAIL_ IN GROUND, DRIVE STAKES t' FLUSH WITH BALES. NOT TO SCALE CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS I 1. BALESSHALLBE PLACED AT THE TOE OF A SLOPE OR ON THE CONTOUR AND IN A ROW WITH ENDS TIGHTLY ABUTTING THE ADJACENT BALES. 2. EACH BALE SHALL BE EMBEDDED IN THE S OIAND PLACED SO THE BINDINGS ARE HORIZONTAL MINIMUM OF ( 4 ) INCHES, 3. BALES SHALL BE SECURELY ANCHORED IN PLACE BY EITHER TWO STAKES OR RE-BARS DRIVEN THROUGH THE BALE. THE FIRST STAKE BALE SU4LL BE DRIVEN TOWARD THE PREVIOUSLY LAID BALEIATEA ANHANGL=+ TO FORCE THE BALES TOGCTI p. STAKES SHALL BE DRIVEN FLUSH WITH THE BALE. 4. INSPECTION SHALL BE FREQUENT AND REPAIR REPLACEMENT SHALL BE MADE PROMTLY AS NEEDED. 5. BALES SHALL BE REMOVED WHEN THEY HAVE SERVED AS NOT TO BLOCK OR IMPEDE STORM FLOW OR DRAINAGE.IR USEFULNESS SO1 J.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE STANOARO SYMBOL 1 _ _ _ _ SYRACUSE, NEW YORK STRAW BALE DIKE New York Guidelines for Urban 1 Erosion and`Sediment Control Page 5A.18 w • • April 1997-Fourtli,Printing 1 rev • PID Figure 5A.9 _ Silt Fence Details MAY - 8 2003 ( [ 1 .T�., tit F APPEALS WOVEN VIRE FENCE (MIH. 14 1/2 GAUGE. 18' MAX. C. TOC M-X. 6' MESH SPACING) _-_-___--_- DRIVEN �_ \ 1��j�■••. ■ 36' MIN. FENCE POSTS GROUND MIN, 16' INTO INN�a � ���' 1"a �;�aRt�ILINea �� mil ...- IftoriclLis.l - "®�,m�malvailr �� s t 5.z�' � i _ fttzit oy ( / • PERSPECTXVE VSEW 36' MIH. FENCE POS WOVEN WIRE FENCE [MIN. 14 1/2 GAUGE MAX. 6' MESH SPACING) WITH FILTER CLOTH OYEFUNDISTURBED GROUND FL`_ 28• MIN. • COMPACTED SOIL l� EMBED FILTER CLOTH iI 16' MIN. MIN. 6' INTO GROUND I ____.,4 • �---L SECT=C3N CONSTRUCTION NOTES FOR FABRICATED SILT FENCE 1. WOVEN WIRE FENCE TO BE FASTENED SECURELY TO FENCE POSTS POSTS: WITH Whip TIES OR STAPLES. STEEL EITHER 'T• OR .U. 2. FILTER CLOTH TO BE TO 8E FASTENED SECURELY TO WOVEN WIRE TYPE OR 2' HARDWOOD FENCE WITH TIES SPACED EVERY 24' AT TOP AND MID SECTION. FENCE: V y D EN WIRE, 14 1/2 GA. 3. WHEN TWO SECTIONS OF FILTER CLOTH ADJOIN EACH OTHER 6' MESH OPENING THEY SHALL BE OVERLAPPED BY SIX INCHES ANO FOLDED. FILTER CLOTH: FILTER X. 1. MAINTENANCE SHALL BE PERS MIRAFI 188X. STABILIMU DIASTHEESILT FENCET IAL ::148N OR APPROVED EQUAL. ANO PREFABRICATED UNIT • BEOFAB, REMOVED WHEN 'BULGES' DEVELOP ENVIROFENCE, OR APPROVED U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE EQUAL. NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE STANDARD SYMBOL SYRACUSE. NEW YORK - k New York Guidelines for Urban • ErOSion'and'Sediment Control Page 5A.20 '•... April 1997-Fourth Printing - .COUNTY OF SUFFOL1 • s \-Y\ a3 P ..yy. \,tg - ROBERT Y. GAFFNEY SOIL AND WATER SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE CONSERVATION DISTRICT Thomas J. MNAGER FAX: (631)727-3160 DISTRICT MANAGER (631)727-2315 r 2003 J y November 24,2003 4 Ruth Oliva Southold Town Board of Appeals 53095 Main Road P.O.Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971-0959 RE: ZBA File No.5419: J&C Holdings/Doll Dear Ms. Oliva: No limitations were found regarding the construction of a 11/2-story dwelling upon review of an additional surveyplan dated July 28,2003 for the above subject parcel. The main item of concern is the large volume of fill required in order to attain the proposed grades in the rear yard. The most effective method to stabilize this fill is to compact it in 6"lifts. This will help to eliminate future settling. To further stabilize the site all bare soil should be vegetated immediately with a quick germinating grass seed mix or a fast growing groundcover. Currently,the topography is sloping from the east/southeast to the northwest into a small depression. A portion of the runoff is bypassing the depression on the west and flowing onto the western neighboring property where it flows over the bluff edge. The majority of the northern most portion of the bluff is sloping inland away from the edge until the retaining wall is reached. The proposed construction will not increase the surface water flow over the edge of the bluff. In fact,surface water flow will be reduced by construction of the retaining wall. All runoff inland of the retaining wall is to be graded towards and discharged into any one of the four drywells. Runoff on the bluff side of the retaining wall will,for the most part,follow its pre-construction path. In conclusion,construction of a 1 %2-story dwelling will not increase erosion of the bluff. Should you have any questions regarding this matter don't hesitate to contact this office. Best regards, Nico a Spinelli Soil District Technician Cooperative Extension Building 423 Griffing Avenue, Suite 110. RIVERHEAD, NY 11901 • COUNTY OF SUFFOLK !! aLo� :cox: f�O 1 S [003(-a/2/441/4 ' ) 4t • 1 _u,-(Aexy4-4-0-4('' v-,ag _ FM.0509 `L ltiAro Cr, ROBERT J. GAFFNEY I K SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE SOIL AND WATER Thomas J. McMahon CONSERVATION DISTRICT DISTRICT MANAGER FAX: (631)727-3160 (631)727-2315 November 5,2003 Jessica Boger Southold Town Board of Appeals 53095 Main Road P.O.Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971-0959 - RE: ZBA File No. 54 : J&C Holdings/Doll Dear Ms.Boger: As per your request,a site investigation was conducted on November 5,2003 at 590 North View Drive in Orient. This site is the location for the proposed new construction of a 1-1/2 story dwelling. No limitations where found. The entire parcel is extremely over-grown,except for the excavated area. The dense vegetation made it difficult to fully survey the site. However,it was possible'to access the bluff by way of a neighboring property. The bluff face itself appears to be stabile with no evidence of erosion. The bluff is completely vegetated, consisting mainly of weeds, grasses,some shrubs and small trees. It is recommended to leave the bluff as is with existing vegetation in tact. It was not possible to view the bluff toe through the dense vegetation. A quick inventory of the site revealed the following aggressive weeds:privet,bittersweet and pokeweed. • It is inferred from the supplied drawing that the subject property will be filled,where the ground slopes down to the northwest,and brought to level grade. The land should be graded so that all surface water runoff flows away from the bluff edge. During construction surface water must also be prevented from flowing over the bluff edge. This maybe accomplished as shown(on the supplied drawing)with properly installed silt fences. All bare soil should be stabilized as soon possible, in order to minimize erosion. This can be done with vegetation,mulch or geotextile materials. Vegetation is optimal; either a grass seed mix or native vegetation may be utilized. It is evident on the supplied drawing that four dry wells will be installed and the roof and driveway runoff discharged into them. This must be done in order to minimize excess surface water runoff. Overall the subject parcel will meet its intended use for the new construction of a 1-/2 story dwelling. Should you require further assistance in this matter,don't hesitate to contact this office. Best regards, I Nicole Spinelli,Soil I .ct Technician Cooperative Extension Building 423 Griffing Avenue, Suite 110. RIVERHEAD, NY 11901 DEC-26-2003 13:37 FROM:WICKHAM ORESSLER 631 298 8565 TO: 7659064 P.0011001 /6. /kOri A&L)/‘'"a2C-) y- 7 LAW OFFICES / j �° WJCK1-1AM BRESSLER,GORDON &GEASA P.G. 13015 MAIN ROAD, P.O,BOX 1424 W1LLLIAM WICKHAM 06-02 MATTITUCK,LONG ISLAND MELVILLE OFFICE ERIC J.BRESSLER NEW YORK 11952 275 BROAD HOLLOW RD ABIGAIL A.WICKHAM SUITE 111 LYNNE M.GORDON MELVILLE, N.Y. 11747 JANET GEASA 631.298-8353 --- TELEFAX NO.631-298-$565 631-249-9480 r 103 T FAX NO.631-249-9484 014 2PL9 1 Of 1� December 26,2003 Town of Southold Zoning Board of Appeals 53095 Main Road,Post Office Box 1179 Southold,New York 11971 Re: J&C Holdings,LP/Doll#5419 Ladies and Gentlemen: Mr. Hurtado has advised me that he is having a plan drawn to move the retaining wall on the west(Sommers) side to six feet from the line to better accommodate landscaping and screening,and is also submitting a landscaping plan to mitigate erosion and visual impacts. The plans are expected to be ready by January 2,2004. Very truly yours, . AAIV/dm Abigail A. Wickham U.and:ba cc.. Heidi Sommers e c's ra\,•: (.5.- \\) 0 , / - - .ffimmon. Alilh AllirlitNillir . ..% • A\7•.\ _____Mik4. '• - •-• ___-\11.1116 . --f _e: 2>‘ . . ___. t_____ ., CEDAR PERiECTON 95AXES---------,-- ri - _ - •. Hilt , 111EM WA - - I , __ • , _________________ --, __, __ - 0 0 -1 ,, - I - -- .-: i 1---- EN e ,—-——e FRDNT Ft ['VA -HO\ - 11/2 STORY RESIDENCE - NORTHVIEW P,RIVE - ORIEN1 , NY i `, 6'-8' .-_ :5-Y '' _ 4•�. - .-- -, _._ - t- -- - 5-fi 4'-C ' - 4'-r- S-f - -- •• _ - - - - - - - - -_ 5� ,;n . _ 4 ,fie-_ „lr _ vy` t7,4 . r - f ra _ _ ` _ -BEDR _ - • _ ASTER - .:a =L r 'r1. ' - ',.ata.,,,. 4'' :af y-. '-tY�lr .s I'. p . y t p ``'T''. �{'''--��,1J l4''`R .��' ?11 ll Lar•,, ` r +. a ;vi _ "y. . nrj ',14' - ;hY 1-,-;::-1;;:. -1:: SFr n i4„ :;{' ,s,r - -:,-�y ‘,..„..„1,,,,,, 1 _ 61� b ,,..-.:•:',:-.--2;',1' 7 2-L.amuir-^ _-1' w' _ .4''''''-",:A:--"--,'..!;---' ,:..�.'se..=L Vary, t� ,'S'�� . , ;5,yyv t T 1 _ _ _ _ Otca Y'', '•Y i�a — T t Q, S UDY .e . ;;+- .� }: � ran Yt. - _ - - J 4 " IIS - - r • l Wil.+ +4 +I. _ 'ROOM_- X' st t •'..z:_:„...7:,`,:-.„.•,-;,-,,!,-,.4.,-.1: -i" - GIFFDNAL =-.. P rt,., .f» }. Jks. _ - , y • a - f 41'. �-r KIrc4re'I • rr• 4 - a,raul ar.ralrirli full.I _ - _ .•�.�,-, - 1 _ ._•I r -r tri' '� �UNE OF BRLGE180YE Y WJCLOSET' : WjCLOSET li. :�,-: • - ,��j f� .- _ .F, - " " : _ fL ` - - - - - - _ '-,,,, �—16 �. __ �.a `-• - . - n , 111 1 Pj 'IA 1 ' - _�® _ - - - - - _ - - _ - I !;1 ll EL.16..1illJdllfli, • ,try ` - , _ ,w ,t-,,--,,,,- �� - �� - _ - - _ . Cddd - •-.., - ..-,...,-, '... • y.---,,--)4. - --,.,„„ . -',7'1Y.r. 4'.'- - ..,..--: -::._ , b VtbFR-R b4S ER BATH :,,, i LAN FIRST- FLOOR P .. _ F . ..LI'OS 88l'l �tiS . : • - NVId ;�OO-i -hU00]S _ , /_ ` J-91AA A9 .Y 91 ' _ - .8-91 - ' - - '- - , , . - - , - .." - e _„ -_ - a • • ��o-o dMI m�tf�hlllll{Ilm i ii " , ;+1 4 ��aia� { 13S010 N1 ewei.(Y OO ="4f FSRJ, _ ' a • I xu Ba 14100211d3210' •_ l " ,� - , - r. - ...Y _ .9-? a s - - - ,,.— .6-8 - .4-11 - S-9 .9-) .9-S J-.0 .y-� . . --- 31-D- i..1 _7 \a_Q, ,.., . . . _2'X 10'ROOF RAFfERS 11D 16'0 C. P \ 12 . .' . , . . . , / N , N . , . . . / - _ 1 - . . . -, // W.LBO SERIES FLOOR JOISTS CP 11 7/8"DEPTH . , l'`.. C17 19'-o" A it. - e--0" 2.-6' , , , ?„„? ..-...= ' - ... - 6 . V/1130 SERES FLOOR slam @ ii 7/8"DEPTH fr001/1"it 1'2' _1 it-AVe r-A0A/i C/0 , . . ..: , . A • ,dinal . , ,S.7 r a e e-T • . . 1 ?....-s TM C .f HEALTH DEPT REF* R/O-02-0/82 TOBSERVED HBYETHE SUFFOLK COUNTY I , DEPT. OF HEALTH 8-18-03 y GROUND EL-0 0 ' A D S®UND TOPSOIL II n 0 nn (//' U v G ISLii EL 30' s, 137.71' l TIE LINE )4 — ( SAND`RCL4;,, } r N 84.4750-E -MARK 6/26/03 IGH WATER I , - 4 - — _ 6 EL.-23 0" ; • • _---- _---- - EL -24 0' SAND '' 6 °,. AREA - 419071 S.F• 6 SILTY - SAND FSLOPE_ 10 i V r0 ��_ cn EL 27 d _ a f „r 10-- -- — - - -_ ---- _.._ ---- - ---- ' _ o a _ S✓L TY ' / .50 Q • SAND / `- _� - z '� GRA VEL �- .� US CZA J -✓ - = NO WATER FOUND 1 ' ; - 30 ._--- - - `----- ----- --- ---- — /�• -SZA '-' r0 �' SAND z - - �_ -�._�- - -- AND Q '% / . �'/ z GRAVEL •'; cc 4a- - --- i -- -- -- �---_ ,, .- - �- ' 60 z - Q � -,-.- - .�'"f / ce" vi — . / - -- --- -- ----- -- Ji // '/ 0 60--� '_ � ---- �'- - _ - ' -/so ( in 62-----_--64- --- =`/ - �, '��i - ,ice,- /�- 9O z 66 � - „ ` /ter jj ter- , z Y ,, 1 J�-TOP OF BL UFF�~- `- ���� j�'_�� - 60 -__r 1 /' , f 7c/ ',� _ -7#� I i ' /GESCALEOJ T`� N , 74 , I , �AZARD�IN �S ,! 74- = _ i 7vr-` :W.79.U i , .' i 1 ,' ! 1� l 1� , J#' . .. - J l i ' I '102 st 76- _ � 27 % ' I ONE STORY ` • . ``�(ft , FRAME 3 t l **I l DWELLING J `‘• i 1 8 59 0 j 8; o 4r SSE cv 5,1-,490 ' r j 1 1 =_, =. M 70 FGF EL8�� ., o f O. " .cc BF•EL,0" AVERAGE NATURAL GRADE •'••'. `O �: r i Fi d 8/.40± Lsio / 59 PG 900 i ��f 0 .,, ;; OO Till,tIA 82 -111.t K / %e , -1_, _, ei fro .y I! 1 /, 2 • i 80 =4. nAz>,f 11 ,I' TEST Sox / I E 13 �- o> N I0.,- 5 / - / 0�� /0 99. , ap S�OJ�O Z �- -- NIPY ►� 0 I °�L E .99.53t� ALT CL.99.98 0. N !�" - i 0 CL 9' PAVEMENT EP.100.16 • z `+ A__ !%►NY EP.96.123j +EP.99 42 2dr � EP.�4 o i +gip 96.12 O 7 = U �VERNE EP 86 Ti 0� el T R 46 � X50'� v 32 WIRES CL 86. 9 � n z POLE EP:. ^4 V CS FD NYT-6 +CL.82.45 'PUN STREE R.I. N V. p�j f MON. EP 82.35 ® W VI E NN ORT , ,,, ..,, EASEMENTS AN/OR SUBSURFACE STRUCTURES RECORDED OR UNRECORDED ARE NOT GUARANTEED UNLESS PHYSICALLY EVIDENT AT THE TIME OF SURVEY.f. J THE OFFSETS OR DIMENSIONS SHOWN HEREON FROM THE PROPERTY LINES TO THE STRUCTURES ARE FOR A SPECIFIC PURPOSE AND USE. THEREFORE. THEY ARE NOT INTENDED TO MONUMENT THE IROPERTY LINES OR TO GLIDE THE ERECTION OF FENCES ADDITIONAL STRUCTURES OR ANY OTHER IMPROVEMENT UNAUTHORIZED ALTERATION OR ADD1770M TO 7795 SURVEY IS A VOLAT70N - OF SECTION 7209 SUBDIVISION 2 OF THE NEW YORK STATE EDUCATION LAW COPIES OF THIS SURVEY MAP NOT BEARIAG THE LAND SURVEYORS INKED SEAL OR EMBOSSED SEAL SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED TO BE A VALID TRUE COPY ', CERTIP/CA770NS INDICATED HEREON SHALL RUN ONLY TO THE PERSON FOR WHOM THE SURVEY IS PREPARED.AND ON THEIR BEHALF TO THE 77TLE U.S.C. el 65. DATUM PER COMPANY. GOVERNMENT AGENCY AND LENDING INSTITUTION LISTED HEREON. CERTIFICATIONS ARE NOT TRANSFERABLE TO ADDITIONAL INSTITUTIONS OR SUFFOLK COUNTY SEWER WORKS STUDIES SUBSEOUENT OWNERS t SURVEY OF DESCRIBED PROPERTY AT ORIENT TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, SUFFOLK COUNTY. NEW YORK i, ') , I0 SCALE ' /" - 40' SURVEYED: JUNE 26. 2003 `'-- ----f •i PLOT PLAN: JULY 28. 2003 ,,`, � -Or w yo - REVISED: AUGUST 20. 2003 �\'-.4 MES NIt� q,1- REVISED: DECEMBER II. 2003-MOVE DRAIN TO SIDE YARD `- c� /,Jy F� REVISED:DECEMBER 29. 2003- MOVE RETAINING WALLS i A� ...'.i:•1. 1.-5? REVISED: JANUARY 6. 2001- PROP. GARAGE UNDER coo;; SUFFOLK COUNTY TAX MAP .. 0 ;+ - ��� DISTRICT SE4'TION -BLOCK' LOT finia �+„ soo3� �� 1000 1,1_ l 5. / .0, ,p _�No� © HILLEBRAND LAND SURVEY P. C. ' I I CHURCHILL LANE. SMl TNTOWN. NEW YORK l' TEL . ( 631 1543-5139 N''' 6 i, i 1 5 �( v 4-t '.COUNTY OF SUFFOLK 411‘ lee 3,ka/0 3 P 41, raze,oNtelb d\,) ROBERT J. GAFFNEY \dam SUCOUNTY EXECUTIVE SOIL AND WA - VX� �� FFOLK Thomas J. McMahon CONSERVATION DIS RICT ��/JJJ"' fa DISTRICT MANAGER FAX: (631)727-3160 (631)727-2315 Lydia A. Tortora, Chairwoman Southold Town Board of Appeals MP- d4-- 'e-1 P.O.Box 1179, 53095 Main Road Southold,New York 11971-0959 March 12, 2003 Dear Ms. Tortora: As you have requested,I have made a site inspection on March 12,2003 at 590 North View Drive in Orient. This parcel is known as the Tassone/Doll Variance Request. While I was able to review the slopes of the lot where it had been cleared for the house,I was not able to see the Bluff Face or the Toe of the Bluff from the subject parcel. Along the bluff edge it was heavily vegetated with briars and other materials that inhibited my access to the bluff. The neighboring property to the west gave me access to the bluff top edge,where a deer path runs right along it. I was able to see that the face is as heavily vegetated as it is above the bluff and briar continues down the bluff face. I was still not able to make out the toe of the slope from above and saw no access down to the bottom. It was apparent that the topographic lines shown on the survey are somewhat accurate.A bank does run along the bluff top edge barring any surface water from flowing over the bluff face on the subject parcel. However, slopes on the parcel to the west are channeled directly over the bluff face. Along North View Drive the parcel boundary has a small berm keeping road runoff from entering the lot. It appears that towards the western side of the lot,road runoff may have the opportunity to enter it. Since the ground is still covered in snow,that may be false. However,if a driveway access to the parcel was put in,then care should be taken so as not to allow any road runoff from entering the parcel. The proposed driveway location will likely increase surface water runoff entering the neighboring lot and 423 GRIFFING AVENUE SUITE 110 . RIVERHEAD, NY 11901 • increase the existing bluff erosion. The enclosed low'spot shown on the topographic survey exists as shown. Water will pond in that area until it overflows onto the neighbor's lot, and may then cause erosion. Any structure placed on the lot will contribute one hundred percent runoff to the enclosed depression and the neighboring lot,therefore,the roof runoff should be collected by gutters and downspouts and contained in drywells. The slope of the lot where the house is proposed is very steep. The survey does not show a grading plan. We recommend that an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan be prepared and implemented to curtail any problems that may arise from construction activities.Bear in mind that with the shortened distance from the bluff edge(only 39' compared to the required minimum of 100'), and if the bluff is actively eroding, then the house could be endangered from merely one or two storm events or may stand for many years without hazard. This would be dependent on whether the toe of the bluff is actively eroding. Judging from the topographic survey only,high tide does not appear to reach the toe of the bluff,however, a storm tide event would certainly reach it. As the toe is undermined,the bluff face tends to slough off thereby causing the bluff top to erode and the set back of the house would be reduced.While estimates of average erosion rates have been attempted in the past,it actually ranges drastically from site to site depending on many variables. One past study took the average recession of the bluff to be about two feet annually,however,that could range up to as much as twenty feet or more in one storm event.No one has been able to accurately predict this rate of erosion,nor has the erosion been able to be stopped, only slowed down with the use of hardening structures, such as;Bulkheads,Rip Rap, Gabions,etc.,which are now no longer recommended due to severe loss of beach fronts as long shore drift occurs. The outlook for placing the house on this parcel is dim,and only may be a short lived proposition. There is nowhere to move the house to if erosion does cause the bluff top to erode back. If you have any further questions please feel free to contact us again. Sincerely, Ak'j Paul TeNyenhuis, Senior Soil District Technician et V, Kpi),3,\05.141 LAW OFFICES WICKHAM, BRESSLER, GORDON & GEASA P.C. 13015 MAIN ROAD, P O.BOX 1424 WILLLIAM WICKHAM(06-02) MATTITUCK,LONG ISLAND MELVILLE OFFICE ERIC J. BRESSLER NEW YORK 11952 275 BROAD HOLLOW RD ABIGAIL A.WICKHAM SUITE 111 LYNNE M.GORDON ---- MELVILLE, N Y 11747 JANET GEASA 631-298-8353 TELEFAX NO.631-298-8565 631-249-9480 FAX NO.631-249-9484 December 31, 2003/�[//p� e^/ '/c/oet[ L /� it Town of Southold Zoning Board of Appeals 53095 Main Road, Post Office Box 1179 Southold,New York 11971 Re: J&C Holdings,LP/Doll#5419 Ladies and Gentlemen: Although the hearing is closed, Mr. Hurtado asked me to submit the enclosed screening/planting plan (7 prints enclosed) with a lower retaining wall recessed six feet from the side yard because it addresses the concerns of the Board and the neighbor as to screening. Very truly yours, AAW/d,n Abigail A. Wickham end/ aki0 -E-r -t 1/shdzba cc. Heidi Sommers HEALTH DEPT. REF* RIO-02-0/82 TEST HOLE OBSERVED BY THE SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPT. OF HEALTH 8-18-03 O��� GROUND EL.-0.0 ONNG I S /f A ND TOPSOIL n /[ LOAM ///� EL -3 0' 50'E /37.7/' ( TIE LINE )4 MARL N 84'L}7� ( SANDY CLAY) HIGH WA TER MARK 6/26/03 --- - EL -23 0 —` EL.-24.0' SAND 6 AREA - 4/907t S.F. a SILTY SLOPE -- •10 -' SAND (N1 � TQM Q EL.-270' 0 - _ - . M. �20 o _ _- - �ti1• .30 z SAND - -- - - �� cc AND --- C� ' lu GRAVEL p __-..... ___ __- --- Y __.- -_-__ -J, Cr) EL.-42.0 '__ _-- .`= •,, • '�' i i 5 p U NO WATER FOUND CI -_-_ i„ _J _ — - SAND a— j �. tA�. zGRAVEL 40' _ 1 --_ 60 z a 50— _ _ _ - - ---- _ ~• -_ �' ------./~ :. ------ --- -- - cc. i - -m -. - --60_ ,„ . 62 -- ` ` - — 64- ---- -- -- _- /j' . - ---- �- z \ ‘ I 76-7-- .-TOP OF BLUFF \— --- -":2---•- ' --,i /-- ` X100 1I ' i 1 11,./ / / 66 _ ; i I t_ \ - / cTEAOS ON p 7z od4NLEs sCALE gRL I 1 55't\ /PROP.RR'✓T/E RET N/NG I'ALL B{Y!7' 0 I / ' / I / / 1 ,4i p �h�' — ; 83.0 ; I / / 1d2 oN 76 `�4 t,:ho / f I` T1�8T.0 I ' l , 4,0?? ONE STORY 4 % ,. to 46,-- 1 1 / 1 ikez F FRAME 5'-6'LEYLAND CYPRES \ 01 'VG DWELLING 6' SPACING TYPICAL VL Vi �-f51V ""'— ,6.87.0 i 1 j 1 �� I Aet;/ IN ,, •\`, , 6pROP y _- 1 1' f0cu, / I/ �•�\�;" Ile ORA/ �1LS93 OOI % r"� 9�� i 7e ' �I\ PROP FF•` 9124 , 1 ® N EL.86 i N GF.EL• O0x 1 _�� 1 i AVERAGE NATURAL GRADE' ®� / '" 8F•EL83• -=1 9AR ,1 1 Q - 8/.401 ® !� Q / 65 6.910 \1 Y 7 i �Da '� .p i'.7 rrEf m p tZ1/I i 4 ', - O ......\,„,\,6' // ,, /OLE\-- Tr) 1..1\ s\ ' fillperP" J z ; , 102 O. BO ,tom M i ✓ _ o� a I + 13 �� ���`i\m`p zin 0 so r 1 ' I�E N �\�� m-- EXP �* JR�` j' /FO 5 W �P g9 T 4 / i'�l 100 g8 u Z t•0 9.53 ALT CL.99 z ; _ i 0 CL.99.53 AS CEMENT EP.10016 � E PA o B2- . , ` % EP•gl i v r<S +CL.96123 +EP. ,,,Co 42 m 0 OVER,86.20(2 `� +CL 91 00 i, EP 9612 z 150.00.POLE32/WIRES 41 EP°•86 % el CL 86. C, FD NYT 6 EP CL.82.45 PUBLIC WA TSR+ ^4 (�O z� MON EP,82 35 1 1N STREE EP.86 t4 % © V a VIEW NOR TH EASEMENTS AN/OR SUBSURFACE STRUCTURES RECORDED OR UNRECORDED ARE NOT GUARANTEED UNLESS PHYSICALLY EV/DENT AT THE TIME OF SURVEY. THE OFFSETS OR DIMENSIONS SHOWN HEREON FROM THE PROPERTY LINES TO THE STRUCTURES ARE FOR A SPECIFIC PURPOSE AND WE. THEREFORE. THEY ARE NOT INTENDED TO MONUMENT THE PROPERTY LINES OR TO GUIDE THE ERECT/ON OF FENCES ADDITIONAL STRUCTURES OR ANY OTHER IMPROVEMENT UNAUTHORIZED ALTERATION OR ADDITIONS TO THIS SURVEY IS A VIOLA TION OF SECTION 7209 SUBDIVISION 2 OF THE NEW YORK STATE EDUCATION LAW COPIES OF THIS SURVEY MAP NOT BEARING THE LAND SURVEYOR'S INKED SEAL OR EMBOSSED SEAL SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED TO BE A VALID TRUE COPY CERTTFICA TIONS IND/CA TED HEREON SHALL RUN ONLY TO THE PERSON FOR WHOM THE SURVEY IS PREPARED.AND ON THEIR BEHALF TO THE TITLE U S.C. a as. DATUM PER COMPANY. GOVERNMENT AGENCY AND LEND/NG INSTITUTION LISTED HEREON. SUFFOLK COUNTY SEWER WORKS STUDIES SUB UARE NOT TRANSFERABLE TO ADDITIONAL INSTITUTIONS OR SUBSEQUENT OWNERS SURVEY OF DESCRIBED PROPERTY AT ORIENT TOWN OF SOUTHOLD. SUFFOLK COUNTY. NEW YORK 7 - ,e1-) ////6 54 _, SCALE • I" - 40' SURVEYED: JUNE 26. 2003 `'- PL OT PLAN: JULY 28. 2003 REVISED: AUGUST 20. 2003 REVISED: DECEMBER III 2003 MOVE DRAIN TO SIDE YARD "S •pF N/NE REVISED:DECEMBER 29. 2003- MOVE RETAINING WALLS �,c,P�,NPMES N/4 `0'f ADO PGA/JT/MG scr -'' ® * SUFFOLK COUNTY TAX MAP N DISTR/CT SECT/ON BLOCK LOT g N.<; .� - .- °' o 1000 13 / 5. / x '/it Pio-Sp039 Q�� 0 HI L L EBRAND LAND SURVEYING. P. C. ° L N°s\ I I CHURCHILL LANE. SMI THTOWN. NEW YORK g TEL . ( 63/1 543-5/39 3 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS ',0 vim® • - �'p ; .; �g,Q C3r-t-�2 C O3 ;/`fes ,li' WO Albert J. Krupski"President O�,o Yom,,, c Town Hall �� � � James King,Vice-President 53095 Route 25�� , x. ��, .� P.O.Box 1179 Artie Foster { , F Southold, New York 11971-0959 Ken Poliwoda T t • Peggy A.Dickerson - " 11 Telephone (631) 765-1892 0,1 �,`ao 1/ Fax(631) 765-1366 ECEPVE MAR 0 4 2004 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD It7P4;'t,%• BORp0 OF APPEALS March 3, 2004 Mr. John Hurtado J & C Holdings LLP P.O. Box 1925 Southold, NY 11971 RE: 590 NORTH VIEW DR., ORIENT SCTM#13-1-5.1 Dear Mr. Hurtado: The Southold Town Board of Trustees reviewed the survey prepared by Michael J. Hillebrand last dated January 27, 2004 and determined the proposed dwelling and retaining wall to be out of the Wetland jurisdiction under Chapter 97 of the Town Wetland Code and Chapter 37 of the Town Code. Therefore, in accordance with the current Tidal Wetlands Code (Chapter 97) and the Coastal Erosion Hazard Area (Chapter 37) no permit is required. Please be advised, however, that no construction, sedimentation, or disturbance of any kind may take place seaward of the tidal wetlands jurisdictional boundary or seaward of the coastal erosion hazard area as indicated above, without a permit. It is your responsibility to ensure that all necessary precautions are taken to prevent any sedimentation or other alteration or disturbance to the ground surface or vegetation within Tidal Wetlands jurisdiction and Coastal Erosion Hazard Area, which may result from your project. Such precautions may include maintaining adequate work area between the tidal wetland jurisdictional boundary and the coastal erosion hazard area and your project or erecting a temporary fence, barrier, or hay bale berm. However, any activity within 100' of a Wetland line or seaward of the Coastal Erosion Hazard Area would require permits from this office. This determination is not a determination from any other agency. ai r, 2 If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, Albert J. Krupski, Jr., President Board of Trustees AJK:lms - LAW OFFICES WICKHAM, BRESSiR, GORDON & GEASA P.C. 13015 MAIN ROAD, P.O.BOX 1424 WILLLIAM WICKHAM(06-02) MATTITU'I,K,LONG ISLAND MELVILLE OFFICE ERIC J.BRESSLER NEW YOFK 11952 275 BROAD HOLLOW RD ABIGAIL A.WICKHAM SUITE 111 LYNNE M.GORDON ---- MELVILLE, N.Y. 11747 JANET GEASA 631-298-8353 - TELEFAX NO.631-298-8565 631-249-9480 FAX NO.631-249-9484 RECEIVED February 2, 2004 FEB 0 5 2004 Town of Southold Zoning Board of Appeals ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 53095 Main Road, Post Office Box 1179 Southold,New York 11971 Re: J&C Holdings (Doll),#57i/q•. Ladies and Gentlemen: Enclosed are seven sets of the following for purposes of the hearing. We will enclose a copy of the map with the notices to adjacent owners. 1. Revised survey dated 1/27/04 showing leaching pool calculations. 2. Engineer's notes showing run-off calculations on which the size of the pools were based. 3. Information sheet on material to be used in construction of retaining wall. The ties will be 6"X 6" in 8 foot lengths, built in standard crib layout. Thank you for your consideration. Very truly yours, /4/2-47-it ot, AAW/dm Al?" it A. Wickham l/shdzba Encl. -ti if -i HEAL TH DEPT. REF#'R/0-02-0/82 TEST HOLE OBSERVED BY THE SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPT. OF HEALTH 8-/8-03 n p n p© GROUND EL 0.0 DNNC� ISLAND l/V TOOAM a. EL. 3.0' N 84'4750'E 137.7/' ( TIE LINE )4 / MARL _ I SANDY CLAY) y GGH WATER MARK 6/26/03 - -' i.t/ ,' - EL.-23.0' d1 6 6 AREA - 4/9071 S.F. B } EL. 24.0' SAND 7 4:111-1-----1 SC - 10ku ' s/LTY X01 TD]6J v- u, SAND -•--- " EL.-270' N L. 27.0' fa ` r 20 10� - -- --- m `� --- --- - _ —�- - o _- �� �_ -'-_ JO Q SILTY __ -_- -- •/ SAND AND 20` _-- - - - - - - __�..,. C2 GRAVEL _ � 40 0 __ - -� V/ a \ �` v - _- - /tpc tr> 1-- -r - - - cc EL.-42.0 o __.._ ---- "-_'_ ---_--� ---._ -._--- - -_ —__ _�_ -- ,QS-- -.� SO V NO WATER FOUND • za ----- / _� - - -_ �-.------_ -, _,� `/ — .. SAND cc 40'--_ l- ,-- ---- _- ___ / Z GRAVEL /, - __.- Q �' \ Z 3 / __ . -- -�� / / - Qt - - . fa 60— i ` _ ------ -----___ ' V --/� - --- - � -_ --r �_ -- !tel ''i z \ -- -- -----<... // /% /- (�/ Sp \4. - -� . 7-400 15- -) •- ( ' 4 ik / ARD r�L ERSSSCALED . _ 74-- \ A 4 , /b :W.79.r ( � pA t --- - W.82. "� I 102 ONE STORY \----4-------:--- ,t o - r �, 2� 1 I l p�F�4y�c°AY FRAME ' 0� f / / l/NG DWELLING �� I / 1i 48 PROP. - - - -- - 6"x6 xl ACO i�, p STD Y ��< <►� 1 t , RETAINING WALL 7B ` 91,TIMBER ,�' AFF EL.92p p ' 1N „ 1 - f DRYWELL STAUDARD CR/8 ` '— W GF.t.ti.p0 0 of 1 �r ( BD/A.x 4 V.F. LAYOUT �3 / QQQF ' � 1r' CALC. PER• �, .,0, co �2 ____el l7 JOSEPH FISCHETTI PE. AVERAGE NATURAL8GRADE O t 46 4, `� [.8i o 82 �. i 1� p,./7,0, ----- / F�o�•-'i 1� . lb PROP. BO `� ��• *i _ o / vir t • LEACH/NGPOOL � 080IA.xI2F. N , EXP l /�5'W CAL PER = 89 / �! 5•f / �p 99.74 _ JOSEPH FISCHETTI PE. Z o ---MIN! % CL. N z �o y ; % 0% .O E .99.5 99.98 • N. "'" +CL 99.53 pA yEMENT EP 100.16 30 / `, PG-4.' - / E "----c,„ % EP.9tT'' • Ep'96 23EP.99.42, 20 r � CL g 00 t +EP.96.12l 50.0 32 WIRESiYERHEAD E iSl 86.4 +Ep, 86 04 0w41FD. NyTE6 CL.82.45 PUBLIC WATER+CL 9N Off, Q QE IN STREE EP.86 6 nj �/z ►. MON. EP.82 35 1 tp a/.1// D W VIEW NORTH ;� � � EASEMENTS AN/OR SUBSURFACE STRUCTURES RECORDED OR GWR-',-...ED NOT GUARANTEED L9VLESS PHYSICALLY EVIDENT AT THE ANE OF'S:' -'. - 7HE OFFSETS OR DIMENSIONS SHOWN HEREON FROM THE PROPERTY LINES TO THE S7RUCTARES ARE FOR A SPEC/FTC PURPOSE AND USE. THEREFORE. THEY ARE NOT INTENDED TO MONUMENT THE PROPERTY LINES OR TO GUIDE THE - EREC77ON OF FENCES.ADDITIONAL STRUCTURES OR ANY OTHER IMPROVEMENT . UNAUTHORIZED ALTERATION OR ADDITIONS TO THIS SURVEY IS A VIOLATION ' OF SECTION 7209 SUBDIVISION 2 OF THE NEW YORK STATE EDUCATION LAW COPIES OF TMS SURVEY MAP NOT BEARING 771E LAND SURVEYORS INKED _ _ SEAL OR EMBOSSED SEAL SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED TO BE A VALID TRUE COPY. CERN/CATIONS INDICATED HEREON SHALL RUN ONEY TO THE PERSON FOR U.S.C. GA 6.5. DATUM PER WHOM THE SURVEY/S PREPARED AND ON THEIR BEHALF TO TIE 77TLE COMPANY. GOVERNMENT AGENCY AND LENDING INSTITUTION LISTED HEREON. CERTIF7CA TIONS ARE NOT TRANSFERABLE TO AD* ,,. L INSTITUTIONS OR SUFFOLK COUNTY SEWER WORKS STUDIES SUBSEQUENT OWNERS SURVEY OF DESCRIBED PROPERTY A T ORIENT Z7 , TOWN OF SOUTHOLD. SUFFOLK COUNTY. NEW YORK FEB 0 5 2004 SURVEYED: JUNE 26. 2003 I ZONING BOARD OF gppEAff- £ SCALE • /" - 40' PLOT PLAN: JULY 28. 2003 REVISED: AUGUST 20. 2003 REVISED: DECEMBER II. 2003-MOVE DRAIN TO SIDE YARD or E�, REVISED.DECEMBER 29. 2003- MOVE RETAINING WALLS • .c1 �nEs yo REVISED: JANUARY 6. 2004- PROP. GARAGE UNDER �� P H'<- '9- REVISED: JANUARY 27 2004 - LEACHING POOL CAL CS. e �, % PER JOSEPH FISCHETTI P.E. i AAN ' SUFFOLK COUNTY TAX MAP ( �_� .- ®' DISTRICT SECT/ON BLOCK LOT � � 1000 /3 / 5. I sFO LANA sq S\3' © HILLEBRAND LAND SURVEYING. P. C. I I CHURCHILL LANE. SM/THTOWN. NEW YORK i TEL . ( 63/1 543-5/39 L] ' / a ,/ Y 2004-01-19 14 31 29(GMT) 16316143516 From Joseph Fischetti • Ffq ; A10,714 0/04.) /47/C)/03 N,7o.if) ; 325 c = /egg SC l&98 �f vtr �l}3�O�w l r 4aie 3 i aa.) •1 zry QUb 3966 CIC Uo(,,r,,.. (0416-2 = 3 965 x r .� z ��-'- 66/ c ; y RECEIVE 1,1151 - hve-a 015(p,4 ;),111 F0 5 2004 S f' LE8 wiNG BOAR®OF APPEALS M 3D x 110 = 1�}-, 3ao -�— 110f {S �'-�� . 1+,300 s-� x , 17 ,� z `' 4 o c 10 f1 I rowvcc /06.6 C - try 5 - = 15, 6-7 C•-F r ()S,() 8 h,4 y. 3) 4 R • SW cI r vsr 8 %14 u CI 4 ' if- G.r= 16c,if- , i (lost ,...,, 0 , ...„ . . rik S '1=1 E ET 0 . : ., ,„., ACQ is the most widely used non-arsenic, non-chromium, . I water-based wood preservative in the world. Formulation Summary Treatment Plant Performance ' ill • Alkaline Copper Quaternary formulations • Cycle times equal to or better than CCA. ; ;; • Copper primary protection • Similar penetration in SYP and Red Pine. ' • Quat-supplemental protection against copper • Enhanced penetration in Douglas;Fir,, ! ' ' tolerant fungi•and termites W. Hemlock and Ponderosa Pine.' ' • No EPA listed carcinogens • True solution, no agitation required. . ' • No temperature controls required.' i : iv • ACQ is formulated to minimize plant corrosion. . ; Retention Levels Corrosion rates are lower than 0.15 mils per • Equivalent performance to CCA in: year. , Above Ground 0.25 pcf ii: Ground Contact 0.40 pcf ;i I I;; ; Fresh Water Immersion 0.40 pcf Environmental Profile . • Marine Splash Zone 0.40 pcf • Independent scientific studies have reported noL Permanent Wood Foundation 0.60 pcf adverse effects from the use of ACQ treated : 411. 1 wood in sensitive aquatic environments. Available with water repellent • Depletion levels for ACQ components from ACQ WR treated wood are equivalent to losses of CCA, ,,;, Structural Lumber 0.25 and 0.40 pcf 0.25 pcf components from wood in service. ,, , ;,,, • Alkaline copper systems similar to ACQ are EPA,' Decking Standard 0.15 pcf 0.25 pcf approved for use in reservoirs, fish farms and, ; ' agricultural canals for algae .n -2, Fastener Performance • Same fasteners (hot dipped/stainless) as for royals and Stands s ���il® � ' CCA and building code recommendations for pp 2004" treated wood. Approved and standardized b industry standards, • Excellent performance of recommended fasten- and building codes. ZOnr�rv- somsb °fi, ; ;;;, er systems in the US over the past seven years. • American Wood-Preservers'Associa • ,.PpEAL•, • Accelerated Industry Standard tests show (AWPA) , , equivalent performance to CCA. • ICBO ES— (International Conference•of Building Officials) including Formosan'Termite i; Zones Fixation • BOCA(US Building Code) ' • Fixation of copper and quat is highly effective, • CSA (Canadian Standards Association) ' i resulting in long-term performance equivalent to • AASHTO ! `ii; • that achieved with CCA. • NES (National Evaluation Service) ' ' di. fa „ , •'l Iii, I. r—.-4 treatedwood corn ; ,, CBI 200 E.Woodlawn Road,Suite 250•Charlotte,NC 28217•704522-0825•FAX;704-527-8232•e-mail:aogldo@chemspec.com • 1 1 8-02 i' 11:; MIR p �-j LAW OFFICES �L `D WICKHAM, BRESSLER, GORDON& GEASA P.C. 13015 MAIN ROAD, P.O.BOX 1424 WILLLIAM WICKHAM(06-02) MATTITUCK,LONG ISLAND MELVILLE OFFICE ERIC J.BRESSLER NEW YORK 11952 275 BROAD HOLLOW RD ABIGAIL A WICKHAM SUITE 111 LYNNE M.GORDON ---- MELVILLE, N.Y 11747 JANET GEASA 631-298-8353 TELEFAX NO.631-298-8565 631-249-9480 FAX NO.631-249-9484 December 9, 2003 ��nn � .7tack,w4 i�,A/3 /?,9 Town of Southold Zoning Board of Appeals 53095 Main Road, Post Office Box 1179 Southold,New York 11971 Re: J&C Holdings, LP/Doll#5419 Ladies and Gentlemen: Enclosed are seven sets of the plans for the proposed dwelling at 590 North Drive, Orient, New York, meeting the following criteria: 1) 1,681. sq. ft. living area, 1St floor; 360. sq. ft., garage 2,041. sq. ft. total, 1st floor. 2) 1,188. sq. ft., upstairs; 3) 2,869. sq. ft.,total living area This is a conceptual plan only, as the actual design and layout will depend on the homeowner's selections. The footprint,height, and generalized design of the house will be maintained. As it is evident,this is a modest and attractive design for the property. Very truly yours, _ _ AAW/dm pp- "310449.4 Abigail A. Wickham encl ig 644 Z/shdzba P Jam'' _ o '"7‘141\6..11' 'AIMINIIIIMIIh.r°"° 11lEm.'7 . .. xi, - —_ -.I - \ 7 — i. CEDAR PERFECION WAXES l�� — .UI III ® ® -- - . _ MIN � m - = eI _ -- -- Y =Q0110�� - - — _ � - I - s _l_zt_i H., Z , Ji r TL r___J L 4 II 4 I J RO\ T ELEVATIO\ 1 1/2 STORY RESIDENCE - NORTHVIEW DRIVE - ORIENT, N.Y. . 021.002.91¢2211111 16'-2' 3-9" 5-8' B-B' 8-' 5'4 0-8' S-9' 4-8° --. 4'-8° - . 3-1' . 3-1' r 4'.$ ., 4=6' _ g-1' • Tv . _ Loa MASTER BEDROOM o — 8 IP m 3 I�14'-e' ikII �' STUDY- �-NI MA B1J2'a13'TCFURNACERLE ��uI_ .. �� 4 FRE BM 1. _ ` t I GREAT ROOM II 4 4r�``�--FfrE C{ASS r ii k..'4,' 4°Hi (VENEER �, I- 41 nt,lmu1111r�uu/1111' 11 1311121111M0 _�_�11' KITCHEN 11 I I 1 UNEOFGEABOVE 10 BFtO W,I.CI OSFT� I,, W ICLOSET .6 GARAGF w 1 `_G 1oc „ 3-6' —. 5.-2' 3 8° S-Y .1.- r T 18-Gr 111 1 1 . 11 1 G I III illlfllf::J'141!1fl111JY1 .3 _4.1 a� F r r _. OYER b I ��III --' 4 8-4' h'�J 6'- • "y 6'-0 �111M �illr -_;--Th at 1 : :u �t 7-C 1=I i i i . 16'-4' B'-B' ' 111-0° 10-4' N 18-5' . a5-C' FIST FLOOR PLA\ 1,681 SQ.FT ® - 16.-2• a'-7 8-c• s'-8 w C-3 If-CrG-s• 4-s• 4L a'-t• 4 s• 4'-6 . _ 3.t M I 2A1 I01 1 N 4.4b Tti �ir�I�i iii i.° i=i i BEDROOM#3 1110) 1 .' If it t4-e —1 — ILO 11 7 _ OPEN mGREA®os00M W1 I L. T g II \� -4-,, BEDROOM#2 I, MII d fi11 01111 fI}�. A ' I OAK RARINS i •1 ' 12 C_0 _ 11 6'-V w 12 fi BRIDGE I. 111 B=D.FLATS HE,T &TA& \ 11 = ,.---, . o s i 1 _. 1 .., ,,,,i. t N .-] ,i, '„): 16.-4• 8'-tr ir-c, _t0'-4• 18'-6• e5tf SECO\D FLOOR PLA\ . 1,188 SQ.ET. 1 li'' 31'—D" _ t 2"X10"ROOFRAFTERS@ 16"0C_ /ITIN 12 `Q 5 12 / \ ---..„,..„....,.., 11 7/ 11111 • (` i I_). 0 I 22'4' , 'NI, A . _I__ 101 .-4- M 6— g d ,_6" WJ.BO SERIES FLOOR JOISTS 0 11 7/8"DEPTH i s'—o" --•. m 2'-8" . i?.."*.-----71.... . W180 SERIES FLOOR JOISTS®11 7/8"DEPTH 4 . LJ u NOU-20-2003 08:53 FROM:WICKHAM 8 BRESSLER 631 298 8565 TO:631 7651823 F.002/002 00 ‘,4e LAW OFFICES 1)( WICKHAM, BRESSLER, GORDON&GEASA P.C. 13015 MAIN ROAD, P.O.BOX 1424 WILLLIAM WICKIIAM(06-02) MATT1TUCK.LONG ISLAND MELVILLE OFFICE ERIC T.BRESSLER NEW YORK 11952 275 BROAD HOLLOW RD ABIGAIL A.WICKHAM SUITE 111 LYNNE M.GORDON ---- MELVILLE. N.Y. 11747 JANET GEASA 631-298-8353 ---- TELEFAX NO.631-298-8565 631-249-9480 FAX NO.631-249-9484 November 19,2003 Town.of Southold Zoning Board of Appeals 53095 Main Road, Post Office Box. 1 179 Southold,New York 11971 Re: J&C Holdings,LP/Doll#5419 Ladies and Gentlemen: We ask that you deny the request,made the afternoon before the hearing, for a delay of the hearing,for the following reasons: 1. Our client has a contingency deadline and numerous approvals to obtain. As a result of her age, Mrs. Doll is anxious to close as soon as possible. 2. We have retained an engineer to appear at the hearing tomorrow to answer any questions the Board may have. 3. Our client has redesigned the proposal to mitigate the concerns of the prior application by another unrelated party. Specifically as it pertains to the Sommers property on the West,the driveway has been repositioned to the east side of the property and a retaining wall proposed for the west side which will prevent the runoff Ms. Sonxrners fears. We believe this wall, coupled with the drain and the pitch away from the top of the wall, address these concerns, as well, as potential run-off over the blu,'f. 4. The notice to this owner was nailed on November 10,2003, and should have been received last.week. A copy of the proposed site plan accompanied our, letter. We also asked the recipient to contact us if there were any concerns, and no communication other than the request for an adjournment has been received. Thank you for your consideration. Very truly yours, AA Wit) Abigail A. Wickham !/shdzb 5--iIi--k-- ._ I! 6 i „(6,, PD--- wit I k LAW OFFICES A PA- WICKHAM, BRESSLER, GORDON & GEASA P.C. 13015 MAIN ROAD, P.O.BOX 1424 WILLLIAM WICKHAM(06-02) MATTITUCK,LONG ISLAND MELVILLE OFFICE ERIC J.BRESSLER NEW YORK 11952 275 BROAD HOLLOW RD ABIGAIL A WICKHAM SUITE 111 LYNNE M GORDON ---- MELVILLE, N.Y. 11747 JANET GEASA 631-298-8353 ---- TELEFAX NO.631-298-8565 631-249-9480 FAX NO 631-249-9484 December 15, 2003 Town of Southold Zoning Board of Appeals 53095 Main Road, Post Office Box 1179 Southold,New York 11971 R : J&C idings, LP/Do11#5419 .,.-,4 Ladies and Gentlemen: Enclosed are seven prints of prints of the survey which show the proposed dry well in the side yard, as per the Board's request. 4 Veryt ly yours, aof,-r ,_____, AAW/dm % / Abigail A. Wickham end ,(11 /In.A¢1 fa,„te l/shdzbcr /1 ,I/EAGTy DEPT,2Er, Q/O-OZ - O/8Z Ol�+�l ® SOUND LoNG TEST //OLE cBSE/2 VE:0 VE-0BY 77/4- G,JAFOGX C-' DEPT-0 HEAL TNB-/8-03 GQou,vp F_C -O 0 137.71' ( TIE LINE )4 TpPSo,L N 84'47'50'E EL -3 0 C0A 4 ---- HIGH WATER MARK 6/26/03 - 4 _- ----- 6 MAQL- -- - - - (SANDY) CLAY 4/9 EL -230 CSV _ —g0 TTO -_ f0 a E2.24 o SA/VD s Ce) 0 = "` _ -- _ - �. ____ -- _ _ -- ' l /! 20 M s/�ry f0 - __: -_ - --1 ! F1-270 cz a 1� e oz. __ % � = . ._ cc .S/L TIS 20'_ J p� EL -SAND A,4/0 f- .i 4O o GRA 1/EL o r- - . Fc �� ► z o ,- _=_- j SO �C 420 ZQ �l _- -- _ �'/ f `r -� _ i/ V9 Z //O WA7E¢pop �� ' - ,60 0 _3A AID \AA `_._ - l - - -� /, Q Al../,0 Q �� G2AVEG. sem-- -- ! = _-- .� ` ` . �. ;j 70 Q 60� — -� i r 'j� cc --- % - , --- _ _ / = '-jDO - -b- - o \ \ _ ,1 OP OF BLUFF., c5. z \ �8 \ ,tom 100 l6B ---__, \ / l SIGN RD 70� \,�' _ } { ! i ! l / l 0 dST INFERS SOALED s.474- / It�' i /' / ,` � �� 55 ROP.R.R—TIE RE�A/N/N :ALL BH47' 0 � / 1D2 'S::''. �� :N A asimmiamm TW 83.0 1 ' 1 / / t i ave ONE STORY - �%���� 93 �� T 8 1 J3� ff fI /I 0,, t pyF��NGY FRAME p /�PLE DWELLING / —'V — 5 �7 G.87• I ? 1/�-r{� t 1/ 48',r 65 � J_ o' ri 76 / LL 93001 / M '94 +r r, cv 'r, N o1�, o EL91.20 . I , �.I J t i -� �1 �y.4r GF-El- 0�� AR z AVERAGE NATURAL GRADE - a 1 65 ( 1\:11I Fiat, . - 8/.40+ - °p G 91 • u, ,�� 26. / 12Q�) 1 { I i ;' `102 eo b `�''l mom// '� ti_. / .E P,E j N �m �� ir E ;M At. ;F0.5 W �P 99 74 "z_ i � � / � GJ � � � 0� '� .99�� pLT CL 99.98 /' 99 pSPH N j / II r�' •� � �G r CL 53 PAVEMENT EP 100.16 0 8� .. �' / / � .11 :. �� �+CL 9ioriww 6123 +EP 99.42 00 m 86.20��� CL.9.00� 5 ��.T EP. O w u • S )VER x.86 z 150 p0 POLE Ep;y.32 WIRE CL.86.41ATE' +Ep 9 W O o FO NYT-8 +CL.82.45 1 pLJ B-' +% EP.86 6 O O O ®� V _ MON Ep.82.35 m O ©n T, VIE W EASEMENTS AN/OR SUBSURFACE STRUCTURES RECORDED OR UNRECORDED ARE NOT GUARANTEED UNLESS PHYSICALLY EVIDENT AT THE TIME OF SURVEY THE OFFSETS OR DIMENSIONS SHOWN HEREON FROM THE PROPERTY LINES TO THE STRUCTURES ARE FOR A SPECIFIC PURPOSE AND USE THEREFORE. THEY ARE NOT INTENDED TO MONUMENT THE PROPERTY LINES OR TO GUIDE THE ERECT/ON OF FENCES ADDITIONAL STRUCTURES OR ANY OTHER IMPROVEMENT UNAUTHORIZED AL TERA TION OR ADDITIONS TO THIS SURVEY IS A VIOLA770N OF SECT/ON 7209 SUBDIVISION 2 OF THE NEW YORK STATE EDUCA TION LAW. COPIES OF TMS SURVEY MAP NOT BEAR/NG THE LAND SURVEYORS MED SEAL OR EMBOSSED SEAL SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED TO BE A VALID TRUE COPY CERTIFICATIONS INDICATED HEREON SHALL RLN ONLY TO THE PERSON FOR WHOM THE SURVEY IS PREPARED.AND ON THEIR BEHALF TO THE 77TL£ U.S.L c4 G.S. DATUM PER CERT/FICA TIONS ARE NOT TRANSFERABLCY AND E TO AODI77OG NALON INSTITUTIO HEREON.ISTED OR SUFFOLK COUNTY SEWER WORKS STUDIES SUBSEOUENT OWNERS. SURVEY OF DESCRIBED PROPERTY AT ORIENT TOWN OF SOUTHOLD. SUFFOLK COUNTY. NEW YORK SCALE • /" - 40° SURVEYED: JUNE 26. 2003 PLOT PLAN: JULY 28. 2003 RR V/SED-' AUG'UST 24 Z003 �� OC:: E Y REV/SED DECE.1i1BE/2 //,2003- ti10VED2/4/-V TO S/DEY,4,PD _ �: ��2 ru N SUFFOLK COUNTY TAX MAP N g Z Ili CI* D/STRICT SECTION BLOCK LOT I 1000 /3 / 5. 1 F No 50�g9 J� @ HI L L EBRAND LAND SURVEYING. P P. C. \.`l0A1O ,�� // CHURCHILL LANE. SM/THTOWN. NEW YORK TEL . ( 63/) 543-5/39 3 U 02/26/2002 21:34 2037629839 DAVID SOMMERS PAGE 01/02 kap I :;\) pCA- 01/4) tk4' ! 0 7 X .() 6i\ , ,,,,..\3*) ck91 ,,t( 1, ) ,,9:—.),, vi i 1 \)-,t4- ;1 Via Fax ...---L h,i( y-, \) 1 December 19, 2003 \ ! IQ IC 11 Zoningacrd of Appeals Town ofl outhold 53095 lV, ' Road Southold NY 11971 I` Dear Mr . Oliva,Mrs.Tortora,Mrs.Kowalski,Mr.Goehringer and Mr. Horning, 1 1 I I want treiterate my strong objection to the proposed significant alteration to the Doll property!' Browns Hills, Orient. As I expressed in the hearing at the end of yesterday I have girl a issues/concerns with this proposal: 1. a major reconfiguration of the landscape creating a building space between c�ntour line 74 and contour line 92... a leveling of 18 feet of sand and marl variously close to the edge of the bluff,requiring major retaining walls. Those aining walls are: a. 8 feet total height above the level of the property line-creating an I artificial platform for building to be filled with sand. Ig b. A total length of over 50 feet of retaining wall is required to hold in the ! sand in order to create this building space. sc. The 2-tiered, 8 foot high retaining wall is 3 feet from my property line. l d. The retaining walls are 35 feet from the bluff(the proposed house is 50 ft.), r in an area where zoning requires structures to be 100 feet from the bluff. rl this is a major distortion of the landscape abutting the bluff and my property and ne that I am vehemently opposed to. There has been significant erosion of this luff less that 150 feet to the east of this location,this reconfiguration gignificantly raises the risk of bluff instability and potential erosion. 2. On top of the 8 foot raised platform on which the house is to be built,the size and 'ieight of this house will tower over the landscape. From my abutting property his supposed 1 Vistory house will soar to 40 feet,more•like a 4 story structure an the zoning intended 1 '/�.stories. If this is approved it is a tragedy. Ii a. As an aside,the previously proposed Tassone home for this location, E rejected by this board is FAR FAR FAR preferable,requiring no 8 foot i3 ii i. Ig• It I9 I I 1; 02/26/2002 21:36 203762:1FM DAVID SOMMERS PAGE m'L0 walls, or massive bluff reconfiguration with a footprint size of 50 x 30 vs. the current much larger structure of 65 x 32. 3. 'vision for drainage run-off appears inadequate given the depth of the drywells ual to the depth of the added fill. I am of opposed to a house on this location provided one can be constructed which does.,ot require 18 foot cut and fill activity and 8 foot high retaining walls. I implore the . Ward to use their better judgment and please ask the applicant to reconsider a prop J' y/home configuration that will not jeopardize the bluff,the landscape and the goo slur ature of neighbors who truly want to protect the character and charm of the No : end. Sincerely, (40,.....44.: .2,,,,, g:Nnier-i-- Heidi Hild Sommers 1. OFFICE OF ZONING BOARD OF APPEALL,' 53095 Main Road Southold, NY 11971 http://southoldtown.northfork.net (631) 765-1809 fax (631) 765-9064 FAX TRANSMISSION FAX# ATTN: / Z4)Lc-LILA-4c S. DATE: D-/)3 /2003 U < SUBJECT: -b,_/ - Amt//j MESSAGE: — c Lam; fid eb °P/«A 3 h., 2. Please feel fre o call i you did not recdive all sheets. Town Hall hours are between 8-4. Thank you. Pages attached: . 3' et\ f/P i• � dna o d/ tit A6 LaSalle Ave. jacat ,mac d 1416 ,° Cranford, NJ 07016 908-276-4365 December 5, 2003 Ruth Oliva, Chairperson Southhold Planning Commission Southhold Town Building Main Street Southhold,NY 11971 Dear Ms. Oliva, I am very sorry not to know you personally(more's the pity). I have been a property owner at Brown's Hills in Orient for over 30 years, and an avid reader of the Suffolk Times, so I feel as if I know you professionally,being acquainted with your courageous espousing of environmental issues. For many years, I was the Assistant Director of the NJ State Council of Environmental Education,working at every level of the educational system in NJ as well as other states, and helping communities with their problems. So, I know yours is not an easy task. Carl W. Dale, my nephew, whom I believe you met at your November meeting is representing me in all property transactions due to my inability to do so since I have had an incapacitating stroke that has paralyzed me. This was a devastating blow in my 89th year, as I have always been exceedingly active and done all my own inside and outside chores. Carl suggested that I write to apprise you of the current situation concerning the granting of a permit upon which the sale of my property is dependent. Being aware of the number of problems and their complexities on your agenda,he suggested that I be brief. So,be it known that Edna Doll has paid the taxes and accrued fees on a piece of waterfront property in Orient for many years with no thought of gain except that the land be a bird sanctuary and happy habitat for whatever creatures we human beings usurped in the name of progress. The land has always been allowed to remain in its pristine condition with the growth of wild cherry, one or two cedars, locust, and even several oaks, all laced together by honeysuckle, woodbine,bittersweet,the ubiquitous cat's claw, and wild grape. All this has served handsomely as a bulwark against curious human footfalls and the ravages of Northeast storms. But now, evil times have come upon me with the advent of the stroke, and I am finding out that illness is very expensive despite how frugally one lives. It makes my decision to sell the property, which I have long loved, an agonizing one. But I can no longer delay as I am in dire financial straits. Unfortunately, the first buyer has already given up the quest for a permit and has fled. Prayerfully, the second buyer, now on the scene, will be more committed. ,-..,. 1, Edna Doll December 5, 2003 , It occurs to me that somewhere in the Southhold archives there is a folder containing the litigation that has gone on. I would hate to think that all my letters thus far have found their way only to the"round file."At any rate, such a folder, if available, would give you the necessary background and save much of your valuable time. Also, Carl tells me that before you make a decision, you would like to walk over the area. I am wholly in accord with your decision and thank you for your interest. One of the gentlemen on the Environmental Committee felt the same need to walk over the property, but that was before it was so savagely bulldozed, scraped, and filled in an effort to meet the restrictions of Southhold's demands. Would that I could accompany you on your trek...but that is impossible in my present condition. I am wheelchair-bound and dependent on someone to push the chair. However, please know that I am available to answer any question you may have, as I feel no one knows the territory better than I. My Orient phone is 631-323-2543. Some weekends I am fortunate enough to be there. Also, I look forward to meeting you in the not-too-distant future. My New Jersey phone is 908-276-4365. Carl, too, is available at 12 G. Washington Drive, Lambertville,NJ. His phone is 609-397- 9040. I would be very appreciative of anything you might be able to do to expedite the granting of the permit. Sincerely yours, Edna Doll Page 2 of 2 OFFICE OF ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 53095 Main Road . Southold, NY 11971 http://southoldtown.northfork.net - (631) 765-1809 fax (631) 765-9064 FAX TRANSMISSION FAX#'• 9f —966-3/1 S' ATTN: Cit- 471i/060 DATE: << / l /2003 a y© Pfi1 SUBJECT: 9 -6 4161 MESSAGE: 67),i 11� -- p l0-1tr1/ ,6',ri.,7 _-e-,/,,,, Please feel free to call if you did not receive all sheets. Town Hall hours are between 8-4. Thank you. Pages attached: a . NNSMISSION VERIFICATION REPORT TIME : 11/19/2003 15:12 DATE,TIME 11/19 15:10 FAX NO./NAME 19147663175 DURATION 00: 01:41 PAGE(S) 03 RESULT OK MODE STANDARD ECM SOUND LONG • N 84.47.5°-E !37.71' ( TIE LINE )4 —_ .P&y71,4EERMARK6/2603 B _ 4 — B w B t.:-. 10 CV ffOTT4. M _ --- ------ _- 8 � -- -Z0 a �- 10 �_ — ' -- o �__ _— —1 /� 50a. —/ - - — — / x tu 20-- � ` � --`—------ - / ' J _—-—-- — '� - 23 - _. --- ----- — _---� / " ? - __ - — �___�_— _••_-� /�6O v C yd 4O—' / ----- — - --___ / / z60 o _ — / / / 0 4. / — — — ---- / /// 70 o r, u' � ''ice— — 7 %/j/j / / i so z 6B'��— — — -----�%/ ////// i �yOPOFB�FE� ��j ��/�//., \ ./"..-. \ /��100 BB SIGN '0.` I L -- I I � I 0 A(STN4 �' SCALED 74 / k l' /IA ARD f INE r 74-, in 55s\ ,•J I •ROP.R•.••7E BETA N/N.6,ALL B J•p I I . III // l / I '.• bI f02 / „....._76_____ 6 N �A�9 °° /( TB .0 / o �� r ONESTOY .��J�O °�' RAfl9' I y 32.1 I pq 't' •ROP // '/ G DWELLING 0O L.86.5� G.87•p E ' \--e.. ______ PPPPPP 4 6pR0PSp6€DY r .4. 78 cc- �FL.93.001!I 9A I I 3 M GF El-•A3?p CO I o AVERAGE NATURAL GRADE • / BF.E 65 F o� -8/.40r •O 0 •G.9i\, I I I I 34 0 P taiO ,\ 26 z_�A a 11 .,! 1/ 00 Bob Q m��x 130 I N J /1 piti 0 f�/ 9974 Z < I —[� 9.5318(! CL 99 98 ,n / / /:T��Si 9 • O L 53 PAVENENT EPI0016 o1 / � E�yfi23 +EP.9942• 6r�� L;1*:.09 EP 96J2p1$0.0() �v ,IRES.A""_ O+E9tp °p p� Z NYiEB CG8245 +Ep 86. 6 �D 111'1// Z.4. `MON Ep 8235 Q Du u N'OR �Y ' ylE Id* EASEIERTS AN/OR SURRLIACE STRUCTURES RECORDED OR CO ECORCED ARE AVT 6WRANTFID(HESS A YSICAlLY EYDEMT AT TIE 715 OF suevE.IIE STRUC77 ES OlE FOR A SNOW C PAR SEFROM RA77E/ THISJY LUES TOAE NOTRADDI AREFORA PESOC PROPOSEAAD/LSE TOGUORE7TOARE AVT E FENC S.IIOIRAENT AE/NO°EATS INNS OP 7R AFRO TIE ARE'CA0.Y OF lEA' I A ERRI /L S5 EWERLO OP AMS OTTER 1ENOYE7k7V7.�v � MEIUIIIAEIZED ALIERA770W OP AEMIMW 7a ART SURVEY Q A VIOLATION • CA4\ OF SEEIMW MD S DVIVZ ON O OF 77E NEW YORK STATE EDUCATION LAI CEEB RE TAR SLIMY MAP LL OT BE ASI ER D TO SEYQPT HIED SEAL CW TIE SLI SEAL SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED TO SEA YAW TRW COPY WHOM D TPP MUTED IEREA.w���RIM ONLr Tp TIE maw FOR WHOM DE P FRDAREO mA IUD LW/RIM BEHALF TO AE A77E V 6 U.S.C. r! 6.S. DATUM PER TEAEON NOTGO TRA S LE TO ADNG NOWD LINED SOP SUFFOLK COUNTY SEWER WORKS STUDIES SURVEY OF DESCRIBED PROPERTY AT ORIENT . TOWN OF SOUTHOLD. SUFFOLK COUNTY. NEW YORK SURVEYED: JUNE 26. 2003 SCALE • /' - 40' PLOT PLAN: JULY 28. 2003 pp NEN,Y Cs N o * SUFFOLK COUNTY TAX MAP DISTRICT SECTION BLOCK LOT /000 /3 / 5. I 5000HILLEBRAND LAND SURVEYING. P.C. ND S'Q` - // CHURCHILL LANE. SMI THTOWN. NEW YORK TEL. ( 63/) 543-5/39 NOV-20--003 08:53 FROM:WICKHAM & BRESSLER 631 298 8565 TO:631 7651823 P.002'002 '-) • 19, LAW OFFICES W1C1CHAM,BRESSLER,GORDON&GEASA P.C. 13015 MAIN ROAD, P.O.BOX 1424 WILLLIAM WICKHAM(06-02) MATTT1'UCK,LONG ISLAND MELVILLE OFFICE ERIC J,BRESSLER NEW YORK 11952 275 BROAD HOLLOW RD ABIGAIL A.WICKHAM SUITE I 11 LYNNE M.GORDON MELVILLE, N.Y. 11747 JANET GEASA 631-298-8353 --- TELEFAX NO.631-298-8565 631-249.9480 FAX NO.631-249-9484 November 19.2003 Town of Southold Zoning Board of Appeals 53095 Main Road,Post Office Box 1179 Southold,New York 11971 • Re: J&C Holdings,LP/Doll#5419 Ladies and Gentlemen: We ask that you deny the request,made the afternoon before the hearing, for a delay of the hearing, for the following reasons: 1. Our client has a contingency deadline and numerous approvals to obtain. As a result of her age, Mrs. Doll is anxious to close as soon as possible. • 2. We have retained an engineer to appear at the hearing tomorrow to answer any questions the Board may have. 3. Our client has redesigned the proposal to mitigate the concerns of the prior application by another unrelated party. Specifically as it pertains to the Sommers property on the West,the driveway has been repositioned to the east side of the property and a retaining wall proposed for the west side which will prevent the runoff Ms. Sommers fears. We believe this wall,coupled with the drain and the pitch away from the top of the wall,address these concerns,as well as potential run-off over the bluff. 4. The notice to this owner was mailed on November 10,2003, and should have been • received last week. A copy of the proposed site plan accompanied our letter. We also asked the recipient to contact us if there were any concerns, and no communication other than the request for an adjournment has been received. Thank you for your consideration. Very truly yours, AArw/lb A igail A. Wickham I/shdzb • -20-2003 08:53 FROM:WICKHAM & BRESSLER 631 298 8565 TO:631 7651823 P.001/002 ••�• �. N..../ •i 7 •- _ • , i i 1 i 1 1 LONG Is 1=A 84.4750•E 137.7/' ( TIE LINE )4 I NH WATER MARK 6/26/03 • — 4 - z__-___.--__-o-d 6 j 01 I 6 '�-_ _ $t�RE_� 10 % -- M ---13-077g a ' ® -� ---- _ H2O a 10 --- __--- -- --� ! ---- __ _- �/ d0 a -- _ tki -- •4� � •!• 20 _ — - _- — _ i 40 o i = 50 -- i --- -- — —� - �- -� SO v �° Z -"/ - �- -- �� _ -Q "^- .. _+-� / I _! y �-^tom -- �. // / Q '':J i 3 % moi' l `^ — �'_ / �/ / `� Iv ca -----,- ___.,. i.,==. ___.i A ca it �� �.�..- `_ /80 o 66`'— a`- ' `_-- -`" • _/ 7/ - ' ; // 90 z. a. \ \\ \ ---1. \ 6o —� \ � \ T 1 SOON � � 72 A C �fST INEE SCALED _ r, _ o I �q ARD l - T� �J t ".4Z± ‘= ----1------- OP.R. .--T/E REM MN ..,ALL B- J• Q / ,�� , -_._,_ �v 039 0 "ice T :3. J l 102 0 76-� ��04lib Ivor d �� / T .80 ���j / I l / o�gs�r��r ONE STORY • D T �V,re,'32 ( / FRAME .T' •R 1 �<</NG DWELLING 7 \_e,..O L.B6:5"-----4;.8 5�� ' ' ' X8=1 4;•87'0 65.PR0PeS€D 7Brii- .�FL.93.p0' ' • f 9' ( •� AVERAGE NATURAL GRADE ' EAR. c.1 - 6,„..E....„._,_, .8,..._ -, J ++' &40s O , 65 G.91. ` , i �� Fei �pC� .• 0 1 deli amu, BO�� \\\ ^ l� �,3 t7i .Tr) al ) I �3 O Z i ¢ 1r EXPi/.' dlY Off" �p.99.74 Z / / •IfflMr/�0 i ' •p EL-g .5y MENT Ep p 6 8 1 1 °� • • EP.99.42 m �� +CL 96.23 + O I 86.20 `, +• CL.9.00 Ep.96.12 O 1 z 0.3 150.00 POLE ;v 2 WIRES •VERNEAD E x-86.41 EPS o.86 O '` ' z MON. NYT 6 +CL.B�45 +EP.86' O N O Qi N DR, VE ' VIE NoRrH EASEMENTS AN/OR SUBSURFACE STRUCTURES RECORDED OR UNNECORDED ARE NOT GUARANTEED UNLESS PHYSICALLY EVIDENT AT THE 7A/E OF SURVEY. THE OFFSETS OR D/A�NS/ONS SHOW HEREON MOM THE PROPERTY LINES TO p,"p( 7H£STRUCTURES ARE FORA SPECIFIC PURPOSE ARID USE. THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT EVIENDED£RECTION O CES.ADOmO SMIMT TRU SES OR ANY OTH TO GUIDE THE f15: El/) F UNALIMT REED 9 Sf�9OnM5ON2 F THE NMONS E£N Y RA n N LAM. FUS�/17 621LO £DTO BEYARVA��U£COPY.CERTff/CEV IND/CA7L�0 AWN SHALL RUN ONLY TO THE VALID D FOR U.S.C. L!• G.S. DATUM PER =MEV sURVEY/s PREPARED AAD ON 7NEL4 @EHALF TO THE TmE SUFFOLK COUNTY SEWER WORKS STUDIES CO'MANY,GOVERNMENT AGENCY AM LENDING BV.S7 AT 707 L/ST£D HEREOM UL`BSEOCAI/ON5 ARE NOT TRANSFERABLE TO ADD/7/ONAL dVS77TU770NS OR - SUBSEOLEIVT OWNERS. SURVEY OF DESCRIBED PROPERTY AT ORIENT TOWN OF SOUTHOLD• SUFFOLK COUNTY. NEW YORK • • •SCALE • /" ,– 40' SURVEPL OT PLANJUNE 2003 JULY 28. 2003 c��F NEW Y g/ i - JPN'ESy/Z< �.9 �J " '��� SUFFOLK COUNTY TAX MAP h. ® D/STRICT SECT/ON BLOCK LOT 1000 /3 / 5. / No.50034 : - © HILLEBRAND LAND SURVEY/NG. P. C. Fo LAND s� // CHURCHILL LANE. SMI THTOWN. NEW YORK - TEL . ( 63/) 543-5/39 2 U i I, _ TRANSMITTAL WITHOUT COVER LETTERIrlf - DELIVERED 1/30/2003 TO ZBA OFFICE SEP 3 0 2003 FROM: ti-OH-Pr -1--(UA- Alk 1I 0 `'_. ` ,27;gsri/� RE: 3' C *IAD(AG -c L c/'' /coo /3 / / S�6itf (17 �' t_err-c,,, em GI isc‘ie-ro F:4,1 scv-icocir (2-Af/ Alex-7Ac. Co, Su c Tit- /Lt. , r Y. /0O0 -/3 - / - S. / PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER \l 1725 HOBART ROAD 1 PO Box 616, SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK 11971 TEL 631-765-2954 • FAX 631-614-3516 • e-mail: joseph@fischettl.com Date: September 25, 2003 Reference: North View Drive John Hurtado PO Box 1925 ( VP'j Southold,NY 11971-4107 6 SEP 3 02003 Dear Mr. Hurtado, I have reviewed the site plan dated July 28, 2003 prepared by Hillebrand Land Surveying regarding the parcel for SCTM#1000-13-1-5.1. That review reveals that the attached design and the location of the retaining walls and proposed dwelling on the site plan will have no detrimental effect on the bluff. This determination has taken the following into consideration: 1. The normal angle of repose for a bluff consisting of sand would be 32' to 34'. Tighter materials such as clay would increase the angle, while heavier gravels would lower the angle. The existing bluff, from the test boring shows silty clay and sand with gravel in layers to 42 feet below the surface. We can assume that because of the soils being layers the stable bluff angle would be around 30 to 32 degrees 2. The angle of the existing bluff is 30 degrees; this is at or below its angle of repose and is generally in a stable condition. 3. The location of the retaining wall is below the extended bluff angle of 30 degrees. This means that any additional fill required to complete the backfilling of the retaining walls would not de- stabilize the bluff. The timber retaining wall and the'proposed dwelling as shown on the site plan in my opinion will have no negative effects on the bluff and will not destabilize the bluff. If you have any questions regarding this matter please call. p� NEIlr)„ �Pz Gaye 0,2: ,:: t ly yours, co , a 4��vA 0. 0525 (e.,/ Jose. Fischetti, P.E. ROFESSION�/�� Nunado- bluff analysts l,t North Vim Drivadoc �1' J Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. Newman Village, Main Street-, P.O. Box 2003, Bridgehampton,New York 11932-2003 (631) 537-5160 Fax: (631) 537-5198 Bruce Anderson, M.S., President September 8, 2003 ,� Mr. John Hurtado E 2003 P.O. Box 1925 V Southold,NY 11971 Re: J&C Holdings, Inc. Situate: North View Drive, Orient,NY SCTM#: 1000-13-1-5.1 Dear Mr. Hurtado, • Enclosed herewith please find ten copies of an Erosion and Sediment Plan in satisfaction of your request to me dated August 28, 2003. I also enclose a copy df Suffolk County Department of Health Services approval granted to Nulty-Tassone, previous contract vendee for the same parcel. Please do not hesitate to contact this office should require any additional materials or information regarding this property. 'ilery truly y s, qr. Bruce A. Anderson Encl. BA/dkw FORM NO. 3 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT SOUTHOLD,N.Y. NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL DATE: November 7, 2002 RENEWED &AMENDED: August 6, 2003 TO J&C Holdings LP PO Box 1925 Southampton, NY 11971 Please take notice that your application dated August 6, 2002 For permit for construction of a single family dwelling at Location of property 590 North View Drive, Orient County Tax Map No. 1000 - Section 13 Block 1 Lot 5_1 Is returned herewith and disapproved on the following grounds: The proposed construction of a single family dwelling is not permitted pursuant to Article XXIII Section 100-239.4A.1 which states; "All buildings located on lots adjacent to sounds and upon which there exists a bluff or bank landward of the shore or beach shall be set back not fewer than one hundred(100) feet from the top of such bluff or bank." The proposed single family dwelling is located+1- 50 feet from the bank. In addition, the proposed construction on this conforming, 41,942 square foot lot in the R-40 zone not permitted pursuant to Article IIIA, 100-30A.3, which states; "No building or premises shall be used and no building or part thereof shall be erected or altered in the Low-Density Residential R-40 District unless the same conforms to the requirements of the Bulk Schedule and of the Parking Schedule,with the same force and effect as if such regulations were set forth herein in fill." Bulk Schedule requires a minimum front yard setback of 50 feet. Plans note a front yard setback of 43 feet. This Notice of Disapproval was renewed and amended on August 6, 2003, and the location of the proposed dwelling has changed since the original Notice of Disapproval was issued. Authorized Signature Cc: File, ZBA Note to Applicant: Any change or deviation to the above referenced application may require further review by the Southold Town Building Department. TOWN OF SOUTHOLD •` BUILDING 'MIT APPLICATION CHECKLIST B/UTT.DING DEPARTMENT f Do you have or need the following,before applying? TOWN HALL Board of Health SOUTHOLD,NY 11971 3 sets of Building Plans TEL: (631) 765-1802 Planning Board approval FAX: (631) 765-9502 Survey www. northfork.net/Southold/ PERMIT NO. Check Septic Form N.Y.S.D.E.0 Examined Trustees 20 Contact: / Approved ,20 Mail to: j°4 C. /%O LJ/ /6,5 4 P Disapproved a/c p p O' &,,X /9.25 Phone.SUC/T/1'[k 0 /(1,/ 11 97/ Expiration 20 5S3 - 4-3/ 40)411IP , in.Inspector 765- 6‘.2 a v ?00\ APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT Date AUG, 6. , 200 3 INSTRUCTIONS a. This application MUST be completely filled in by typewriter or in ink and submitted to the Building Inspector with 3 sets of plans, accurate plot plan to scale. Fee according to schedule. b. Plot plan showing location of lot and of buildings on premises, relationship to adjoining premises or public streets or areas, and waterways. c. The work covered by this application may not be commenced before issuance of Building Permit. d.Upon approval of this application, the Building Inspector will issue a Building Permit to the applicant. Such a permit shall be kept on the premises available for inspection throughout the work e.No building shall be occupied or used in whole or in part for any purpose what so ever until the Building Inspector issues a Certificate of Occupancy. f. Every building permit shall expire if the work authorized has not commenced within 12 months after the date of issuance or has not been completed within 18 months from such date. If no zoning amendments or other regulations affecting the property have been enacted in the interim, the Building Inspector may authorize, in writing, the extension of the permit for an addition six months. Thereafter, a new permit shall be required. APPLICATION IS HEREBY MADE to the Building Department for the issuance of a Building Permit pursuant to the Building Zone Ordinance of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County,New York, and other applicable Laws, Ordinances or Regulations, for the construction of buildings, additions, or alterations or for removal or demolition as herein described. The applicant agrees to comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, building code, housing code, and regulations, and to admit authorized inspectors on premises and in building for necessary inspections. re of applicant or name,if a corporation) (Mailing address of applicant State whether applicant is owner, lessee, agent, architect, engineer, general contractor,( elecIt OL�� m �� / I electrician,plumber or builder Cc e—riCA-c_7 V C_--1,0'i Name of owner of premises (^.�/1/� Q 04 L (As on the tax roll or latest deed) If applicant is a corporation, signature of duly authorized officer o ev L .2iA4v (Name and title of corporate officer) Builders License No. Plumbers License No. Electricians License No. Other Trade's License No. 1. Location of land on which proposed work will bedone: 5?o O/Loll Dert/f UL' 012 f es v7- House Number Street Hamlet County Tax Ma No. 1000 Section 13 Block k1"' ""� '►°� Subdivision �L s 7t C l� eo ecce 7 Filed Map �'" 440140 (Name) Von � . State existing use and occupancy ofpremises and it ended use and occupancy of proposed construction: a. Existing use and occupancy V&C A a! 7 R — itz-0 b. Intended use and occupancy Dot✓( - FAMILy A cs/ D cs'LiC e >. Nature of work (check which applicable): New Building I Addition Alteration Repair Removal Demolition Other Work (Description) 1. Estimated Cost o�5-0 o 6Fee r (To be paid on filing this application) 5. If dwelling, number of dwelling units / Number of dwelling units on each floor If garage, number of cars ,oc 5. If business, commercial or mixed occupancy, specify nature and extent of each type of use. ' 7. Dimensions of existing structures, if any: FrontVA.C A w7 Rear Depth Height Number of Stories Dimensions of same structure with alterations or additions: Front Pc/A Rear Depth Height Number of Stories 8. Dimensions of entire new construction: Front Ci Rear G S Depth 3 4 Height 35 Number of Stories / / 9. Size of lot: Front /o2 9, 0 Rear / 3 Z 7 / Depth 3 c2 0 12 Cc'TftfC-7 10. Date of Purchase V L/1 0 e---ezName of Former Owner 11. Zone or use district in which premises are situated -_ `kv / , D, or Ab9PeAt- 12. Does proposed construction violate any zoning law, ordinance or regulation? YES �/ NO 13. Will lot be re-graded? YES j NO Will excess fill be removed from premises? YES NO / % c yw '/7//A SA/ Y AL 2 14. Names of Owner of premises L p/iA J)LL Address6 L OGW'OOO P4(Phone No. Name of Architect Address A.IJA vAA L C- l(/, hone No Name of Contractor Address (') S y L7 ( Phone No. 15 a. Is this property within 100 feet of a tidal wetland or a freshwater wetland? *YES NO * IF YES, SOUTHOLD TOWN TRUSTEES & D.E.C. PERMITS MAY BE REQUIRED. b. Is this property within 300 feet of a tidal wetland? * YES NO * IF YES, D.E.C. PERMITS MAY BE REQUIRED. 16. Provide survey, to scale, with accurate foundation plan and distances to property lines. 17. If elevation at any point on property is at 10 feet or below, must provide topographical data on survey. STATE OF NEW YORK) SS: COUNTY OF g Y ) To f(o/ L , N 0 f 7 A.lw being duly sworn, deposes and says that (s)he is the applicant (Name of individual signing contract) above named, (S)He is the Co Ayr-, ,it C;7 1 2'Q &LC (Contractor,Agent, Corporate Officer, etc) of said owner or owners, and is duly authorized to perform or have performed the said work and to make and file this application; that all statements contained in this application are true to the best of his knowledge and belief; and that the work will be performed in the manner set forth in the application filed therewith Sworn to before me this lk C 'fes day of AU6, 20 673 otary Public Signature of Applicant BONNIE!.DOROSKI Notary Public,State Of New T rk No.01006095328,Suffolk Ciunty 1\ Term Expires July 7,20 APPEALS BOARD MEMBE] Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road Ruth D. Oliva,Chairwoman P.O.Box 1179 Gerard P. Goehringer Southold,New York 11971-0959 Lydia A.Tortora Telephone(631)765-1809 Vincent Orlando ZBA Fax(631)765-9064 James Dinizio http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD-OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD April 23, 2004 Mr. Gerald G. Newman, Chief Planner Suffolk County Department of Planning P. O. Box 6100 Hauppauge, NY 11788-0099 Dear Mr. Newman: Please find enclosed for your review, the following decisions, applications, surveys, tax maps, building disapprovals, and related information for review pursuant to Article XIV of the Suffolk County Administrative Code; within 500 feet of: R— STATE OR COUNTY ROAD W —WATERWAY (BAY, SOUND, OR ESTUARY) B — BOUNDARY OF EXISTING OR PROPOSED COUNTY, STATE, FEDERAL LAND ZBA NAME ACTION REQUESTED /VARIANCE R W B 5419 J&C HOLDINGS NEW DWELLING — FRONT YARD & BLUFF SB X 5453 TRENCHENY CHANGE 1 1/2 STY TO 2 STY HOME — SYSB X 5461 STUFANO NEW HOUSE — REAR YARD SETBACK X 5474 MANGUS ADDN/ALT— SIDE YARD & BULKHEAD SB X 5484 BANCROFT LAP POOL— SIDE YARD LOCATION X 5489 SUTER RELOCATE & ADDN GAR— F/SY & LOT CVRG X 5491 WILLOTT CARPORT ADDN — REAR YARD SETBACK X 5495 VENTURA NEW HOUSE — BLUFF SETBACK X 5496 SETARO ADDN'S /ALTS — SYSB X If any other information is needed, please do not hesitate to call us. Thank you. Very truly yours, Jess Boger - Enc. cc: ZBA Staff l� )( fin( G 4 I 1416-4(2/871—Text 12 • PROJECT I.D.NUMBER 617.21 SEQ Appendix C State Environmental 'Duality Review SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM •• For UNLISTED ACTIONS Only PART I—PROJECT INFORMATION (To be completed by Applicant or Project sponsor) 1. APPLICANT/SPONSOR ' 2. PROJECT NAME T+C llOLD pi 6-5 L, P. =_ J. PROJECT LOCATION: Municipality SOV T/-(w ) County s'UF/oLk_ 4. PRECISE LOCATION(Street address and road Intersections,prominent landmarks,etc.,or provide maul ,hyo Nor2 # ,I/ RJ DA/Uri . orzic=NTS /Jt)1, " _ ... /000 /3 / 5 / S. IS PRO SED ACTION: New 0 Expansion 0 Modification/alteration 6. DESCRIBE PROJECT BRIEFLY: • cop STRuCT Now omec 1 ArN)ty AES /DEA %14L. h-ev & ( R-4W) • 7. AMOUNT OF LAND AFFECTED: �1 . Initially / acres Ultimately Oe of O, LeSSaeres e. WILL PROPOSEDDAAf?TiON COMPLY WITH EXISTING ZONING OR OTHER EXISTING LAND USE RESTRICTIONS? Dyes I.0 No If No,describe briefly 4 6 O(f ce I`oFF SL 73A c K /nom Aro rTo 3-c) AeDU(Lt f/'U/vT SG%3ACk Pito AA. $v( 7-0 v,3 9. WHA S PRESENT LAND USE IN VICINITY OF PROJECT? - • t. 0 Residential 0 Industrial ❑Commercial ❑Agriculture C3 Park/ForesVOpen space Olber Describe: • 10. DOES ACTION INVOLVE A PERMIT APPROVAL OR FUNDING,NOW OR ULTIMATELY FROM ANY OTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY(FEDERAL STATE QR LOCAU? . Yes 0 No If yes,list agency(s)and permit/approvals Sou71IOLD aUrc.p/4i6- tcrPTr, • 11. DOES ANY ASPS OF THE ACTT.N HAVE A CURRENTLY VALID PERMIT OR APPROVAL? 0 Yeo t N- If ye=,list agency name and permltfapproval • 12. AS A RESULT O—F�P OPOSED ACTION WILL EXISTING PERMIT/APPROVAL REQUIRE MODIFICATION? ❑Yes L No I CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVEAS TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE - -'.,J- C /-{o LD//�A C-S L. /'- /; ? Applieanl/sponsor name- JJb/7&/ L U/� l"Or✓�(� Dale rJ 7 t 3 Signature: �_G:.i✓ ��. /- _ II the action is in the Coastal Area, and you are a stale agency, complete Ine Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this assessment OVER 1 • • I APPLICANT G 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 to take whatever action is necessary to avoid same. YOUR NAME: Td- C ffOLO/,f/G-S L P ATO Id L ftU/Z%,4D0 (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 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 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 a'. icant) and the Town officer or employee. Either check the appropriate line A through D •elow) and/or describe the relationship in the space provided The Town officer or employee or h: or her spouse, sibling, parent, or child is (check all that apply)• A)the owner of gr-- er than 5%of the shares of the corporate stock of the appli nt (when the applicant is a corporation), B)the lega •r beneficial owner of any interest in a non-corporate entity (w the applicant is not a corporation); C) - officer, director, partner, of employee of the applicant, or D the actual applicant DESCRIPTION OF RELATIONSHIP Submitted this — day of d()GO S T Z 00 3 S ignatui e. _+ Paint Name JoHA✓ L, (U/2i-AI 6-(G- CONSENT Re: SCTM#1000-13-1-5.1 590 North View Drive, Orient,New York I,EDNA DOLL,the owner of the above referenced property, consent to J&C Holdings,L.P.,Wickham,Bressler, Gordon& Geasa,P.C.; and any of their surveyors, engineers, or other contractors retained by any of the above, or any of their representatives and/or agents, (a)to make applications necessary for the approval of a building permit for a single family dwelling and accessory uses to the Suffolk County Department of Health Services,DEC,Town of Southold Trustees, Southold Zoning Board of Appeals, and the Town of Southold Building Department and any other authorities having jurisdiction, (b)to request public water availability from the Suffolk County Water Authority, and(c)to enter onto the premises for the purposes of surveying, water tests, soil tests including excavation by crane if necessary, and other testing, plotting and inspections as required for such applications. Such applications shall include all matters in connection therewith. Dated: May , 2003 Edna Do 21/consenhl ei( G . TOWN O4OUTHOLD BUILDIN( iRMIT APPLICATION CHECKLIST BUIT,DING IYEPARTMENT w Do you have or need the following,before applying? TOWN HALL Board of Health SOUTHOLD,NY 11971 3 sets of Building Plans TEL: (631) 765-1802 Planning Board approval FAX: (631) 765-9502 Survey www. northfork.net/Southold/ PERMIT NO. Check Septic Form N.Y.S.D.E C. Trustees Examined :20 20 Contact: / Approved Mail to: J .1 C• %oo/ oi L P 3v Disapproved a/c R p v Phone:,5-o u i o o 1/97/ Expiration 20 5— 3 -- 4-3/2 Orin(nspector 7G S- 6.2.;26 _ _ ��� ; APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT Date AUG, , 200 3 INSTRUCTIONS a. This application MUST be completely filled in by typewriter or in ink and submitted to the Building Inspector with 3 sets of plans, accurate plot plan to scale. Fee according to schedule. b.Plot plan showing location of lot and of buildings on premises, relationship to adjoining premises or public streets or areas, and waterways. c. The work covered by this application may not be commenced before issuance of Building Permit. d.Upon approval of this application, the Building Inspector will issue a Building Permit to the applicant. Such a permit shall be kept on the premises available for inspection throughout the work. e.No building shall be occupied or used in whole or in part for any purpose what so ever until the Building Inspector issues a Certificate of Occupancy. f. Every building permit shall expire if the work authorized has not commenced within 12 months after the date of issuance or has not been completed within 18 months from such date. If no zoning amendments or other regulations affecting the property have been enacted in the interim, the Building Inspector may authorize, in writing, the extension of the permit for an addition six months. Thereafter, a new permit shall be required. APPLICATION IS HEREBY MADE to the Building Department for the issuance of a Building Permit pursuant to the Building Zone Ordinance of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County,New York, and other applicable Laws, Ordinances or Regulations, for the construction of buildings, additions, or alterations or for removal or demolition as herein described. The applicant agrees to comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, building code, housing code, and regulations, and to admit authorized inspectors on premises and in building for necessary inspections. '�� C NOLDIA-"GS' • "•T�_. A.. 1_r :re of applicant or name,if a corporation) (Mailing address of applicant) State whether applicant is owner, lessee, agent, architect, engineer, general contractor,/�{o�/.j \� � / 7 electrician, plumber or builder ccs—Tn,4cz T V(-gyp 6 L� Name of owner of premises 12.D iV A D(jL L (As on the tax roll or latest deed) If applicant is a corporation, signature of duly authorized officer ThAIAY 4 , (qv dz/A Dv (Name and title of corporate officer) Builders License No. Plumbers License No. Electricians License No. Other Trade's License No. 1. Location of land on which proposed work will be done: Hous Number o /00/2-S r o f 1,-;11/ P A)U(= o n i ,v Hamlet County Tax Ma No. 1000 Section l3 Block rvis""1 ��°/ Subdivision LSC 1,� �`7� i t0 ,' ' •'`T, ^r P opeA Filed Map No. t,8 `2 �` (Name) "'�' <'> t FS>r ':t'" �.t� ;. State existing use and occupancy of premises and intended use and occupancy of'proposed constructi&n: a. Existing use and occupancy VAC AV ( P - ite-o b. Intended use and occupancy OP( - 1 Adv1 /L7 R Es/ 1) C vice L Nature of work (check which applicable): New Building I Addition Alteration Repair Removal Demolition Other Work (Description) I. Estimated Cost oQ 5-0 oU c) Fee (To be paid on filing this application) 5. If dwelling, number of dwelling units I Number of dwelling units on each floor If garage, number of cars jc 5. If business, commercial or mixed occupancy, specify nature and extent of each type of use. ' 7. Dimensions of existing structures, if any: FrontVA.C A �� Rear Depth Height Number of Stories / Dimensions of same structure with alterations or additions: Front PI/A Rear Depth Height Number of Stories 8. Dimensions of entire new construction: Front C 5 ` Rear C S Depth 3 4 Height 35 Number of Stories / /' 9. Size of lot: Front 429, 50 Rear 1 37, 7 / Depth 3 CcTit NC--7 10. Date of Purchase V /J D L Name of Former Owner 11. Zone or use district in which premises are situated 12-T 'Fv I b I), or ARAI-5 12. Does proposed construction violate any zoning law, ordinance or regulation? YES NO 13. Will lot be re-graded? YES j NO Will excess fill be removed from premises? YES NO / c/O cyZ// Nf4 SA/ YAE=2 14. Names of Owner of premises f✓.1)IYA I)oLL Address( DOG-WOO DA. Phone No. Name of Architect Address A 1.1A a f)A L cJ PE phone No Name of Contractor Address (') S 0 ( Phone No. 15 a. Is this property within 100 feet of a tidal wetland or a freshwater wetland? *YES NO * IF YES, SOUTHOLD TOWN TRUSTEES &D E.C. PERMITS MAY BE REQUIRED. b. Is this property within 300 feet of a tidal wetland? * YES NO * IF YES, D.E.C. PERMITS MAY BE REQUIRED. 16. Provide survey, to scale, with accurate foundation plan and distances to property lines. 17. If elevation at any point on property is at 10 feet or below, must provide topographical data on survey. STATE OF NEW YORK) SS: COUNTY OF Al Y ) :1-0 4-(p-, L , H cu —rA.w being duly sworn, deposes and says that(s)he is the applicant (Name of individual signing contract) above named, (S)He is the Co w-7--/j A c Y V 'D 661 (Contractor, Agent, Corporate Officer, etc) of said owner or owners, and is duly authorized to perform or have performed the said work and to make and file this application; that all statements contained in this application are tnie to the best of his knowledge and belief; and that the work will be performed in the manner set forth in the application filed therewith. Sworn to before me this 1; '�L day of AUG, 20 O3 hitiwa)61. 12:-/ (iL -..1., otary Public Signature of Applicant DONNIEJ.DOROSIQ Notary Public,State Of New tbrk No.01D06095328,Suffolk County Term Expires July 7,20 7\ I —own Of Southold P.O Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 * * * RECEIPT * * * Date: 08/22/03 Receipt#: 1085 Transaction(s): Subtotal 1 Application Fees $200.00 ? Check#: 1085 Total Paid: $200.00 I = I • •- I I Name: J&C, Holdings LP 590 North View Dr Orient, NY 11957 F• Clerk ID: LINDAC Internal ID 81323 I - I -^ I RECEIVED AUG 2 2 2003 MEMO/TRANSMITTAL OF FUNDS • Southold Town Clerk TO: Town Clerk's Office FROM: ZBA Office DATE: August 19, 2003 SUBJECT: Additional Filing Fee—Assigned File #5419 (J & C Holding/Doll) Transmitted is $200 check for the remainder due under the above Appeal filed last week. Thank you. Town Of Southold P.OBox 1179 Southold, NY 11971 * * * RECEIPT * * * Date: 08/07/03 Receipt#: 1079 Transaction(s): Subtotal 1 Application Fees $400.00 Check#: 1079 Total Paid: $400.00 ti • Name: J&C, Holdings LP 590 North View Dr Orient, NY 11957 Clerk ID: LINDAC Internal ID.80695 MEMO/TRANSMITTAL OF FUNDS TO: Town Clerk's Office FROM: ZBA Office DATE: August 19, 2003 SUBJECT: Additional Filing Fee —Assigned File #5419 (J & C Holding/Doll) Transmitted is $200 check for the remainder due under the above Appeal filed last week. Thank you. l '1 ).'2 . .i\-- 4'47'50'E 137.71' ( TIE LINE )4 SOUND i LONG ISLAND N 8 y G--y WATER MARK 6/26/03 4 6 i .� ___---- 71-1 .. 8 } tia 61:3)„.... ti �� = 10 CV __- -- -BOTTOM —� tr> a 8 �` J-- a. _ ___ --- ._-- ____ i20 ----' - - �_._- �_ --_ _ Z ' �' '- _'_ ./ . ,__.._ C,n\ _`__ _ _-_ " _ ' Ste. F-4- .. 20- � v/ �/� _ § CJ - ----- -"._ -- r- --- -_ OG 't'� �,---�3 ._--- _--- _, __ ----- -- - so °� =1 _ yCW f._ y7 O es-- 40_ �- % ---- - _/ 6� W ,7:__:),1 3 i ----` - // / Q 00-- % ----- _----- �_ — `'- �----;_,--->,! 70 `cis i _, - -._ _ 6D-- in 62----:- f% = =_�/� / //moi 66' --- - / ///� /' /' _ � �/ - /90 z /� /i/ ' /of OF BL UF� j j j///`'% foo \ ( 1 1 , t / I ) I I E E SIDED72 1 - } C ST INE ;NAL C74, �� ' I ( : oA ARD S1 %55;\ ROP.R. .-T/!?' E REtq N/N _,ALLB 7' 0 I r 112 ���/N0y9Pimm— ;4;3. JoI f NF s? 76 �'1 0ibliter TT88 .0 / 494442:9). ONFRAME y W. ROP. DWELLING .L.86.5�--/NG 87,0 iriD/32-/y ' / l \--r''Q 48: PROPS y l 70 \ �Fn1.93.00' l �" � �� • N GF.EL•91.o !.1 IAVERAGE NATURAL GRADE "� BF.CD 6BAR•8/.40± �� c°° 0 1\ 26\ z N 1 / Q. 00.0 00 • ..• o /m�� z a Q. rm ¢ EXP GJ� 1 0 P.99.7 / 9 53 CL.99•g8 ;). ) 1,4 u, Z / •c �Y ��-: / / ►4 O � ASPHALT z .�r ; CL.99.53 pAVEMENT EPJ00.16 o / , " +CL 96 23 +EP.99.42 m EAD E:86.20 eel CL.9.00 EP.96.12 O O VIEW „- 150.00. z POLE ;v 32 WIRES �VERH +CL.86.41 +EP.99.86 OOj O DRIVE NyT 6 CL.82.45 EP.86.' O O z. MON. EP.82.35 to O 0) NORTH EASEMENTS AN/OR SUBSURFACE STRUCTURES RECORDED OR LNRECORDED ARE NOT GUARANTEED L4VLESS PHYSICALLY EVIDENT AT THE 77ME OF SURVEY. f THE OFFSETS OR DOOMS/OHS SHOWN HEREON FROM 771E PROPERTY LINES TO THE STRUCTURES ARE FOR A SPECIFIC PURPOSE AM)USE. THEREFORE THEY INTENDED£RECTOO ADDNITI S CRIES OR ANY OR GUIDE UNAUTHORIZED ALTERATION OR ADD/TONS TO THIS SIU/VEY IS A VIOLATION OF SECTION 7209 SUBDIVISION 2 OF THE NEW YORK STATE EDUCATION LAW. COPIES OF 7715 SURVEY MAP NOT BEARING THE LAND SURVEYOR'S AWED SEAL OR EMBOSSED SEAL SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED TO BE A VALID TRUE COPY. MIT/MATIONS MVD/CATED HEREON SHALL RUN ONLY TO 771E PERSON FOR WHOM 771E SURVEY IS PREPARED.AM)ON 7HEIR BEHALF TO THE TRE U.S.C. A G.S. DATUM PER COMPANY.GOVERNMENT AGENCY AM)LENDING INSTITUTION LISTED HEREON SUFFOLK COUNTY SEWER WORKS STUDIES COGENT OWSNOT TRANSFERABLE TO ADDITIONAL WSTTUTONS OR .11 SURVEY OF DESCRIBED PROPERTY AT ORIENT TOWN OF SOUTHOLD. SUFFOLK COUNTY. NEW YORK SCALE • /” - 40' SURVEYED: UNE 26. 2003 P ✓LOT PLAN: JULY 28. 2003 of NEN /\P• 1:,--Es ly/<YO.9',- co <>' Fey -2' \ 0P vv SUFFOLK COUNTY TAX MAP - . 4` g 1; ,. DISTRICT SECTION BLOCK LOT g /000 /3 / 5. I o.5�0 4av © H/LLEBRAND LAND SURVEYING. P. C. 1t_ `'O LAND S // CHURCHILL LANE. SMl THTOWN. NEW YORK ' TEL. ( 63/) 543-5/39 - ,' , i-_/ 4: r '0/ V6\ SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS SPECIAL MEETING TRANSCRIPT OF HEARINGS HELD MAY 1, 2003 (Prepared by Jessica Boger) `Present were: Chairwoman Lydia A. Tortora Member Vincent Orlando Member Gerard P. Goehringer ) Clerk Paula Quintieri \ 4, r nw Absent were: � ) �� Member Ruth D. Oliva 4 Member George Horning 3, \ � ° , �0"' t PUBLIC HEARINGS: 6:43 p.m. Claire Tassone and Michael Nulty#5272—(continued from 3/20/03) applicants request Variances under Sections 239.4A.1 and 30A.3 based on the Building Department's November 7, 2002 Notice of Disapproval. Applicants propose a single family at less than 100 feet from the top of the bluff or bank of the Long Island Sound, and front yard setback at less than 50 feet, 590 North View Drive, Orient; Parcel 1000-13-1-5.1. Resolution to consider applicant's May 1,2003 request to withdraw this application. CHAIRWOMAN: The applicant has decided not to pursue this particular plan so I will make a motion to accept the applicant's request to withdraw the application. ***** Page 6 March 20, 2003 Southold Town Board of Appeals Regular Meeting Public Hearing 9:54 a.m. Claire Tassone and Michael Nulty#5272—Applicants request Variances under Sections 239.4A.1 and 30A.3 based on the Building Department's November 7, 2002 Notice of Disapproval. Applicants propose a single family dwelling at less than 100 feet from the top of the bluff or bank of the Long Island Sound, and front yard setback at less than 50 feet, at 590 North View Drive, Orient; Parcel 1000-13-1-5.1. CHAIRWOMAN: Is someone here who would like to speak on behalf of the application? BRUCE ANDERSON: I'm Bruce Anderson, Suffolk Environmental Consulting for the applicants Nulty and Tassone. I have a couple things I want to hand up to you that aren't in the file and the first is the exterior elevations of the house and I'll get to that and describe them. The applicants wish to build a house on a 41,922 sq. ft. lot which has a bluff that fronts the LI Sound about 2/3rds of this property is beach and bluff. The dwelling would 1750 sq. ft. in footprint and would include a 435 sq. ft. deck overall coverage on the property would be 5.2%. I submitted to you a memo on the outlining our points on March 16th and I had previously made a FOIL request to the ZBA which produced a variance that was granted for the corner lot as you come down North View Dr. to the east of the property and I'd like to hand that up to you as well because that will give you some insight to the prior zoning history to the neighborhood. We laid out our variance criteria based upon surveys we were able to obtain from the Build. Dept. which included 3 surveys we have our own obviously and then there was one additional survey which unfortunately does not show the location of the bluff so what we did was we obtained an aerial photo of the property and the reason we consider the neighborhood to be would be the waterfront lots and on that aerial I took the house and I adjusted it to 1" to 100' scale and applied that house onto the aerial and I think what's immediately obvious is this is a house that fits into the character of the neighborhood. In this neighborhood there is no house that meets the 100'bluff setback. There are houses that were built particularly on the west that are in excess in one case 180'off the road and yet those houses would be 40'off the bluff. The table that was submitted under the character of the neighborhood is a little bit conservative because it was prepared before I had that variance before me. It simply didn't come in at the time I drafted the memo and that variance relating to tax map 13-1-7 tells us that bluff setback was actually 5'not the 22'and 15' reported in the table that were significantly closer but that it was setback 23' from the road where I reported 18. What that means to us is we are essentially more conforming than 6 out of the 7 houses comprising the neighborhood. We explain to you in our memo that we could not build any house on this property without benefit of a variance because when you exact the 50' setback off the road and you exact the 100' setback off the bluff face what you discover is that you wind up with a negative building envelope so any house built on this property will require a variance. When viewed in context with what the neighborhood exists the variances sought are not substantial because they would significantly exceed the bluff setback in that neighborhood and at least among the nonconforming lots with respect to front yard setbacks those setbacks are also exceeded in this application. That brings us to the impact of the physical environmental conditions of the neighborhood. This is a house that is built essentially into the grade of the property and the exterior elevations demonstrate what that is. You come off the driveway you enter a garage that is essentially under the house which puts the driveway to the west of the property. It's done so the preserve the essential topography of the site and is therefore very Page 6 of 96 Page 7 March 20, 2003 Southold Town Board of Appeals Regular Meeting Public Hearing sensitive design given the constraints on the lot. As you know we designed it so as to avoid regulatory process of both the Trustees and the DEC and that was done by keeping the house back from the bluff and coastal erosion hazard line which is shown on the survey. Finally I received a fax copy of a letter that was submitted by SC Soil and Water District. That is in your file. That's a letter from Mr. Tinious and it was sent to me yesterday afternoon. I did not work late last night as it was my wedding anniversary but I do want to address it today and the essential points are that the bluff in front of this house is heavily vegetated and what that means to us all is that it is stable and I agree with that. It says the survey topography is accurate. I also agree with that. It recommends gutters and liters that would empty into drywells and that also was a good recommendation and one we intend to comply with and I will be showing you a revised plan that shows that we will engineer those in accordance with the most recent requirements that some towns are now enacting as part of the clean water act and that will appear on a site plan that I will submit to you and it also recommends that some drainage control at the top of the driveway be incorporated in this plan because there's a concern of the water running off the road across the driveway into the lot and perhaps into the lot into the west. He recommends an erosion sedimentation plan which we have done before which is essentially the showing of hay bales and snow fences and that's become more formalized over the years particularly very recently in the last month as part of this clean water act amendments and reauthorization and that will be incorporated into our site plan that we will send to you. A final thing- and I also agree with this -is that no one can really predict the erosion rates along this stretch of beach but I would say this that the fact that we would be set back from the bluff this heavily vegetated and stable bluff more than we find in the neighborhood and that we are making every effort to preserve the existing topography,I believe this application demonstrates suitable protection to the bluff even in the event of a storm theoretically lapping up against the toe of this bluff. CHAIRWOMAN: What's the depth of the- from the house? MR. ANDERSON: They range from 4-16''however the exterior elevation plans that are provided are going to square off the deck. CHAIRWOMAN: That's what I see. I see what you are showing on the survey and the plans you just submitted are 2 different plans. The plans you submitted today are for a full deck the width of that deck is going to be 15'. What you are proposing to do is take the entire width, 50' width of the house and come out 15' all the way across to 39 is that correct? MR. ANDERSON: That is correct. CHAIRWOMAN: A couple of things, in the 8 years I have been on the board I've never read such a letter from Soil &Water. There are very serious concerns in the letter. The final line of the letter says the outlook for placing the house on this parcel is dim. That's pretty explicit and only maybe a short lived proposition. They are talking about not only ponding on the property because of the fresh area that would go into the neighbors area and ponding that would go into the bluff area and the erosion rate and potential erosion rate as to other properties which were granted variances as you well know every property on the bluff is unique. Page 7 of 96 • mi fl • Page 8 March 20, 2003 Southold Town Board of Appeals Regular Meeting Public Hearing MR. ANDERSON: There was only one variance granted in the neighborhood. CHAIRWOMAN: Every one is unique. You have a limited ability to build on this parcel without variances however as far as encroaching as far as the 39' if you omitted the deck that would be 49' you could knock that up to a 54% decrease which would be a less than 50% variance. What you are asking for right now is a 60%variance. MR. ANDERSON: The survey shows the house 43' from the edge of the bluff so you can't take 39 and simply subtract 39 because the bluff comes in, The house is at 43' from the edge of the bluff. CHAIRWOMAN: Because of the significant environmental problems the soil and erosion has cited with this property to the point where they actually say the prospects of building a house on this property are doomed. I've never seen that Mr. Anderson they have very strong feelings about this they are expert opinions that this board simply can't ignore. MR. ANDERSON: Well the last sentence that says is dim is not in my view supported by what comes before it previously. The last sentence about dim- dim is a very odd word anyway but it doesn't follow from the analysis that proceeds it. The second thing is if you look at the exterior elevations that are provided for you, we are talking about a deck that is significantly raised above the ground and the reason for that is it is our goal here to preserve the topography to the greatest extent so in terms of there is no foundation that extends out into the deck there are merely a set of pilings with footings to support a deck that is literally 8 or 9' above grade and again that is to preserve the topography of the site so this is a house that is filled in such a way to respect the land and the way it slopes. MEMBER GOEHRINGER: I suspect that some of the issues that are raised by S&W are generic to that area and that is the bluffs tend to be vertical and a little more sloped than you see in some areas of the island as I'm sure you're aware of. The issue that has come into play over the years has been the possibility of what kind of erosion would exist underneath these deck areas which are starved by vegetation because of lack of sun and that may be an issue and I'm sure you have the expertise to address this but it's an issue you may want to deal with after this hearing and give us some information on. What can we put under the deck that will not cause an erosion problem because of course the water is going to diffuse through the deck and it's going to cause some problems. The other issue is to what degree the deck could break away from the house if it had to. We dealt with that with minor situations primarily swimming pools where we do not necessarily allow the swimming pool and deck area be attached to the house and that maybe something you may want to look at also just the way we produce breakaway foundations today how could you break away the deck from the house without disturbing the house in any way. I realize it's a little difficult to actually free stand a deck adjacent to a foundation of'a dwelling but these are issues that we have come to with environmental issues that concern these things but defmitely I think that would have some great credibility to addressing this deck issue and that's my opinion. Page 8 of 96 • Page 9 March 20, 2003 Southold Town Board of Appeals Regular Meeting Public Hearing MR. ANDERSON: As I said I only got that letter late yesterday afternoon and it's my intention to come back and also the drywells it's not a problem to integrate your questions into that plan. I'd love to have had it today but- MEMBER HORNING: I noticed the applicant is proposing town water supplies rather than a well. Do you know if the adjacent neighbors have the town water as well? MR. ANDERSON: All the neighbors have the town water. MEMBER HORNING: So there's no issue with contamination from septics into well supply. Also I'm curious with this letter from S&W did they do any write-ups for adjacent parcels when those houses were built? MR. ANDERSON: I don't know. MEMBER ORLANDO: What are the approximate sq. footage of the two adjacent houses on the east and west side? MR. ANDERSON: I think if you look at your aerial photograph they are equal or greater than what we have here- MEMBER ORLANDO: I'd have to disagree with you because they are both ranches. I was there. I would think a house on the west side is no more than 1400 sq. ft. The house on the east side is no more than 1800 sq. ft. Quick calculations this house is approximately 3500 sq. ft. did you say? MR. ANDERSON: 1750 footprint. MEMBER ORLANDO: Living square footage over 3000? I think this house is significantly larger than it's neighbors. MR. ANDERSON: Well again we looked at the size of the neighbors. We looked at the whole neighborhood which I think we reasonably defined. I could provide you with the survey. MEMBER ORLANDO: And you are aware that the deck on the west side of the house will be approximately 10'off the ground? MR. ANDERSON: On the north side, northwest side, yes. - MEMBER ORLANDO: I just see it as a- MR. ANDERSON: Far better than being on the ground, wouldn't you agree? MEMBER ORLANDO: I don't know-the height- I have young children,being on a high deck like that I get concerned. Page 9 of 96 Page 10 March 20, 2003 Southold Town Board of Appeals Regular Meeting Public Hearing MR. ANDERSON: It's a better plan from an environmental standpoint because if you were to come to my house and see you have a deck that is a foot or two of grade that is essentially 16' wide and runs the length of the house it relates to what Mr. Goehringer is saying and that is what can you do underneath the deck that provides the erosion and runoff protection and the answer is the fact that it is elevated 8, 9, 10' above grade you could do much more with it and the actual structural contact with the ground is limited to the diameter of the supporting columns and the footings underneath them so the deck above grade I would my opinion is a much more environmentally sensitive way of providing a deck rather than something that was on ground which would allow no sunlight penetration that would cover the land that would require grating, etc. MEMBER ORLANDO: Either one is sq. ftg. covering the land but putting all that aside-what was the plan for the east side of the land with the once you remove the vegetation on that hill, you know your clients in danger of mud slides coming into their property on the east side. MR. ANDERSON: It will be stabilized with vegetation and I will put that in my erosion control plan. The idea here is when you are dealing with a lot like this you are either forced to do what someone would do is massive filling to level the property and we've seen numerous applications I've handled on that and the other approach is to try to build a house into the slope which the exterior elevations do show so you're not creating, you're not altering the topography. MEMBER ORLANDO: Since you brought that up Mr. Anderson,how much fill are you planning on bringing? MR. ANDERSON: We are not planning on bringing any fill. MEMBER ORLANDO: This house I don't think is typical to adjacent properties size wise. CLAIRE TASSONE: Hi, I'm Claire Tassone one of the applicants, my husband is here with me this morning. You are absolutely right our immediate neighbors to the right and left of us are between 16-1800 sq. ft.but the 2 neighbors that extend beyond that the house immediately to the left which is at the farthest end of the street the last parcel is in excess of 4400 sq. ft. and I know that because I actually spoke with the owner in brief when I introduced myself and a newer dwelling 2 houses to the right of us is in excess of 3500 sq. ft. MEMBER OLIVA: I reiterate everything everyone said and want to add I find it a very difficult piece of property. First of all it wasn't cleared enough that I could even get to the edge of the bluff to look down on it and it slopes down both ways into a gully in there and then only 39' from a bluff in Orient it's ridiculous I don't care what the other ones are I know that about 2 or 3 houses up a few years back one of their porches from a noreaster went over the drink and they just lost it they are very unstable I don't care how vegetated it is at the present moment and I think just 39' away from a bluff is just ridiculous. I think the house is too big for the size of the property I think it should be a much smaller house, it's 30'high, it's going to overwhelm the other houses you are sunk down in a ditch that you're going to have erosion coming the water comes Page 10 of 96 ( Page 11 March 20, 2003 Southold Town Board of Appeals Regular Meeting Public Hearing and the rain comes in Orient having that I live there. I think you're in big trouble. I just don't think the size of the house is comparable to what you want to do with the size of this property and the constraints on it. MR. ANDERSON: With all due respect my job is to look at this property and apply the zoning criteria. Now it may be your position and I might even agree with that in a perfect world North View Road would be substantially south where it is. In a perfect world the houses on the west setback in one case 180' from the road and 30' from the bluff would have been centered on that lot. If I brought you a lot and where I had 210' distance between the road and the bluff. MEMBER OLIVA: One thing has nothing to do with the other I don't care what others have done. A lot of these homes were put here a long time ago when there were no setbacks and this property is unique I don't care what the one from the west and east are doing. I care about this property and the effect this piece of property is going to have on not only the applicant but the people around it and the environment in general. MR. ANDERSON: The question is whether the variance sought will result in an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood and a detriment to nearby properties that's it. CHAIRWOMAN: You don't have this deck on the survey but you said on the east side that's 43' to the closest point for the house so with a 15' deck that would be 28' to the top of the bluff is that correct? MR. ANDERSON: That is correct. Keep in mind this is an elevated deck. CHAIRWOMAN: We need you to exactly show us this is just rough map -it would not be a 39' setback what you are asking for now is a 28' setback from the top of the bluff. We also need the erosion and sediment control plan and three we need a plan for drywells and gutters to contain road runoff and any runoff on your property, four we need a plan for the proposed deck away from the easterly side of the property because I doubt very seriously that this board is going to approve a 28' setback to the top of the bluff. We haven't approved one with or without a deck in -it doesn't happen we don't do it so I would urge you to develop an alternative plan,push the deck over to the west side as much as possible to get as great a setback as possible. That's my own recommendation,but the most important thing is to address the issues S&W raised. The depression, any overflow coming off the property-try to minimize the distance 28'won't fly. MEMBER ORLANDO: One more question, did you specify material for the driveway? MR. ANDERSON: The driveway would be pervious. CHAIRWOMAN: We have to move things along. We need affidavits of sign posting and 1 green card. Is there anyone else in the audience who would like to speak for or against the application? Page 11 of 96 f�� Page 12 March 20, 2003 Southold Town Board of Appeals Regular Meeting Public Hearing TOM MORGAN: My name is Tom Morgan. We live at 855 Northview. We built a house,just finished up last April and there was no need for any variances because we conformed to everything. Most of the neighbors at Browns Hills which is a privately owned association with about 17 households. Most of them, all but a few in fact are weekend residents if that. They are 2nd homes and most of them although we've been in touch by_phone and email are unaware of this hearing or unable to get here to voice the opinions of the neighbors about the character of the neighborhood. I was going to ask for a postponement,but that looks like it's in the works anyway until the neighbors are able to voice their opinion on it. That's all I have to say. I do live there I love it, I enjoy the wildlife which must have a habitat which this lot prior to it's being cleared was and when we bought this property 8 years ago at 855 we understood it was the last buildable lot and they are actually was a subdivision I believe Stuart Johnson sold the property to part of his property or a lot he owned that he intended not to build upon to some friends who had built a house that conforms without any variances required. MARY FOSTER MORGAN: Hello my name is Mary Foster Morgan. I live at Northview Dr. Orient NY. I have an email from the neighbor of the property in question and I have a letter I've composed. For the sake of time I'll read them they are each a page. Amy and Chris Astley live to the east of the property. Amy writes we bought our property 6 years ago with the explicit understanding that the ravine-like land next to us was considered unbuildable. Although we made several attempts to buy the land from Edna Doll in an effort to preserve the land as a bird sanctuary,we were repeatedly rebuffed. We are distressed that the land is now being considered for development. The current owners bulldozed the land and it is possible to see the erosion they have already created to our property. We are most especially concerned with the irreversible damage they will cause to the delicate cliff by building a mere 40' from it rather than the 100' normally required. We are extremely worried that the health of the cliff will be so compromised that our own dwelling will be negatively effected if these owners were to abide by the setback sanctioned by the town this land would be in fact be deemed unbuildable. Thank you for the protection of the property of current landowners. CHAIRWOMAN: If you could submit a copy to the board and a copy of the other one too because we are running very,very late and we are going to adjourn this hearing. Is there anyone else in the audience who would like to speak for or against the application? What is the next calendar date? May 1St 6:30, is that convenient for you Mr. Anderson? MR. ANDERSON: Yes. CHAIRWOMAN: I make a motion to adjourn this hearing until May 1st at 6:30 pm. ***** Page 12 of 96 r j„,,.....- ..� Existing chimney to remain v20- ( �� rl f Existing ridge height to remain — iii j � �� .,,,,,IIIIII ct J IIIIIIt 1111 //to° SzGa � /`�V�� _ 41 ;,/� Provide snow and ice shield in valley / t UUU Fiberglass architectural roofing shingles U 3-IN f aj New double 4 1/2 vinyl siding 1/3 vented soffit along front and .�::'.�� rear of structure ----7 its Alk 1 n p-. \_ _ i o i cO C - — , ne fa Fiberglass architectural roofing shingles—N with white aluminum ua clad 5 ir"-- S CO l I 1I I I�� _ s_ , , ___ ---==-=__ s =_= _ — s -= e= (� — I ` ' �14• •I 1V��. 70.•r7•r4 ♦� ,Nrew w`,-ice• ♦•••����♦ ���4 ••• 4. ••••••�♦ ♦ • •iiiiiiiiiiiiiii •iiiiii�iiiiiiiiii• •.iiiiiiiiiiiii.iiiiii••• iiiiiiiiiii•••iiii•iiiiii•. • ii•• i •1 iiiiiiii•iiiiiii iii:---4".: •=•.•.•t•A.•A.•• A•' Existing Grade 0 ;0 1 Cedar railing and balusters 1 fl CCA treated decking and framing - CCA treated stair framing and steps Vinyl lattice below decking to final grade 1"-0"0 x 3'-0"deep concrete piers Use Teco anchors to fasten deck support posts to concrete piers• - -rL .1_r �,1 L _I J. J 131-2" 19'-0" 1 17'-92"/ i 49'-10" • / / (new construction) , Front Elevation scale 1/4"=1-0" 1 50•-0' • 19{6X• r45,16.r45,16. 22-1178 • � 24•-8I 4 I• 6'ay 4 1T-2 • B• n 13,3Y2.• 6,23/4. II e.Ea& 4'-117,18 I 740 6-239• 1 9•T3%. I 9•.23/• 9•.233• I 02y I 2.,0. 12-0 a 38'deep min,concrete trers — Ir{ I III�II — post too CUele Ioaoltaings d ^� .- EE=B09 EEE aa^L 1.1.00ov6?5 a6i EoSE6E=J= emllme06eicc E6B6a 6862 I/I 6x6'CCAtttatM ry upport posts • F • ( )eturdms CCA treated 4 I 1 I (2)7x10 CCA treated derkjoiste,16.0 C d ` I Ilk — MIaode1•x1 floor I �f_•' I a — Mkaopam LVL IborlesLs I w . Mr u tf i 5/8'W Jt F R sheelmck,taped 0 tz W b I o and In((odong er Ftoomd on �Oe co6p19 Utility Room td le L2 b L I rr i\ n ry III (5)2'x 4•beanng pmts �/ q 18 77 7x P,16'oc stud wap wth 5/11.Deck _..] 36•a 36.016'deep F R sheeback,taped end spoddetl _ 3310100109 � I�� cm (2)13/0.011716•MIddtam LVL I ,.1�rn - -_- n1 ibo1Josts under wall Plate ebme 312'0 aleeicolter. hi (3J7]'x 1T'Muxopam LVL Older III (2)13W'x 117/6' C Mwmllam LVL girderII 2CarGarageiooan:::5obovo �� __Jz•x4•bcarmg posts RIM4 i ll LL O 330 o36'x16'dee M1 ^ 4� (4)1314'x117/8' 01 p 1• ry Jr Miuopam LVL floor joists fa �I concrete foam F 6 To � o 1 Unfinished Cellar $ — u n WI 0 o. _ ry (1I Cellar Area ti e 9 . All. -a. (3d): )13/4'011778' Si a V o n Mwrepam LVL Ildorjolsls Storage Area e o _ z•,4•,76•oc sbid wap aerwap para atxwe m ti ' I w ww,5/8'thick F R shaebook 4'x 4'CCA treated IL e O loped end speckled SII 170 x36•deep nun concrete Colbgs support posts (4WI Unica,rmlenen 0 In 4•x4-CCA treated _ t support post to commie footings Y x 8'CCAtreated deck 1 it n Joists,16'0C g, • a 4�•II 3-11• I 9•T I B3T I 17'61'76' I 11'-3 I 4i' _ 8' I 17'77• I 11'6e' I T"16 I 10'"5i` I 65114' l B. 13'-0 I 1T-toyj• 50-0• r A Foundation Plan spele 114•=1•-0• 7 • 4X" 12-8' 4y" 18'-4' 4%2 17'-6° 472 • n U N N U II N U U N kl N n U II N IIU H N 2'x6'#2 Cedar decking 0 ?` N 1 a- 1/ O O n v (2)2°x 10'header (2)2'x 10'header (2)2'x 10'header (2)2'x10' (2)2'x10' 2 2"x10'header • ` (2)2'x 12'header ' ( ) c , header header er < . , ill header 2'x10°Floor Joists E \ / pi 12.00 iv /RN Master Open to second floor above / i'+ Bedroom \ / ii Kitchen . Great In 6.h 4 Y 2•x 10°Floor Joists X Room •^' H rn 16.0 C i ♦ II (3)1 3/4'x 9 1/4°1 9E Microllam flush bears) ` i. IIII p '° / \\••. ii ". i Provided Microllam LVL full bearing post 2 Provided Microllam x ® LVL full bearing post / \ ` , Q 0 - :-.1 II O7 - -(2)1 3/4'x 9 1/4'1 9E Microllam flush beam with • II , 314'steel flitch plate Use 1/2 0 nuts and bolts,16' " O C staggered lop and bottom and(2)at each end Pantry 2. o—°' v I 1 Provided Microllam LVL ,-�° x D I (2)13/4-19E full beano Q 5 0 1 7 g post from vrI� 4-12• 3'_B• 4-1z' OS ry° Microllam flush beam Ridge Beam post above O Laundry © >x Z. 8 Walk-In Walk-in LL ^m Closet .42 4' '.;.;.r...:.: r : }, Closet %}, z m C. J • • o MillI © ' ®/ 1/2 Bath 2°x 10'Floor Joists I iv v p'P9�rlr^�� Master Bathroom ;,� \ 12oc •-r N2'x 10"Floor Joists a - %- �:; Closet Dining Room • •\ O (2)2"x 12*header o N. Omecon v P 3O BathroomOueof saboved Boor \ O O x"` m .........eeei----- --�• •.:.:•:•>:•:r:.a--..-. Foyer - A (2)2-x10•header •` • (2)2"x10"header (2)2"x10"header N . e fi 9Z' I 7 . ,..................•.:9t72� ..... 9'-54 ° 9' ° - , 1 4%2 412" „ 13 0 18,4" 4Y2" 17,6' 4Y2 50'-0' AJ 1st Floor Plan scale 1/4•.1-0" 2 4• • 12-8' 4y2' 18'-4° 17'-10%2" / 41/2° II 6-8 4.-11"2 9'-9° t2-3. T-1' 10'-1'i o 0 io a p 0 III 0 .ii i 0 0 ♦ (2)2"x10°header 4111064.1(2)2^x10" (2)2°x10" / _� ♦ (2)2'x 10"header (2)2"x 10"header N \header header .�\ \ / Bedroom i a En o 0 \ Open to Below ' • i to m ♦ i m O 215Oco to x X E X CO co N Si N N / X E X ID N m •cc V Si Study N , N . I ''N o / \ Y X (3)1 3/4°x 4°Micolllam / \ © N i LVL posts to underside of i ♦ N t ridge beam / (3)3 112"x 18"Micmllam a I ..- 2 Wood Railing and posts LVL ridge beam Si' N . M • \ O / 3 1 3/4°x 4°Micolllam x —� O (3)1/34'x91/4' \ t ) LVL posts to underside of N c Micmllam LVL valley beam N \ ridge beam N O C N ` N N --1 Use(3)2"x 4"ndge post j Q '- II• i/ Ill �N Hallway/Catwalk m 0 11 Iii® O ..-.-..-en- ., Ooo g i;, . ii:: iin 91' 5'-0" r 5'.0" . Nd —�— ,-°Bathro: 5'-102 i i • a Bedroom N. ; II \ IS Nm O ,r\ 0 Bedroom �, 1. Si " c U o U z \ ti��. ' m k_ _f '4 U ,-Es U •♦ III _ U `o U `,- o ♦ m o U x E x m Y. U f, '� 'N V N C O m N x E m 2"x 10'Roof X i III 2"x 10"Roof EN m iv m • /ce Rafters 16"O C 01 Rafters 16°0 Ctx • I \ (2)2'x10°header (2)2"x 10"header // n \ 2 2"x10"header • ^�/ \ ( ) (2)2°x 10"header 4 III e e ,� Open to Below N \\ ` Y (2)1/34"x 9 1/4"MIcrollam LVL header—/i> (2)1/34"x 14"Mlcrollam LVL ndge beam / _ 3._.q 6'-4" 1Z-112-1" 15.-8-1. 8•-6" x / 5'-2° 442° .` 12-8" [i 18'-4° 17'-6° / 4Y2" 7 i'4%2^ 1,.. 4y2 i 50'-0" n 2nd Floor Plan scale 1/4"=1'-0" 3 0 0 (3)1 3/4"x 18"Microllam Cont Ridge venting LVL ndge beam _ •• Roof Construction 2"x 6°DF Collar ties,4'-0"0 C 2"x 10"roof rafters,16"0 C I I I L LI —Provide"cricket"at bock chimney • I I rI I I>riiiillSolpj ` 1/2"sheathing 15#felt paper i I i I III240#3 tab fiberglass roofing 1LIIIIi I I I I1 1 1IIIIIII I I IIIIIIII 2"x 8"ceiling Joists II I I (3)1 3/4°x 14'Microllam LVL flush beam to R-19 faced fiberglass insulation I r Isupport ceiling beams beyond above hall 1/2°sheet rock,taped and jI 1[ L: railing Use Teco hangers to fasten ceiling speckled finish I I Ibeams to Microllam Beam L_ I I I ii LIII NIIIIIIIM_ III VP 7741476 �ttt�tltttt��tttlt�tt��Il'YIZA tett AVAIT�IJ11Tttt�tt���tttt♦tt���t�t��ttt�ttttttteWeVtti•.t ��r &LLLL1././.1./,1,/,1,�lLI�,LLLLLLL 1.1.1,L1�L1.LL1.1.1.1.1,1.lL1.LLLLLQA I.LLLLLLLLI.I.LLI,LLA_I,L1,LL1.I.LLLLLLI.LI.1.L1.1.1.LLLL�.LLL1:•.A ��r .. Wall Construction ��=� 2"x 4"DF wall studs,16°0 C � 111111 IIIIII� ; 1/2"sheathing � �� jam Tyvecvapor bamer 3===11• Vinyl siding with 3/8"insulation isommi a� R-13 faced fiberglass Insulation ����� .= 1/2 sheet rock,taped and speckled omm=� 2°x 12"Floor Joists,16"O C Wall finish by homeowner a. -- I I i I "thick T&G plywood decking,glued y� _ I I I I and screwed I i I 1/2"sheetrock,taped and speckled ice 41 11111101=IMPP, nl 11•1111111 I ==mss l== -- _ l===1,. , ''II "M��■■■:■1■:■,■,■,■,■, ■,■l�■,.1.111•.,1I,■',■,■,■,■.1■h L °x 8"CCA treated deck j lists,16°O C I _' "x 6"#2 Cedar decking I d IMO 2'x 12"Floor joists,16°O.011141111 11,1111 Nallan i"thick T&G plywood decking,glued I, I and screwed I i I',11-:I R-19 faced fiberglass Insulationionem 12"x 8"CCA treated deck S L1 5/6"sheetrock,taped and speckled ' I Joists,16"0 C 3CaLI • ; 2"x6'#2Cedar decking wim IEr=L3iss I L 3 12"0 x X-0"deep concrete piers Use . .5 D — — Teco connection from CCA posts to new ■i ___,_ �4 r,1 1 I concrete piers i I I I I " s 'III' III "I r i t1i I I I i r. (3)1i"x 11 7/8°Microllam 2"x 10"CCA treated deck; I I IIII - LVL girder I Joists,16"0 C I I I I I I 1 I dia anchor bolts 2'x 6"it 2 Cedar decking! i i i I to H� I I I I I , 3 1/2"0 steel pipe column with to local code IIIIIII steel plated top and bottom r:......1••'t 1 o v i i L 1;,J m l y IIII i I 1 •;' 4"thick finish concrete slab with 6 x 6/ I I J I m o I I i I'•. 6 x 6 W WM over 6 and plastic over 3'-0"x 3'-0"x 1'-4"deep '% L�u—___,. I I i I I compacted fill concrete footing �� 2"thick rigid insulation 24°away from i i i I-..% foundation wall below slab and at foundation II i I i i ; walls around penmeter below grade 1 . • (711.1 — V ----a__.—...._..4. --- EINE MI 6"x 6"CCA treated 2'-0"x 1,_0„deep concrete Wall Construction su PP ort osts haunch continuous footing 2°x 4"DF wall studs,16"0 C P 5/8 F R sheet rock, 6'-0' 3,-0" and speckled,bothd D'-0' sides / 15'-0" • / • 35'-0" BOSection scale 1/4"=1'-0" 3 I I I --MEM � ■MMMO - ---- ---. IM-O ■---. ■---. .Ipppy. ---- . ■MMMT ---- ■MMM. ---- ■---. MUM NM.■MMM. MI-- ■MMM ---- ■MMMO MIME= ■___. ---- IMMM■ Mr -mq ■__�■ ���� :ja w�� IIIIIIIl II MB NM I iiI LI II mu lull NMImai =mu ,��, EMI NM.� =maw---- NNMI MI ImsEli Aw 404, _ Y ) ) 1 1 1 1 1 1 Ii1 I I r; I I I I I I I I I I 1I I I I I I I ) ( ) I I 1 II I j I I I 1 1 JI , I I I1 I ( ) ( ) 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 'I I I I' I I I If I I I I I I Ii1 I I r I II ( ) ( ) I I I I II I ' I L 1 J _ 6'-0" 30'-0" i 3'-0" 15'-0" 35'-0" / i OSide Elevation scale 1/4"=1'-0" 3 1 133 1 2 ther-, if it is his property. I have a quest'on on this map, here it doesn't show 3 where • he cesspool's going to go. It doesn't show wh-re the front steps o porch or back 4 steps gong to go. I built at least 20 houses in Southo d, and I was nev-r permitted to put 5 cesspools 'n the back of ' he house. Now, according to this, the cesspools are going 6 back in the '•ouse, nex, to my property. C" AIRWO AA OLIVA: Sir, I think 7 that is up to e B.=rd of Health and not up to this Board to d- ermine where the cesspools 8 are being placed. BOARD MBER GOEHRINGER: We're 9 not even close so -- C AIRWOMA OLIVA: We're not even 10 close to them .uilding = house. rOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: We don't 11 mean to be -arcastic yet\out -- MR. RATICAN: ,hat's all I have. 12 Thank you CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA.All in favor? 13 (Whereupon, all Board Members respond-4 in favor. ) 14 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Second and I. 15CHAIRWOMAN_ OLIVA: Next hearing is J. and C Holdings, Incorporated, Mrs. 16 Doll. It's been recessed since 12/1 we got a new letter from the soil and water 17 conservation. They actually replied rather favorably. Mrs. Wickham, good afternoon. 18 MS. WICKHAM: Good afternoon, Abigail Wickham for the applicant. 19 And yes, since the last hearing, several things have happened. Soil and water 20 has responded indicating a favorable review of the proposal with respect to bluff 21 drainage. You have received new maps which indicate the moving of the drain that had been 22 close to the bluff further towards the street and that drain will accommodate part of the 23 roof runoff, and there are other dry wells on the property that will accommodate the 24 driveway run off and the run off from the front part of the roof, front meaning water 25 side, actually the rear. You have also received._a-plan that (I::---- -,,,, December 18, 2003 i 134 1 2 shows the building that is proposed to be constructed. Frankly, I think it's kind of an 3 attractive home, and if you look at it, it is not imposing. It will be very modest and 4 being somewhat lower than street level, will not be a looming structure. 5 The survey shows that the side yards will be 26 feet on the west and 32 feet 6 on the east, those are the shortest dimensions; there are actually wider distances 7 because of the angle of the side lines. And so the house is fairly centered on the lot. 8 I'd like to call your attention to the fact that while there's a 50 foot setback from the 9 top of the bluff that is considerably less than the house to the east, and it is about as 10 far back from the bluff as can be obtained in order to have adequate setback from the street 11 to get the driveway in. The setback from the street is, 12 again, more than the house to the east, and I think that there's been an attempt to really 13 mitigate what are obviously concerns of drainage and impacts on the property. 14 I'd like to know if you have any particular questions that you'd like to 15 address that we haven't supplied to you? But I think that we have tried to accommodate your 16 requests and Mr. Fischetti is here to address some of the engineering concerns. 17 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Mrs. Tortora? BOARD MEMBER TORTORA: No, I think 18 a lot of the concerns have been addressed. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: I still think 19 the house is too big. MS. WICKHAM: Let me address that. 20 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: It's almost 3, 000 square feet. It's a pretty big house. 21 MS. WICKHAM: I have to disagree with you a lot of people building pretty 22 ridiculous lees big houses. On this particular plan, you will note that the ground 23 floor includes the garage, and the garage has been scaled back to an 18 foot width, which is 24 pretty minimal when you consider what a typical two car garage would be. You do need 25 however two car garage here because otherwise you're going to have a car in the driveway and December 18, 2003 135 1 2 there's just not adequate room on the property to provide turnaround and what not. And you 3 can't have cars backing in and out. So that first floor makes it a 47 foot width after you 4 take off the garage, and that I think is pretty modest. If you look at the front 5 elevation, which is facing the street, it really does not look like an imposing home. 6 There are windows on the water side coming off the first and second half-story on the top. 7 He's really scaled it down to a pretty bare minimum, and left a lot of the floor area open 8 on the first floor to take advantage of as much space as he can. Not a very big kitchen 9 with a dining room as part of it. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: From your 10 original plan I don't see that he's scaled the house down that much. Still 65 by 32 feet. 11 I'm very sensitive on to that bluff area. I really feel that a house more 2,200 to 2,500 12 square feet is more than enough. MS. WICKHAM: This is 2, 800. 13 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: That includes the second story, right? 14 MS. WICKHAM: That includes the second story. The first floor, without the 15 garage which is the way I'm told is they determine living is area, is under 1,700 16 square feet. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: The second 17 floor is supposed to be one and a half stories, so I would think that would be even 18 less than 1,188 square feet. MS. WICKHAM: That's the way the 19 actual square footage; he counted everything, and that's what it comes up as. 20 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: When you're done can I ask Mr. Fischetti a 21 question? MS. WICKHAM: I don't think you 22 can look at the house or even the elevation, or the height is under 31 feet. 23 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: The house is going to be 30 feet? 24 MS. WICKHAM: Under 31 feet. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: I'm not happy 25 with that. MS. WICKHAM: Since it's below the December 18, 2003 ) 136 1 2 street level, it's not going to be an imposing house by any means. 3 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Go ahead, Mr. Goehringer. 4 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Can I ask Mr. Fischetti a question? 5 MS. WICKHAM: Please. MR. FISCHETTI: Joseph Fischetti. 6 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: You've been before this Board many times and the most 7 recent was the Mattituck situation on the bluff that is not on the water, where we had 8 some significant washing away. There was an awful lot more sand there than there is, I 9 think, in this location. The question is -- and this is for my own personal -- I see a 10 retaining wall made out of railroad ties -- I may have asked you this question before, but 11 not necessarily on the site -- what is actually holding up that railroad tie wall? 12 MR. FISCHETTI: : The weight of the soil on the retaining wall itself. 13 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Not like in Mattituck where you drove pilings in back 14 of it? MR. FISCHETTI: Not at all. What 15 we're doing here is a standard retaining wall. They're four foot high we have dead men, which 16 are four foot deep. BOARD MEMBER ORLANDO: Horizontal. 17 MR. FISCHETTI: They're connected to the wall. 18 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: But there are pilings driven into those dead 19 men. MR. FISCHETTI: Most of the time 20 it's the horizontal. It's the angle of repose of the soil that you're using. It's the 21 weight of the dead men to hold everything together. Very different than that other 22 area. What we're doing here is a very limited retaining wall. The retaining walls are only 23 there to change the grade. We're there to try to stop that depression that's in there now 24 where all the soil is going to. So what the retaining walls are doing only holding up four 25 foot of soil. It's there to change the grade; it's not to hold up all this soil behind it December 18, 2003 137 1 2 like it was before. We had to do that to make sure that everything was above impacting that. 3 We're trying to change the grade eight feet in that area, bringing it up in four foot 4 intervals. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Doing that 5 whole retaining wall on the west side too? MR. FISCHETTI: That's correct. 6 It starts at four foot, then it will end up getting smaller as it goes to the end, but 7 it's there to change the grade to bring that grade up. If you notice at the low point in 8 that area where there's a low point it says 74, and the grade changes slightly. Then it 9 goes to 76 and the bottom of the lowest retaining wall is 79. Then it goes up four 10 feet to 83 this's the first level. That's what's built first. That's the first 11 retaining wall that will be built on that site. When we go down -- one of you last 12 meeting wanted to know construction processes, and really what happens is we would go in 13 there and build that first retaining wall. Most of it will be done by hand. 14 There's not much change of grade, four feet. The lower level will be put in and the 15 retaining wall will be put in with no fill, and then what happens is we'll start taking 16 the soil from the top where the next retaining wall would be, bring it down to the first one; 17 then now we've got the next one leveled to the lower level; and we build the next one up four 18 feet. Then once that's built up, we have the soil where the house is gets pushed in and 19 that gets filled in. All of those will be done prior; that will be done mostly handwork 20 I don't think there's any need for machine work except maybe small machines to carry the 21 retaining walls, whatever they use, the bobcats, and mostly it's by hand. 22 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: How are you going to clear that lot, it's a mess? 23 MR. FISCHETTI: It gets cleared. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: You have to 24 take some big machinery in there? MR. FISCHETTI: Not really. A lot 25 of it is chipping. I really doesn't do an extensive, but whatever, that gets done first. December 18, 2003 4 138 1 2 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: I know that. MR. FISCHETTI: Whatever the 3 retaining wall is has to be cleared. Most of it is not that, that's all scrub brush in that 4 area. What happens is now you have that depression in there. So the first thing that 5 gets is those two retaining walls and minor clearing to get the equipment in, whatever. 6 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: It's a stupid question, but that great big hole that's 7 there, all that dirt that's been pushed there put back into that big hole; what's done with 8 that? MR. FISCHETTI: The hole was there 9 for the sanitary system. It really has no bearing. The whole site is balance, cut and 10 fill. Not bringing any soil in. You asked that question last time. 11 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: I did. MR. FISCHETTI: If you notice the 12 east side of the house is sitting inside the slope and the west side is sitting out. What 13 happens is all that soil on the east side gets pushed to where the retaining walls are to 14 level that site. So that's why the retaining walls get built first. The site gets cleared 15 and leveled. So I really didn't do an analysis of the whole of the pit, but that all 16 gets filled in and everything gets put back again. 17 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: What is your opinion in reference to the distance 18 between the retaining walls? MR. FISCHETTI: Four feet, it's 19 standard, between the lower one and the upper one, that's all you need. And I've done steps 20 up three or four even that way. BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Of 21 course I have grass growing or some sort of soil retention the minute that's done. 22 MR. FISCHETTI: You mean on the levels? You could put them there, there's a 23 slight pitch on them, basically level. You could put grass or any kind of vegetation to 24 grow in there. Again, it's level. It's not getting eroded. There's no place for it to 25 erode to because the retaining wall itself is there to hold it back. You could put ground December 18, 2003 139 1 2 covers, plantings. BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Wood 3 chips. MR. FISCHETTI: That's your 4 question. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Mrs. Tortora? 5 BOARD MEMBER TORTORA: No questions. 6 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Mr. Orlando. BOARD MEMBER ORLANDO: Not for 7 Mr. Fischetti but for Miss Wickham. I was not present for the last public hearing, but I was 8 briefed on it. I was under the impression, I was told that the house is going to be 9 reduced. I don't see it. It was a 32 by 65. It's still 32 by 65. 10 MS. WICKHAM: It was originally going to be a two story center hall colonial, 11 and that was kind of an imposing structure. He did cut that back. 12 BOARD MEMBER ORLANDO: The footprint of the house? 13 MS. WICKHAM: Is essentially the same, yeah, it is the same, yes. And just 14 given the size of the house, the size of the. side yards, you're not anywhere near the side 15 yards in terms of maximum size. You're well within the side yard requirements. And to 16 make a house less than 32 feet is going to be a little bit difficult. If you're concerned 17 about the width of the house, 65 feet. BOARD MEMBER ORLANDO: I'm not 18 concerned, I was just was under the impression -- 19 MS. WICKHAM: I talked to him about it. He spent a lot of time. He had a 20 whole plan done, and this is what he felt made sense for the property in terms of what was 21 reasonable given a moderate size house. It's not one of these mansions that people are 22 coming up with. It's 2,800 square feet of living area. It's modest. 23 BOARD MEMBER ORLANDO: I was just making a comment and because it said it was 24 being reduced. MS. WICKHAM: We were asked to 25 consider it, and we did consider it. It's certainly a better plan. December 18, 2003 140 1 2 BOARD MEMBER ORLANDO: How many square feet was the original house; do you 3 recall? My original paperwork does not show a plan either. 4 MS. WICKHAM: He didn't have one, but he was thinking of more of a two story. 5 MS. KOWALSKI: Probably the same square foot or so. 6 MS. WICKHAM: He didn't have a specific plan when I was here the last time 7 that we would come up with the conceptual plan. 8 BOARD MEMBER ORLANDO: No further questions from me. 9 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Mrs. Wickham, you still couldn't take another five feet off, 10 maybe six feet? MS. WICKHAM: Believe me, I have 11 been up and down. Unfortunately he's out of town today and couldn't be here. But I did 12 examine him very, very closely on that. And he said when you start doing that the layout 13 is not working, this man is a builder and he knows how to deal with houses and get things 14 to move. With the garage on that first floor, I think he put a small study or something 15 behind it just to fill up the space, but basically the first floor is 47 feet wide. 16 BOARD MEMBER ORLANDO: Is he building a custom house for a client or is 17 this just a spec house? MS. WICKHAM: He would be building 18 this basic house whether there would be a slight change on the interior, I can't say, 19 but basically this is the house. BOARD MEMBER ORLANDO: He's not 20 building it for a particular family? MS. WICKHAM: I don't know. 21 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Is it a spec house? 22 MS. WICKHAM: I think he may because he did get this plan together. 23 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Let's see if there's anybody else in the audience. Thank 24 you, Mrs. Wickham. , - i MS. SOMERS: My name is Ley 25 Hill Somers. I'm the abutting property to the west. December 18, 2003 141 1 2 First I want to thank everybody for allowing this to be deferred for one month 3 because I wasn't able to attend, I was out of town last month. 4 I have three major concerns that I wanted to address and just get some feedback 5 on. My first one concern is the height and safety and the aesthetics of the retaining 6 walls. From the plans, the retaining walls appear to be three feet from my property line. 7 And the retaining wall appears to be, although I can't exactly tell, appears to be roughly 60 8 feet or so, right along my property line, three feet from the property line. And it is, 9 while it is called a two tiered retaining wall, and each one is four feet, that is 10 essentially eight feet of wall, three feet from my property, 60 feet or so long, which I 11 think is a little excessive. The second point on the retaining 12 walls, if I look at the contour lines, the retaining wall at the bluff south side hit the 13 74 retaining wall, 74 sea wall, and the one on the driveway side hits 92 feet. So that's a 14 difference of 18 feet. So, I want to make sure I understand, if the retaining walls are 15 four feet and four feet or eight feet high at the bluff side and the difference is 18 feet, 16 what happens to the other ten feet; is the property sloping down; is the property level, 17 so that the retaining walls have to be actually more than two four foot ones at the 18 bluff side, because our dwelling has sliding glass doors that look out on the retaining 19 wall, and the retaining wall is three sides; so the view from our window here, which is all 20 windows, goes directly out onto two four foot or essentially eight feet wall of retaining. 21 So I just don't understand the depth. Does that mean that they are taking away ten feet 22 from the bluff? I mean, ten feet from the inside and moving that down to create that 23 this eight foot retaining wall. Or the difference of eight feet, how is that handled? 24 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Mr. Fischetti. MR. FISCHETTI: Do you want me to 25 answer it now? CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Yes. December 18, 2003 142 1 2 MR. FISCHETTI: If you notice the top, the upper -- the lower wall, the lowest 3 part of the lower wall has elevation of 79 and the top of the lower wall is 83 . 4 MS. SOMERS: My map shows 74 could you show me where 79? 5 MR. FISCHETTI: 74 is a change in grade; that's not a retaining wall down there. 6 MS. SOMERS: The contour line. MR. FISCHETTI: Yes, that's a 7 change in the contour; that's not a retaining wall. Then it goes the next contour line 8 changes to the 76 foot contour line, and that's a slight -- so we're going from 74 to 9 79. 79 is the bottom of the wall, the bottom of the lower wall is 79, okay? 10 MS. SOMERS: No, on the drawing that I'm looking at, which may be down level 11 the retaining wall crosses the 74 contour line. 12 MR. FISCHETTI: Yes, it does. MS. KOWALSKI: I think she wants 13 to know what's the difference between the 79 grade and the 79 foot to the bottom. 14 BOARD MEMBER ORLANDO: When she looks out her window how far above grade? 15 MR. FISCHETTI: The retaining wall's only four foot above ground. It's only 16 four foot high, each level is only four foot. MS. KOWALSKI: Is it filled? 17 MR. FISCHETTI: Below it it's filled from 74 to 79, yeah, that hole, which 18 is a hole there, is filled five feet. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: But four foot 19 that she can see -- MR. FISCHETTI: It's only four 20 foot. The retaining wall's only four foot high. So what happens is initially that hole 21 where the 74 is gets filled up to the bottom of 79. That little hole, there's a little 22 hole depression in there gets filled up to 79 to try to level the bottom to get to the 23 steps, the bottom of the elevation of 79, which is the bottom of the wall. So we go to 24 79, that bottom of the wall, the last grade line that that wall hits on the east side is 25 80. If you notice it ends at 80. This end at 80 or 81 I'm sorry. December 18, 2003 143 1 2 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: 81. MR. FISCHETTI: So 79 to 81 it 3 dives into that side. So now we continue that, we actually the bottom of the retaining 4 wall continues along going west at 79, goes around it's at 79; you'll see it hits towards 5 the western property line. It hits a 76, so it was three foot fill in there slightly to 6 build it up you'll see the grade line continuing around to 78; and then that new 7 contour line ends right there 'cause now it hits the actual 79. So the bottom of the 8 first wall is 79. MS. KOWALSKI: What would the top 9 of the wall be from grade? MR. FISCHETTI: Four foot higher. 10 MS. KOWALSKI: No from the top of the 74 foot contour grade that's there now. 11 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Filling in the back of it. 12 MR. FISCHETTI: Yes, it's nine feet higher than 74. The top of the wall is 13 79. MS. KOWALSKI: I'm just saying it 14 relates to the water view. MR. FISCHETTI: The top of the 15 wall is 83 . It's only a four foot wall. It's not a nine foot wall. 16 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: All the way across it's four foot above grade. 17 MR. FISCHETTI: Underneath there's some areas of fill there was a hole there that 18 has to be hand filled and leveled so we can get into it. Once that first wall is done, 19 then it's leveled four feet away from it, and the next wall you see starts at the top of the 20 old wall. So the top of the first wall is 79 and the bottom of the upper wall is 79, goes 21 to 83, and it just steps it up. So, yes, she will see two walls that are four foot on that 22 side. Now, understand that you have an erosion problem here. If we didn't build a 23 house, you would have to do this to stop the erosion because you want the erosion to pitch 24 backwards. So whatever you do in there, you can't do it without some kind of fill and some 25 kind of retaining wall. So either you're going to leave, you don't build in there and December 18, 2003 144 1 2 leave it as a natural soil, eventually it will wash out and eventually lose everything in 3 there in who knows how many years. And the solution to stop the erosion and which 4 everybody was concerned about and now people are saying, we're not concerned about that; he 5 doesn't want to build that retaining wall. It costs $20, 000, $30, 000 to build that. He's 6 doing that to save that erosion that's in there now, plantings along that side can 7 mitigate the view of that wall. BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: That's 8 exactly why I asked that question. BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Both 9 planting the walls and on the tier? MR. FISCHETTI: Yes, you have four 10 feet to plant in front of it, and plant in between. In front of them can be planted if 11 that's a concern, that could be mitigated that way, and then you couldn't, wouldn't see a 12 retaining wall. And I've seen just ivy, I've seen retaining walls planted with ivy, after a 13 while you don't see retaining walls. I've been a builder for 30 years myself, and this 14 house is modest at 2, 800 square feet, that's living area. Some of the stuff that's being 15 built now is talking about 5, 000, 6, 000, 7,000 square feet. When I built a big house it was 16 in the 4,000 square foot range. This house is modest and reducing it five feet, it would 17 make everybody feel better, but it really is not going to mitigate anything. If we reduced 18 it five feet. What it would do is constrict the floor plan of the house. There's certain 19 modules that you work with modules of bedrooms, living rooms and modules of garages, 20 normal two car garage for a reasonable house is usually 24 by 24. This is 18 by 18. He's 21 kept everything to a minimum. It is a one and a half story house. It's a very modest house. 22 In the front it looks like a ranch. It's modest in the back as well. 23 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Does that answer your questions? 24 MS. SOMERS: So the question really was so they're taking ten feet of soil, 25 away from the upper driveway portion and moving it to the lower so it's level. December 18, 2003 145 1 2 MR. FISCHETTI: We will use the upper area for soil. To make the site 3 reasonable level. Actually, the front of the house, the soil slopes from front to back but 4 in essence, the soil on the east side will be brought to the west side to bring a rough 5 grade of 79 in the back and in the front 91. MS. SOMERS: So in essence, it's 6 roughly around 90 feet the total level where the house is? 7 MR. FISCHETTI: Yes. On the right side where the grades are to the right side of 8 the house it does go up to about 96. So some of that 96 will be cut. 9 MS. SOMERS: I still want to state my concern, three feet from my property 10 line I have lovely levels, two levels pointing to eight feet of wall, and it goes over 70 11 feet right to my property line. I'm concerned about how that is going to be, how the 12 retaining wall will be reenforced. MR. FISCHETTI: The retaining 13 walls are built standard, that every retaining wall will have a dead man tieback. It's 14structurally sound, standard procedure to build it. Yes, you will see eight foot of 15 wall if it's not planted. MS. SOMERS: My second question 16 was related to the height. The house picture that was in the file is 30 feet high, and that 17 is on top of the eight feet from my property. So this house will be 38 feet high from my 18 property level, which does, if you beg my pardon, I consider to be kind of towering, 38 19 feet. The second question was the stability of the bluff. Given the weight of the 20 transfer of the fill from one side of the property to the other side, do you know how 21 much fill in square yards or cube yards or what the weight of that has to get transferred 22 to the road side to the bluff side to make this property level? 23 MR. FISCHETTI: It comes down to the angle of repose of the bluff. When the 24 soil has a normal stability, an angle, anything below that angle is stable, anything 25 placed above that angle makes it unstable. So anything placed below that angle makes the December 18, 2003 146 1 2 soil more stable, not less stable; anything placed above that line makes it unstable. 3 Right now this bluff is at its angle of repose, and if that line continued from the 4 top, all the construction and all the material is placed below the angel of repose. So it 5 has no bearing, no effect except making the bluff below it more stable because it's adding 6 weight to it. It's not making it unstable. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Miss Wickham, 7 did you get a permit from the Trustees? MS. WICKHAM: There's a letter of 8 nonjurisdiction from -- back from the previous application, I believe. If you don't have it 9 in your file, I have a copy and I will submit it to you. 10 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Thank you. MS. SOMERS: I had one last 11 question. How deep are the dry wells expected to be? 12 MR. FISCHETTI: Actually, they're probably about eight feet deep. 13 MS. SOMERS: So if the dry wells are eight feet deep, and the walls in which 14 the dry well is contained is eight feet, that means the dry well will empty out level with 15 my property; is that correct, eight feet, eight feet? 16 MR. FISCHETTI: No. Basically, the water will basically drain straight down. 17 it is sandy soil and it won't go horizontal. It will drain straight down. 18 MS. SOMERS: Even in -- what is the soil composition at eight feet; do you 19 know? MR. FISCHETTI: Again, it's all 20 sandy soil. MS. SOMERS: So I should have no 21 concern that the dry wells will provide any extra runoff on my property at all because of 22 the depth of the dry wells being consistent with this eight foot wall, eight foot dry 23 well. MR. FISCHETTI: Not at all. 24 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Is there a clay layer there? 25 MR. FISCHETTI: Yes, there is some clay. It's sandy clay. It's not silty December 18, 2003 147 1 2 clay. It's still permeable and the soil all of that material will go down. 3 MS. SOMERS: Because the problem is this little depression that's mostly on our 4 side of the property line goes down to like 68 feet contour. So I'm kind of concerned given 5 the top of the property is 92 feet, and is the bottom is 72 or 68, sorry, that anything that 6 would -- so I shouldn't worry about any water runoff? 7 MS. WICKHAM: The drain is well back from that point. 8 MR. FISCHETTI: It's not even close. And this is not a lot of water. This 9 is just the roof runoff. This is the same amount of water that would be there if it 10 normally rained. What's happening is just it's just being contained. It's not 11 additional water. It's the standard runoff that would happen at that point. 12 MS. SOMERS: Can I request that we reconsider the retaining wall being three 13 feet from my property line at eight feet tall? MS. WICKHAM: If you're finished, 14 can I address that? If you're finished. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Go ahead. 15 MS. WICKHAM: First of all, I just want to respond to one point she made and 16 clarify that an adjoining owner does not have the right to a water view over the neighbor's 17 property. She has 150 feet of her own, but that being said, let me just indicate to you 18 the mitigating factors on this retaining wall. I don't think they're going to be as ominous 19 from her point of view as she may be concerned about. 20 First of all, her house is 55 feet, and there is vegetation there. Second 21 of all, the retaining wall will not be -- the first one, the outside one -- will not be four 22 feet height for the whole distance of the 50 feet. It goes into the hill. So it's not 23 going to be standing up. The neighbor could put a four foot fence all the way along that 24 side yard, which would probably be uglier, but this is a recessed planted retaining wall. 25 And portion of the retaining wall opposite her house is actually angled away from her house. December 18, 2003 148 1 2 So that's not going to be nearly as obvious as it being right up against the side yard. 3 The second inside retaining wall, again, is further recessed, it will be 4 planted, and it's not going to be four feet above the ground the whole distance. I'd also 5 like to point out that the entire proposed house is behind the location of her house. So 6 there's not going to be an impact, I think, to the extent that she is concerned about. 7 Basically, just trying to level off and ameliorate the runoff that's really decimating 8 that property right now. BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: That's 9 why we're going to request -- suggest the buffering. And we'll reserve the right to 10 review it. MS. WICKHAM: That's fine. I 11 don't know what precisely you have in mind, but I would suggest plantings between the two 12 retaining walls perhaps in the nature of a perennial that would overgrow the lower 13 retaining wall and upper retaining to camouflage it in some way. Or, do you want to 14 put plantings on the ground in front of it? I don't know if that's environmentally sound. I 15 would think -- BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Where 16 the retaining wall is the most blatant looking at it's lowest point to plant plantings 17 there. MS. WICKHAM: Yes. We would do 18 plantings there and get someone who can tell us what's going to be best in terms of -- 19 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Probably rosa rugosa. 20 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Or you can ask Cornell what would be best. 21 MS. WICKHAM: We would be advantage willing to accept that condition. I 22 think that would be in their best interest make sure that bluff stays stable. 23 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: It's only going to add to the stability of the 24 whole thing. MS. WICKHAM: Exactly. I have no 25 problem with that. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Any other December 18, 2003 149 1 2 questions from the audience? Yes, sir. MR. HESTLY: Who's liable if it's 3 not stable? CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Come to the 4 mike give your name, please. MR. HESTLY: My name is Chris 5 Hestly. I'm the adjoining property owner to the east side. I'm very concerned about the 6 fill is going to come off the slope adjacent to mine, to fill the other side of the 7 property. I'm wondering who -- say this doesn't work, this retaining wall and 8 everything, who's committed to this property that's still going to be here five years from 9 now? Is anybody in this room? Because I'm going to be here five years from now and I'm 10 pretty convinced that there wasn't an erosion problem before that lot got cleared. It was 11 built up with trees and lots of underbrush, and it was totally stable. And now 12 everybody's talking about, everybody's concerned about erosion. Now we build a 13 retaining wall, we were concerned about erosion after the lot got cleared out. 14 Anyways, so I'm concerned about the fill coming from my side, the east side, 15 and I'd like to hear something about that, and going to the other side, how's that going to 16 happen? What's the grade going to look like coming off my property on that side now? I 17 also have to say, just like what I said last time. These are huge variances I don't 18 understand why they just are allowed to happen. I think it's really kind of horrible 19 because I don't understand why these guidelines are in place, if they're just 20 rubber stamped. Just like that attorney said before, you guys are rubber stamping if you 21 allow anything this big to go in there. It's really like the laws or the guidelines are 22 very far from being what that drawing's about. 23 Also, I'd like to state that we back out of our driveway. There's no garage. 24 Most of the houses up there don't have garages. So if all this extra room is being 25 taken to justify having a garage, I think the garage should be reconsidered. December 18, 2003 150 1 2 Also, somebody was comparing my house, which is to the east, to this house in 3 terms of building on that property, and we're closer to the bluff. But we're also on top of 4 the hill. This is being built on a slope. It's an entirely different situation. We're 5 up on the crest of a hill. It's stable. It's got rocks underneath it. 6 Just thought I would bring that point up. They're not at all similar. You 7 can't look at them and say you've got this much room, the house on the east has this much 8 room away from the bluff -- it's on top of the bluff. 9 Somebody made a comparison about these big houses being built all around here, 10 well Brown's Hills doesn't have any 5, 000 or 6, 000 square foot houses. We've got a very 11 beautiful little community and we'd like to keep it that way. So a 5, 000 or 6,000 square 12 foot house would be like three times bigger than the biggest house up there. This house 13 relative to the other houses up there is big, this proposed house. 14 I would also like to just state before this that I'm a little concerned about 15 the sensitivity of the builder and the people involved in this, because somebody had a 16 survey done, and they cut through my property. They cut a path through the underbrush. They 17 macheted through and sawed through on my trees and everything. So I really hope that when 18 something's agreed to -- I guess what I'm concerned about is, say we agree to a proposed 19 plan or whatever, who's to say that if that plan changes from what it is when it's 20 actually built, what do we do about that then? Is there any recourse at that point? When the 21 building starts, what happens? CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Building 22 inspectors usually come out and inspect at various stages of the construction to make 23 sure, first of all, that the foundation is exactly in the place that we have agreed to, 24 because there have been times when the foundation have been placed in someplace other 25 than what the Board has decreed, and we have made them change it. December 18, 2003 151 1 2 MR. HESTLY: What about porches and stuff like that? 3 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: He does have to come back again for a variance for anything 4 because it would be too close. MR. HESTLY: Okay. 5 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: We don't look too favorably on that at this type of a 6 construction. MR. HESTLY: Especially because 7 the variances are highly extreme already in my opinion as a property owner. 8 I guess that's all I have to say. Thank you. 9 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Thank you. Is there anybody else? Yes, ma'am. 10 MS. MORGAN: Mary Morgan, I live in Brown's Hills. I spoke at the meeting 11 before and I just wanted to reiterate that it is a small property with a deep ravine and I 12 am concerned about the runoff and what's going to happen there, and also this being a builder 13 and the fact that we don't know -- it isn't someone who loves this area and loves this 14 property and really wants to build a nice, sensitive little house on this lot, which 15 again, is like a negative building envelope, there's not much room there, but a small, 16 nice, little house could be built. Nobody who's in that category of being interested in 17 being a good neighbor with all of us has stepped forward, no one's approached our 18 association. It's just a lovely, sensitive, little house could be built there with very -- 19 not these huge variances, and I don't see what seems to be driving the fact that somebody's 20 got to build this big house is that the property's very high. If they would sell it 21 for less, somebody could build something smaller and more sensitive. That makes sense 22 to me. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Thank you. Is 23 there anybody else wishes to comment? Any Boards members that are left? 24 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: I unfortunately have to get going. I apologize. 25 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: So do I. MS. WICKHAM: Could I just respond December 18, 2003 152 1 2 to something? I'll be brief. First of all, front yard variance 3 is not significant. And front and back together, while it may be a lot, is really 4 minimal, I think, particularly when you look at adjoining properties whether you're at the 5 top of the bluff or part way down, it's proximity to the bluff that we're concerned 6 about. There is a house that is located just on the other side of one of these to the west, 7 which is 73 feet long, that is the Tax Lot 5. The house on the other side, Tax Lot 3, as I 8 read the town assessor's card is 93 feet long. So again, yes, it's a small lot, but I don't 9 think th side yards is what's the problem here. Everything has tried to be mitigated, 10 and I think he really has designed a nice house that we would be willing to adhere to 11 conditions. MS. SOMERS: Can I make one more 12 comment? CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Yes. Please go 13 to the mike. MS. SOMERS: I just looked at the 14 drawing again and noticed there's five feet before the first floor starts and then there's 15 25 feet of house and again, just the concern that while the 30 foot height doesn't sound 16 like a lot when you 30 feet to the eight feet of wall, I'm concerned about it, and I don't 17 know what value it brings that house to have that five feet. I don't know if that's 18 something that was brought up before. But it seems to me that's five feet that doesn't 19 bring any value but brings 38 foot from the base property that could be potentially -- 20 MR. FISCHETTI: That drawing is not truly -- it doesn't show grade. If you 21 look at the site plan, you'll notice there's the two in the front, it says PG, that's 22 proposed grade in the front is 91. The finished floor elevation is 93, so that means 23 the grade in the front is a two foot differential on the grade in the front. The 24 back, there's a PG in the back is 87. So it's a six foot in the back because, again, we're 25 trying to mitigate the little bit of elevation in the front. December 18, 2003 153 1 2 MS. KOWALSKI: Date on that plan, Joe? 3 MR. FISCHETTI: Excuse me? MS. KOWALSKI: What's the date on 4 that plan? MR. FISCHETTI: The maps are the 5 same. MS. KOWALSKI: I think the map we 6 gave her -- MS. WICKHAM: December 11th. 7 MR. FISCHETTI: Proposed grade in the front is 91, and it says that's FFL, 8 that's finished floor elevation is 93; that's what those words mean. 9 MS. SOMERS: Could you translate for me? From the base of my property, how 10 tall does this house go? MR. FISCHETTI: What is your base, 11 76? MS. SOMERS: 78 is the 12 midpoint. MR. FISCHETTI: We're basically a 13 grade in the back of ten feet higher. MS. SOMERS: From the top of the 14 roof to the bottom of my property at the midpoint 78, how many feet is it? Cause this 15 says that it's 38. That's not right. MS. WICKHAM: It's 81 feet away 16 from your house at least. BOARD MEMBER ORLANDO: From the 17 ridge of her house to her average grades. MS. WICKHAM: What was the first 18 part? BOARD MEMBER ORLANDO: She wants 19 to know from the ridge of her house to average grades. 20 MS. WICKHAM: 118 would be. MS. KOWALSKI: 118 minus 78 leaves 21 her 40. " MS. WICKHAM: It's 80 some feet 22 away, behind the house. That's the topography of the property. 23 BOARD MEMBER ORLANDO: 40 feet, four story building. 24 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: That's a lot. MS. WICKHAM: 31 feet to the ridge 25 line. BOARD MEMBER ORLANDO: We didn't December 18, 2003 154 1 2 say that, 40 feet. MS. WICKHAM: That's because her 3 property is lower. And the house is behind her house. 4 MS. SOMERS: It's not really because my property is lower per se, it's 5 because you're filling up eight feet. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Yes, sir. Real 6 quick because I've got to go. MR. MORGAN: Very briefly, Tom 7 Morgan, Brown's Hills. These are not huge variances? There is a negative building 8 envelope according to the setbacks. I don't want to deny somebody the right to build on 9 their property, but there's a negative -- you start with less than nothing and anything is a 10 huge variance beyond that. In addition, to which when we were building, and it was only a 11 couple of years ago, I was told that the height of the house that we were allowed to 12 build was based upon -- I said what's the starting point, what's the ground point? 13 Well, that's the mean level of the property, goes to 80 to 100 feet. So we had to conform 14 as though it were in the middle of that. Now this goes from 0 to 92 or something like that, 15 doesn't it? Or does it count from where the bluff begins? 16 MR. FISCHETTI: It's average. MR. MORGAN: So -- 17 BOARD MEMBER ORLANDO: Is says average natural grade is 81. 18 MR. MORGAN: Where does that 36 -- BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: It's the 19 height of the house. MR. MORGAN: At what level is the 20 house first floor? MR. FISCHETTI: The first floor 21 elevation, first floor is 93. First floor elevation is 93. 22 MR. MORGAN: Does this not exceed the height? 23 MR. FISCHETTI: I'm not sure the question he asked me -- the code says you have 24 to compute that maximum height of 34 feet from the average elevation all around. We're 25 talking about it's sloped down, so you're starting from the right side of the house December 18, 2003 155 1 2 starts to 92 and it goes to 82. So it's 85, 87, that's the average. 3 BOARD MEMBER ORLANDO: It's written down 81 it's your drawing. 4 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: You know the problem, Mr. Fischetti, the problem is 5 that everybody is visualizing as a suspension, as opposed to the relationship of the lady's 6 property that spoke that's sitting in back of you and the relationship of the road. If we 7 knew the relationship of the house to the road, we would then be able to understand, I 8 think, what the height differential would be. I'm just throwing that out. We're throwing 9 numbers out left and right here, and there's no mean, the mean that we have here, because 10 the lady in back of you has multitopography, but the roads should the mean, and that's the 11 problem. MS. WICKHAM: The middle of the 12 road, if I can answer that question, is about 92, in the middle of the property at the road. 13 So the house is going to be just under that at the ground floors elevation is 91. 14 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Is that first floor finished plan is 92. 15 MR. FISCHETTI: Finished floor elevation is 93. 16 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: That's about even with the road then? 17 MS. WICKHAM: Yes, it's not going to be looming. 18 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: that answers the question because now we have a 19 norm to deal with. Ma'am. MS. SOMERS: I can only assess 20 the quality of looming from where I sit, and from where I sit it's 40 feet. 21 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: I was not referring to your property being 22 multi-topographical. I was merely referring to it as the hole that exists on the one side. 23 I know your property is much more level than that. No way was I degrading the property. I 24 just wanted you to be aware of that CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: If there's no 25 other comments, I will have a motion to close the hearing and reserve decision until later. December 18, 2003 156 1 2 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Second. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: All in favor? 3 (Whereupon, all Board Members responded in favor. ) 4 (Time ended: 4 :55 p.m.) 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 December 18, 2003 157 1 2 3 CERTIFICATION 4 5 I, Florence V. Wiles, Notary Public for 6 the State of New York, do hereby certify: 7 THAT the within transcript is a true 8 record of the testimony given. 9 I further certify that I am not related by 10 blood or marriage, to any of the parties to 11 this action; and 12 THAT I am in no way interested in the 13 outcome of this matter. 14 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my 15 hand this 18th day of December, 2003. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Florence V. Wiles 23 24 25 December 18, 2003 li4 29 2 and reserve decision until later. BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Second. 3 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: All in favor. (Whereupon, all Board members 4 responded in favor. ) 5 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: The next hearing is J & C Holdings, this is for an application 6 for a new house on North View Drive in Orient. BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: I think 7 they're outside. They're all outside. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Miss Wickham, 8 are you here to speak on J & C Holdings? Before you just begin, we have sent this 9 application to the Cullen water people for their comments. They were unable to get 10 through that mess that's up there, and I have since sent them Mr. Fischetti's engineering 11 drawing of what's there. I cannot walk through that piece of property. I would 12 request that the applicant make some sort of path that we could review this property before 13 we make any decisions. You cannot get through that. 14 MS. WICKHAM: I don't think he'll have a problem with it. 15 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: I walked all around it. Mr. Goehringer walked all around 16 it. I know it's a deep ravine and I'm terribly concerned about it. Environmentally 17 it's an extremely sensitive piece. That bluff has not been in good condition for many years. 18 Part of it maybe 20 years ago fell in the drink from a house, and I can't get down. I 19 don't know if there's any stairs down. MR. FICHETTI: Joseph Fichetti, 20 engineer. Ruth, where would you like the clearing to go? 21 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: I would like to be able to walk down into that. 22 MR. FICHETTI: Towards that ravine area? 23 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Yes. I'm concerned with that big block of dirt that's 24 pushed in there, and that huge hole in the ground that is extreme safety concern for me 25 to any kids that might come up there, even though probably they don't, if they ever fell November 20, 2003 30 1 2 in that hole it would be the end of them. MS. WICKHAM: I do want to note 3 that the actual ravine is on the neighboring property to the west, at least on the contour 4 maps I don't know that we would have the authority to go into that. You want to be 5 able to access down? CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: I've looked at 6 the neighbor, I went and I walked the neighboring lot too, which does dip down, but 7 this one, if you go to the west and I walk down there, there is a ravine there but it 8 continues down even into your lot and I certainly can't walk down there with that 9 shrub and brush without tearing myself apart, and if I break a leg down there, I'll 10 certainly not get out either. MS. WICKHAM: May I come up? This 11 is the map we have, and if you notice, the actual ravine is on the neighbor's property. 12 We can clear a path right along here that would allow you to see down into it. If you 13 would like us to ask the neighbor for consent. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: This is Mrs. 14 Doll, and I believe she owns the lot or did own the lot. 15 MS. WICKHAM: She no longer does. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: But this dips 16 here and further into here, and this is your lot (indicating) . 17 MS. WICKHAM: See these contours indicate the dip is on this side (indicating) . 18 I'm happy to clear it. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Dips here and 19 even further here because I walked it. MS. WICKHAM: We can certainly do 20 that. I don't want to create a ravine where water goes down. There is a screen to the 21 east of this property where I'm sure the water does go down. Okay. We will do that and let 22 you know and if you would like, maybe not me, but my client to accompany you. 23 BOARD MEMBER TORTORA: Can I say something? 24 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Yes, Mrs. Tortora. 25 BOARD MEMBER TORTORA: Okay, let me just try to not spill my coffee all over November 20, 2003 E.- 1 . 31 1 2 your application. There are two variance requests here? 3 MS. WICKHAM: Yes. BOARD MEMBER TORTORA: The first 4 is for a deviation from the front yard requirement from 50 to 43? 5 MS. WICKHAM: 43 feet. BOARD MEMBER TORTORA: The second 6 is a deviation from the hundred foot setback requirement to -- and this is what is not 7 quite clear -- 50 feet? MS. WICKHAM: Yes. To the 8 northeast corner of the proposed house and that's shown on here. 9 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: I see that. BOARD MEMBER TORTORA: I just 10 wanted to get that. I also noted that there are a number of requests for delays on this 11 hearing. I saw your response to them this morning. We did not, obviously, we did not 12 delay the hearing; it's being held, but it would probably be adjourned. 13 MS. WICKHAM: I can see that already from the request. As long as we get 14 started today, see what you need in terms of additional information and -- 15 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Also your house is going to be 32 feet by 65 feet, that's a 16 two-story house? MS. WICKHAM: It's one and-a-half 17 story house. What that means is a full first floor and a second floor where there would be 18 0 bedrooms with sloping ceilings. So it will not be a full-blown, two-story house. 19 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Could we get ' the plans for the house? 20 MS. WICKHAM: I believe Mr. Hertado has a conceptual concept. He 21 doesn't have specific plans but I asked him to bring a conceptual plan so that you could see 22 it's not going to be a big, looming structure. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: I'd also like to 23 know what material he's going to be building with, because I know his other buildings up at 24 Grand View are very heavy and I would prefer seeing something a lot lighter, and I cannot 25 see a big house on that piece of property. MS. WICKHAM: I agree with you. November 20, 2003 32 1 2 The siding is going to be cedar shake, that he would be willing to specify. What in addition 3 do you want in terms of material specifications? 4 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: What the foundation and just what he's going to be 5 using. So we can determine the weight. Because, as I say, this bluff is extremely 6 tenuous. MS. WICKHAM: We have Mr. Fichetti 7 here, he may be able to address some of those issues. 8 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Also, Madam Chair? 9 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Yes, Mr. Goehringer. 10 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: And what type of heavy equipment is going in there. 11 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Yes. And I want to know how much fill is going to be 12 needed to comply with all the requirements here. 13 MS. WICKHAM: Okay. Can I address you on a number of other items? 14 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Yes, you may. MS. WICKHAM: I wanted to make the 15 point that the applicant is sensitive to house size and that is why there's been an attempt 16 to scale back dramatically and reconfigure what I understand was here before you 17 previously. And the 50 foot setback from the top of the bluff is, as you can see, 18 considerably back from the older houses that are on either side, but we think it strikes a 19 balance between a front yard setback and a bluff setback, with a house of what is fairly 20 modest depth of 32 feet. The driveway was originally proposed on the west side of the 21 house, and that we think did have the effect of aggravating that depression as the water 22 went down the bluff. Also, because of the contour that is descending right off the 23 street, it was decided that it would make much more sense to move the driveway over to the 24 other side of the property, using the contour -- going more along the contour is 25 what I mean by that -- and putting the garage on the east side of the property. And to November 20, 2003 33 1 2 alleviate the problem of runoff coming down the property over the bluff, which is the 3 biggest problem. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: That too and 4 also going down the road because you have homes to the west of that and I wouldn't like 5 to see a whole stream of water. You know, we get these big, heavy rains, we don't get 6 little ones, and flooding and eroding that piece of property and going down the road and 7 harming someone else's property. MS. WICKHAM: If I could focus you 8 on the proposed railroad tie retaining wall that is going to be designed to avoid 9 those two problems, down the property and over the bluff and across the property on to the 10 west side. They will be constructed in such a way that it would contain that water, grade it 11 back into this particular property and the runoff directed towards drains within the 12 property itself, so that it won't be leaving on to someone else's property. Similarly, 13 any water coming down towards this house will be drained so as to accommodate a flow away 14 from the house itself, dry wells are specified on the plan to contain roof runoff. So that 15 has all been incorporated. If you have any questions of Mr. Fichetti, who is here, he can 16 answer them. The applicant has also retained an environmental consultant to talk about or 17 to address during the construction phase runoff, hay bail placement and all those types 18 of things because there's nobody that's more concerned about losing what's on the property 19 now than the applicant, because if he loses part of his bluff, then he's much further 20 disadvantaged in terms of developing this. And I will say that this gentleman is very 21 sensitive to that. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Before Mrs. 22 Tortora asks a further question, has anyone done a deep analysis of that deep hole that's 23 there? MS. WICKHAM: That was done 24 because -- the reason that's there is because the health department required an actual 25 excavation in order to pass on their soil. That was something that was required to be November 20, 2003 34 1 2 done in the course of the approvals, and my understanding was that that was approved and 3 therefore we must have soil test rolls. I don't have them in front of me. Do you have 4 them, Joe? MR. FICHETTI: It's on the site 5 plan. If they have the site plan and that shows not more than 30 feet from -- 6 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: It's not on the survey. 7 MS. WICKHAM: Can I give them this? This is a survey revised August 20th 8 that shows at the site of the test hole, which is in the front yard area well, they went down 9 to 42 feet without finding water. The composition of the soil is top soil, loam, 10 sandy clay, sand, silty sand, silty sand and gravel. So I'll submit this to you. 11 MR. FISCHETTI: I need this for my discussion unless they want to see it. 12 MS. WICKHAM: Let's let them look at it now. I did submit that and if you need 13 more copies, I'll give them to you. MS. KOWALSKI: Do you have any 14 extras with you? MS. WICKHAM: I don't have them 15 now, but I will submit them after the hearing. BOARD MEMBER TORTORA: What's the 16 square footage on this lot because it's not on the stamped sealed survey? 17 MS. KOWALSKI: Almost 42, 000 square feet. It's on the disapproval. 18 BOARD MEMBER TORTORA: Is there anything on the record that substantiates 19 that? MS. KOWALSKI: No, I don't see cg 20 anything on the record on that. MS. WICKHAM: I'll have that noted 21 on the survey. Then I will submit -- BOARD MEMBER TORTORA: Six plans 22 of a revised survey showing the square footage of the lot in question. 23 MS. WICKHAM: Yes. I have an approximation but I'd rather have the surveyor 24 compute it directly. BOARD MEMBER TORTORA: So would 25 we. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: I'm informed November 20, 2003 35 1 2 that in order to be a valid survey we must have the square footage. 3 MS. WICKHAM: Yes, we're going to get that. It should have been on there, I'm 4 surprised it's not. But we'll certainly have that added. 5 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Mrs. Tortora, do you have further questions? 6 MR. FICHETTI: I have an earlier survey from John Metzger on the same parcel 7 that shows 41, 942 square feet. We'll have it on the other one, but -- 8 BOARD MEMBER TORTORA: Nine hundred and what Joe? 9 MR. FICHETTI: 41, 942 square feet it says to the tie line. 10 MS. KOWALSKI: What is the date on that? 11 MR. FICHETTI: This survey is dated revised July 5, 2002. It will probably 12 be the same amount. BOARD MEMBER TORTORA: I just 13 wanted to try to go over a couple of things. The footprint of the house that you're 14 proposing is currently a 3,265, correct? MS. WICKHAM: Uh-huh. 15 BOARD MEMBER TORTORA: So that would be a ground floor footprint of 2, 080 16 feet? MS. WICKHAM: Yes. 17 BOARD MEMBER TORTORA: What is the square footage of the second story or half 18 story as you put it? MS. WICKHAM: It would be 19 approximately half of that. BOARD MEMBER TORTORA: The reason 20 I'm asking that is the building department -- MS. WICKHAM: Excuse me. I might 21 clarify that the first floor includes the garage. 22 BOARD MEMBER TORTORA: The , building -- I'm not sure if they're going to 23 view this as a half story or a full story, they have an unusual way of determining these 24 things, that's why I'm asking specifically. MS. WICKHAM: Again, the house is 25 conceptual so I can't give you the specific square footage. I can ask the applicant to November 20, 2003 36 1 2 develop that for you. BOARD MEMBER TORTORA: The other 3 thing is obviously the setback from the bluff is very keenly tied to the length of the - 4 house, it's a 65 foot length. If that was a 55 foot house, because of the angle of the 5 house to the bluff, that would automatically increase the setback that you're proposing. 6 MS. WICKHAM: That's correct. On the other hand we have very ample side yards 7 here, and I don't think a 2,000 square foot footprint is a monster house. It's really not 8 excessive. BOARD MEMBER TORTORA: I don't 9 know what the final product is. I don't know if it's going to be a two-story, a two 10 and-a-half story. I don't know whether your client is willing to stipulate those types of 11 decisions in order to obtain what amounts to a substantial variance. That's all up in the 12 air. You can see there's a great deal of concern. 13 MS. WICKHAM: The substantial nature of this variance is generated as much 14 by the lot itself as the house that's going on it. Therefore, it's really hard when you're 15 making a decision on a setback to specify exactly what the layout of the house is going 16 to be because it hasn't actually been designed yet. But we're willing to stipulate that 17 within that footprint there will be a house designed. It could be end up being smaller, 18 but that is the maximum we're asking you to approve because of the angle of the property 19 and the short depth of the property. BOARD MEMBER TORTORA: Well, 20 historically when we look at properties like this, one of the things we're going to look at 21 is the impact, whether it's one-story, two stories or two and-a-half stories -- 22 MS. WICKHAM: Right. BOARD MEMBER TORTORA: -- is to 23 the relationship of the variance. Obviously it's really not cost effective from your 24 perspective to go ahead and have a set of site plans drawn up and then continually revise 25 them. I understand that, that's why I'm asking the question. November 20, 2003 37 1 2 MS. WICKHAM: But your code goes to footprint and that's why we're focusing 3 here on footprint. BOARD MEMBER TORTORA: I'm not 4 sure that the word "footprint" even appears in the codes. 5 MS. WICKHAM: No. But it's a setback that contemplates footprint. It's a 6 setback rule and it doesn't relate specifically only to the number of stories. 7 We are wiling to agree, though, that this is going to be the maximum setback, and the house 8 will be a one and-a-half story, and I can give you a better conceptual design on that if you 9 like with a specific concept of how much square footage will be on either floor. But 10 again, the second floor of the half-story is not something that affects the footprint and 11 we're not talking about side yard setbacks; we're not talking about looming next to a 12 neighbor, which is sometimes why you get into that issue. 13 BOARD MEMBER TORTORA: Okay, okay. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Thank you. 14 MS. WICKHAM: And I'd also note that because the property is lower than the 15 road, we're not talking about a concern you also have about a house looming up when you 16 look at it from a neighbor's property or from the street. 17 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: The house won't be lower than the road, there will be fill put 18 in to make it higher. MS. WICKHAM: I didn't get the end 19 of your question. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Add a lot of 20 fill to make it even higher. MS. WICKHAM: You're not adding 21 significant elevation to make the house higher; that's correct. 22 MR. FICHETTI: I'll discuss it when I come up. 23 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Mr. Goehringer. BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: You 24 called on me? CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Yes. 25 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Good. Is there any reason why you, Miss Wickham, November 20, 2003 I- 38 1 2 sought the location -- I don't want you particularly, but you as being the agent for 3 the applicant and attorney for -- as 43 feet rather than greater distance to the top of the 4 bluff? MS. WICKHAM: Yeah, yeah, I can 5 answer that and probably Mr. Fischetti can answer it better but that seemed to be the 6 right balance in order to give adequate room for the driveway, which will dip down, 7 adequate room in order to grade the front yard so that the water from the driveway doesn't go 8 right into the garage as it goes down, adequate room for the septic system. It just 9 seemed to be the right balance in terms of where the house should be setback. Also, that 10 house on the west is way, way back so we didn't want to get too close to the road, and 11 as you know, we try to minimize variances so I guess 43 feet was more minimal than 40. It 12 was more to design it so that the front yard accommodated the driveway access as much as 13 anything in the drainage. BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: That's 14 the reason why you gained more footage on the west side than you do on the east side for the 15 purposes of accommodating the driveway? MS. WICKHAM: Uh-huh. 16 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Is that the case? 17 MS. WICKHAM: Uh-huh. BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: I just 18 want to say, you've been before us many, many years, this is a very difficult plan to 19 understand based upon the difficulty of this lot, and I think you have to bear with me and 20 my fellow colleagues in the construction of a house on that piece of property. It is 21 something that I am having great difficulty with. 22 MS. WICKHAM: Well, it is difficult to design, that's why we've tried to 23 mitigate the concern because of the topography down towards the bluff, and I'm going to let 24 Mr. Fischetti address that from an engineering point of view because he's more technical. 25 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Mr. Horning. MR. HORNING: No questions. November 20, 2003 39 1 2 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Mr. Fischetti, would you like to -- 3 MS. WICKHAM: While he's coming up, I'd like to maybe help you with a little 4 bit more of the construction phase and erosion and sediment control plan that does specify 5 drainage calculations, proposed line of hay bails, fence and snow fencing during 6 construction in order to not have a washout while the equipment is there, and I have one 7 copy. I can give it to you now, but I will need to submit more copies to you. I guess 8 I'm going to give you a big package. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Thank you. 9 Mr. Fischetti. MR. FICHETTI: Good morning, 10 Joseph Fischetti. We've already been introduced. 11 Yes, this is -- maybe I can go through some of the thought processes in 12 laying this house out and maybe go through construction with you. Gail talking about the 13 front yard setback and go with why we really worked on that. 14 The one area we have certain separations between the sanitary systems and 15 the house, the sanitary systems and each other and also the sanitary systems and the side 16 yards. But more important, the pitch of the house, to keep it down low enough and not have 17 water go into the garage, I've seen many houses that have the waters going in the 18 garage and it causes a lot of problems. We have to have a reverse pitch away from the 19 garage and also have a level that area that's level where we can catch that water. We have 20 a dry well in that area, so we're pitching both ways now. If we shorten that up, the 21 only way we could do that would be to have to raise the house a little higher because we 22 wouldn't be able to get those pitches. We have elevation 91 at the garage at the dry 23 well, the garage level is 91; the entrance of the driveway at road line is 92-8. And we 24 need to pitch back so we've kept it down to a point where we can have pitches in either 25 direction to get the water away from the house. So the location of the house is kind November 20, 2003 1 , 40 1 2 of in the middle between the two, and also to be able to get the sanitary system in there 3 with the setbacks that are required from the health department. 4 At one point you brought up and Gail touched upon was the sanitary system that 5 excavation that's there. We have had problems -- builders have problems getting 6 approvals of sanitary systems that have this silty sand and gravel and silty clay down to 7 27 feet, it's very expensive, and not only expensive -- 8 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: It erodes nicely if it's on the bluff -- go ahead, go 9 ahead. MR. FICHETTI: To approve a system 10 like that subject to those depths you're better off -- the health department probably 11 requires you to excavate, but a lot of times you'll find that they'll cave in on you, and 12 you'll never be able to do that. And having the free reign of going in there actually 13 physically digging it, getting all that clay out and knowing that you've gone through that 14 clay. Initially the health department says great you've done it and they approve it. 15 They prefer to do it initially instead of approving it subject to. I've done a house 16 where I've approved the sanitary system when it was like that. I 've told the people, this 17 is a very expensive system that you're doing in here, so the health department doesn't want 18 to have that problem later on when somebody buys a lot that you have to dig down 27, 30 19 feet. They prefer doing it just the way the applicant has done here. 20 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Can I stop you one point. That's a crane operation? 21 MR. FICHETTI: Yes, has to be. BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: That's 22 another concern we have. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Mrs. Tortora 23 has a question. MR. FICHETTI: Go ahead. 24 BOARD MEMBER TORTORA: The retaining wall, Mr. Fischetti, the height of 25 the retaining wall? MR. FICHETTI: It's a two-tier November 20, 2003 r 41 1 2 retaining wall, which is very expensive and the reason this was done was to get a reverse 3 pitch. We have that depression there, as you said, there is a hole there. The retaining 4 • wall is going just to the south of that area. Part of that hole will be filled in, but it's 5 a two-tier retaining wall. The bottom to the top of the wall, the lower wall -- let's see 6 the bottom of the wall is 79, top is 83; the second wall is -- the bottom of the wall is 83 7 going to 87, and the reason for that is to get the pitches away and all the draining away 8 from the slope. Everything is contained on this site. All the water and runoff that 9 originally, before this was built was going down that gully. Right now it's going 10 backwards, and it's going into dry wells and actually that one dry well in the corner I 11 probably remember moving it further away from the edge of the bluff because I don't want any 12 of the water going in there to leach out the side, actually I talked to him, I said I don't 13 like that. I want to move it further to the south so it doesn't leach out underneath the , 14 wall. BOARD MEMBER TORTORA: The areas 15 inside the proposed where you have the retaining wall, because I think the house 16 right down the middle of the elevation 80 and then that area in there is kind of crazy, it 17 goes to 70 down to -- actually it goes down to about 76, do you plan on filling area? 18 MR. FICHETTI: If you look at the topos there, you have a cut to the right and a 19 fill to the left, so you're really going into that fill. I haven't done -- you asked for a 20 calculation of what's going to be':needed on the site. I actually didn't do a calculation 21 of what's needed on the site some of that fill will be cut on the east side and cross to the 22 west side. So it would be taken, I don't know if additional fill would be put in there so it 23 would be leveled off and bringing to the left to get that area in. ' 24 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Did you go down to the base of the bluff? 25 MR. FICHETTI: No, I did not. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: There's no November 20, 2003 . i 42 1 2 stairs. MR. FICHETTI: No, I didn't go 3 down. We did just the design from the top. Is there a reason to go down there? How's the 4 tow; is it stable down there? CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: For now, you 5 are aware as I am, that you never know from the type of storms that we have, the wave 6 action, the wind action you can have a wonderful bluff one day, a tenuous bluff the 7 next day. MR. FICHETTI: Yep. I tell people 8 don't think about giving these properties to your grandchildren. That's not the case here. 9 The bluff is stable. The tow is reasonable at this point, and when I did my analysis in the 10 letter that I gave you, it was based on an angle of repose that was stable and all the 11 construction that would be at the low end of that extension of the angle of repose. So 12 none of the construction or none of the impact on the house or the fill that's putting in 13 here will destabilize that slope. The slope right now is stable. And as long as the 14 vegetation is kept on the bluff, it will -- CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Keep your 15 fingers crossed. MR. FICHETTI: Again, even if the 16 client here built a bulkhead here and none of the other neighbors have bulkheads it has no 17 bearing. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Mr. Fischetti, 18 if you're finished, I'd like to know if anybody else in the audience has any comments 19 about this application? Yes, ma'am. Would you give your name and address, please? 20 MS. MORGAN: My name is Mary Morgan. I'm at 855 North View Drive, Brown's 21 Hill. I have a letter I'll read to you. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Sure. 22 MS. MORGAN: The lot in question was recently bought and the company proposes 23 to construct a single-family dwelling to sell. The company wants two variances, one 24 from 100 foot setback from the bluff and one from the 50 foot setback in the road. They 25 propose a 43 foot setback. They propose a 65 by 35 foot house on a 2, 080 footprint. The November 20, 2003 43 1 2 property has a huge gully or ravine and the neighbors have always been told that this was 3 an unbuildable lot and owner wants to keep it as a bird sanctuary. The owner has divided 4 another lot to achieve this bird sanctuary selling the other portion. My questions and 5 concerns are: Is the setback from the bluff at 50 feet enough to prevent erosion? And the 6 one and-a-half story house proposed with the 2000 footprint is substantially larger that 7 any of the other neighboring houses, which are one-story dwellings. I'm also thinking about 8 the fill that they're going to use; is it nonnative soils? Is it some kind of fill that 9 could leach and be polluting or cause erosion? And ultimately, there is this question of sort 10 of the elephant in the room kind of thing, you know, it was an unbuildable lot with these 11 negative building envelope, and we bought a lot a couple of years ago in Brown's Hills 12 that was big enough to build on, and I just wonder about the rules. I mean, if there are 13 lots that aren't -- don't have building envelopes how can they become building 14 envelopes? That's just my points. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Thank you. Is 15 there anybody else that would like to comment? MR. MORGAN: My name is Tom 16 Morgan. I also live in the same house with Mary Morgan. We just built the house a couple 17 of years ago without applying for any variances and not needing anything. The house 18 actually is a little bit smaller in footprint than this. It doesn't have a garage, houses 19 in Brown's Hills do not have garages. I was at the hearing in the spring 20 and it had been discussed about the fact that it was a negative building envelope and that 21 application was withdrawn, and it became a moot point. But those roads are also private 22 roads. They're not public roads, and if there was an erosion that the association would have 23 to rebuild the road and replace the fill and whatever. It's not an immediate concern of i 24 mine. The houses on either side, the two houses on the west are much more modest 25 dwellings. One is perched on the side of the bluff like an outhouse in the Ozarks, and it's November 20, 2003 1 44 1 2 some day going to be a beach house at some time, but those were built at times when these 3 rules weren't in place and there were no rules about setback and the bluffs, as far as I know 4 you could build right on the edge. But I would like your permission to read a letter 5 from another one of the residents who just built a house even more recently than we 6 did. That's Bill Rile, I'll give you a copy of the letter, addressed to the Southold 7 Zoning Board of Appeals re this item. Dear Sir, I am a resident of 8 Brown's Hill and am concerned about the environmental impact of building on a small 9 lot on Long Island Sound. I am not in principal against any house being built on 10 this lot. I would ask that the ZBA think very carefully about the environmental issues 11 before deciding whether this lot is buildable, and to what degree the ZBA will allow it 12 so. Point one: Most importantly, the lot is tiny. There is a large natural ravine running 13 through it and the down the bluff facing to the north. This is the natural drainage. A 14 65 foot by 32 foot house as proposed cannot be built without filling the ravine. What 15 environmental impact will this have on the bluff and how will drainage occur after the 16 ravine is full out of existence? I cannot answer the question that the ZBA must answer 17 and before giving any relief to the 100 foot bluff setback. 18 Point two: The applicant requests that a 100 foot environmental setback from the 19 bluff be reduced to 50 feet in order that this house be built. A house could be built 20 farther than 50 feet from the bluff and closer to the road potentially reducing the 21 environmental impact on the bluff and ravine. The house would almost have to be smaller or 22 narrower than proposed -- incidentally, Bill Rile is an architect -- The front yard setback 23 might be reduced by 25 feet in order to create a greater setback to the bluff. In parens a 24 25 foot front yard setback was granted by ZBA number 4851 on 9/11/00 at 915 South View 25 Drive, more reasonable site planning and environmental considerations were the November 20, 2003 45 1 2 motivating reasons for the variance. Number three: This lot is the 3 remainder of a larger lot which had been subdivided and partially sold off by the 4 current owner. The owner has told all adjoining neighbors over the years that this 5 remaining lot would also be nature preserve or bird sanctuary. The owner has correctly said 6 that this lot is unbuildable following the current environmental and zoning setbacks. 7 Current neighbors have not only purchased and built their houses with this knowledge but the 8 existing laws but they have also attempted to discuss with the owner the possibility of 9 purchasing the lot in order to leave it undeveloped, and letters to this effect have 10 been ignored. Point four: And current 11 application is a test by speculative builders/developers to find out how much ZBA 12 will bend the rules to allow a house to be built with environmental setbacks. Today's 13 market, the larger the house the larger the profit. 14 I would ask again that the ZBA take a closer look at the environmental issues 15 raised by the construction of this lot. Sincerely, William Rile. 16 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: One question, Mr. Morgan, are there stairs going down to the 17 bluffs someplace in Brown's Hills? MR. MORGAN: Not on that property. 18 There is a Brown's Hills right of way. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Where is that? 19 MR. MORGAN: Between that next house to the west and the next house beyond 20 that to the west is a 25 foot right of way that goes down to a -- 21 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Stairs? MR. MORGAN: -- 108 steps, 109 22 steps. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: I was trying to 23 find it. It used to be further to the east. MR. MORGAN: There was a former 24 site which -- CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Has been built 25 on? MR. MORGAN: No. November 20, 2003 46 1 2 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: There are stairs. Okay, thank you. 3 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Miss Wickham, who is the owner of this property? 4 MS. WICKHAM: The owner of the property is Edna Doll. She was unable to be 5 here today. Her nephew is here. I just want to note that there is no credible evidence in 6 the record she may have made as to buildablity, and can supply an attorney, Mr. 7 Camenetti, who advises that she would refute having made any representations to the 8 neighbors as to that effect. I'd also, while I'm up here, like 9 to point out that the survey I did just give you showing the test hole information revised 10 August 20th does show the square footage of the lot. I just didn't see it earlier, 41, 907 11 square feet. It's noted up at the bottom of the slope, which is not where we're used to 12 seeing it, so we didn't see it. It is on the survey. I'll get you additional prints. 13 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Thank you. Anybody else that would like to speak? 14 MR. ASTLE: My name is Chris A-S-T-L-E, my wife and I own the property 15 immediately to the east. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: It was Helen -- 16 MR. ASTLE: It was, we bought it from Murray Moss, who I think bought it from 17 Helen. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Okay, got it. 18 MR. ASTLE: Anyway, we were told at the time that it was an unbuildable lot. 19 To the side of us, which we wouldn't have bought the place if we knew that a house could 20 be built there, and if a house can be built there especially one this big, I don't know 21 that we'll still stay there, I'm pretty sure we won't. We're very worried about the 22 fact -- I mean, I just saw this plan and it's like these retaining walls going through this 23 natural area right on the bluff. It's like a beautiful natural area and if you go up there, 24 the whole community is like that. This is just going to be like these retaining walls 25 that are unnaturally keeping, you know, the bluff in a way that it's kind of not meant to November 20, 2003 . 4 . 47 1 2 be, and who knows how well they'll work. We know that it stayed that way for a long time, 3 the way that it is right now. Anyways, I'm not an expert on it, but it looks highly 4 unattractive to me in the plans. Not that -- it's not my property, but we bought it knowing 5 that the laws said that it couldn't be built there, and honestly I wonder why the laws are 6 in place if they're just going to be changed. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: I don't think 7 there's anything in the law that says it couldn't be built on. 8 MR. ASTLE: That it couldn't be built on? Well, the laws put certain -- 9 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Conditions on things. But it doesn't mean that somehow, 10 somewhere that something can't be built on. MR. ASTLE: As an adjoining 11 neighbor, I state my objections to bending those conditions. 12 BOARD MEMBER TORTORA: Without variances. 13 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: It does need variances. I'm not saying you just come in 14 and plop a house there, but. MR. ASTLE: Right. 15 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Unless you and your neighbors wanted to get together and buy 16 that piece of property, the owner has property rights. 17 MR. ASTLE: I understand that. We've talked about doing that. 18 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Thank you. Is there anybody else that would like to comment 19 on this application? Yes, sir. MR. DALE: Yes, my name's Carl 20 Dale, I'm the nephew of Edna Doll. I just want to say that my aunt to 21 my knowledge has never made any reference to a bird sanctuary. She's had land there for 50 22 years and she loves the area very much. She's currently handicapped. She had a stroke four 23 years ago. So I'm handling the business as much as I can for her. • 24 I just want to say a couple of things. She really doesn't want to sell the 25 land, but she is what you might call a hardship case. She needs 24 hour care and November 20, 2003 • 48 1 2 this is one of the reasons we want to put it up for sale. So she's endeavoring as much as 3 she can through me and the parties that want to buy to minimize any impact upon that 4 property, and as Miss Wickham had indicated, to put as small a house that is possible 5 there. That's all. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: No one else has 6 any comments? MR. ASTLE: Can I just say one 7 more thing. I could provide the letter to this Board, where Edna talks about the fact 8 that she said that was a bird sanctuary and a fox sanctuary. She wrote a letter within the 9 last year stating that. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: So then do it 10 and give it to us. If there are no further questions, we will recess this hearing until 11 December 18th. MS. KOWALSKI: At 2:30 in the 12 afternoon. BOARD MEMBER HORNING: I'll make 13 such a motion. BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Second. 14 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: All in favor. (Whereupon, all Board members 15 responded in favor. ) MS. WICKHAM: Thank you. 16 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: The next 17 hearing is Richard and Nancy Cincotta. They are applying for a special exception for a bed 18 and breakfast of having not more than four casual and transient roomers at 26815 Main 19 Road in Cutchogue. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Is your 20 application four or two? MS. HAWTHORN-CINCOTTA: Excuse me? 21 MS. KOWALSKI: Two guest rooms? MS. HAWTHORN-CINCOTTA: Two. 22 MS. KOWALSKI: Would you please state your full name for the record? 23 MS. HAWTHORN-CINCOTTA: Nancey Hawthorn-Cincotta, at 26815 Main Road in 129 1 2 would like to have the small businesses survive out here, and I think that that 3 interpretation, particular interpretation regarding the bulk schedule by the Building 4 Inspector is really going to send the town in the wrong direction. And I would hope that 5 the Zoning Board of Appeals straightens that out . Thank you. 6 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Thank you, John. If there' s no one else to speak, I 7 would like to adjourn this hearing until March 18th at 2 : 15 p.m. 8 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: So moved. 9 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: All in favor? (Whereupon, all Board Members 10 responded in favor. ) CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: So moved. 11 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Can we take a four minute recess? 12 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Yes . (Whereupon, a brief recess was 13 taken. ) 14 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: I' d like to call our next hearing, which is J and C 15 Holdings . It' s for a piece of property North View Drive in Orient for a home less than 50 16 feet from the property line, less than 100 feet from the top of the Sound bluff . 17 MS . WICKHAM: I just want to quickly bring you up to date since you closed 18 the last hearing. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: We have 19 reopened it . MS . WICKHAM: You have reopened it 20 because my client was sensitive to the discussion about size of retaining walls, 21 drainage and -- CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Size of the 22 house . MS . WICKHAM: -- size of the 23 house . Looked at the plan again, went back to the engineer and the surveyor and was able to 24 redesign it so that there was one three foot retaining wall, and by putting the garage 25 underneath a smaller house . CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: What is the size February 26 , 2004 130 1 2 of the house now? MS . WICKHAM: One and-a-half 3 story, 59 by 32 foot house and the garage under and a partial second floor, which is 4 about 300 square feet smaller than the upstairs than the prior one because they have 5 shortened the house by six feet . CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: So it' s 2 , 000 6 square feet or under 2000 square feet for the total? 7 MS . WICKHAM: I' ll get you the total . Let me compute that out . There are a 8 number of drainage questions . If the Board has any questions about that Mr. Fischetti is 9 here, and he can probably answer them better than I can. Let me look at my notes on the 10 square footage . CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: By the way, 11 Miss Wickham, did you get the report or letter from Miss Summers, from her engineer' s report? 12 MS . WICKHAM: I did. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Joe has it? 13 MS . WICKHAM: Yes . MR. FISCHETTI : Joseph Fischetti . 14 As you know, after that last meeting, I did work with John Hertado to redo the house and 15 to redo the drainage . I submitted the drainage to you. We used the drainage 16 calculations required by the Town, which is two inch rainfall . The calculations were 17 to -- the calculations that were sent to you were for the roof runoff completely, the 18 driveways and all the upper surface areas were retained, that was the question as to what it 19 retained, but it was retaining all the grass areas, the driveways and the roof areas . That 20 was into two drainage structures because one was going to be in the driveway because now 21 there was four, because the house was now at one level and usually you put the dry wells 22 around; and two, because we were picking up part of the roof area and the driveway area 23 was now very important . So we think we have addressed all the drainage issues . The 24 retaining walls now are only three feet . A lot of the problems with the view and the 25 massiveness of the two walls are now taken up by having the garage under. I ' ll take any February 26, 2004 131 1 2 questions for the Board. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Mr. Dinizio? 3 BOARD MEMBER DINIZIO: I thought eight foot was pretty high. I think you did a 4 nice job bringing it down. MR. FISCHETTI : Yeah. We' re down 5 to only three foot, and three foot is less . CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Did you address 6 the concerns that Miss Summers had in her letter to you? 7 MR. FISCHETTI : Some of them I don' t understand. So I think -- 8 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: I didn' t understand them either. 9 MS . WICKHAM: So the answer is yes . 10 MR. FISCHETTI : Yes . I addressed what was in that letter. I felt consistently 11 she' s talked about five inch rainfall, but we don' t use that in the town. 12 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: I know we don' t . 13 MR. FISCHETTI : We are containing -- there was a question about a 14 little depression and runoff, in essence -- CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Right . And 15 going down for that ravine that is on her property. 16 MR. FISCHETTI : We are retaining all the water on the site; so that' s really a 17 moot point in that we are retaining everything on the site . So that shouldn' t really enter 18 into the analysis . Again, I think everything has been addressed with the change in the site 19 plan. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Mr. Orlando? 20 BOARD MEMBER ORLANDO: I did notice, I don' t recall why, but the natural 21 screening on the west side was removed; was it necessary now that -- 22 MR. FISCHETTI : Well, we only have a three foot retaining wall now, so we felt 23 that we were changing our grade . We didn' t need that screening anymore . If it' s required 24 we would be glad to put screening back again. But I don' t think it' s needed. We only have a 25 three foot retaining wall . BOARD MEMBER ORLANDO: Correct . February 26 , 2004 132 1 2 No other questions . CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Mr. Goehringer? 3 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: You said the garage is under on the west side, is that 4 Belgian block that' s retaining that water into that center drain, or is that some sort of 5 poured concrete edging; what is that? MR. FISCHETTI : The driveway would 6 be asphalt because it has to contain that . So there' s really no need to have an edging. I 7 think if he wanted it for that purpose, but you can see it will just naturally go in that 8 direction because of the way we placed it . So you don' t have to contain anything because 9 that' s the lowest point, and that' s where the water wants to go. 10 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: So there will be no water runoff from the road onto 11 that driveway? MR. FISCHETTI : Say the question 12 again. BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: No water 13 runoff from the road onto the driveway? MR. FISCHETTI : No, you mean North 14 View Drive? BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Right . 15 MR. FISCHETTI : No. Again, what we' ll do is you put a very slight hump at the 16 beginning and bring it down. We don' t want water, we don' t want water from there, no, not 17 at all . We don' t want to pick up their water. BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Of 18 course not . CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: There' s no 19 chance of making that a pervious surface of a driveway? 20 MR. FISCHETTI : We' re trying to contain the water. We don' t really want 21 erosion. If I did it as a gravel driveway, I think we would have a little more of a 22 problem -- pervious, if it was bigger, I would concern myself . We' re taking it all and 23 putting it in the ground anyway, Ruth. So it' s all going in there . So having it 24 pervious or impervious, I 've taken into consideration that it' s impervious, so 25 whatever water doesn' t go into that drain, it' s going to go down. February 26, 2004 133 1 2 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: I don' t know why is she asking about moving that retaining 3 wall 35 feet further back? MR. FISCHETTI : She asks for some 4 more buffer. I'm only 20 feet from the retaining wall right now. I 'm trying to keep 5 a buffer from the coastal zone erosion line, and I'm only giving myself maybe a little less 6 than 20 feet from the edge of that retaining wall to the house . So, all it would do is 7 force the house to come closer to the property. I don' t think it protects anything. 8 Her question is not of any protection, we've addressed all that . We have, in a number of 9 letters that I have written, that we have addressed that . She asks about the wood is 10 not a maintenance issue . It' s a lifetime issue . I mean, again, this wood block, the 11 wood crib will last probably 40 years, and it' s not that it will -- if the retaining wall 12 was much higher and much more massive, there would be a concern of maintenance, but, again, 13 a three foot retaining wall doesn' t require any maintenance . It would require repairs 14 over the lifetime . I know John and I have talked about that, and John is willing, if 15 it' s a concern, to go with a Nicoloc, I think if you understand walls, which is an 16 interlocking block wall, and we' d be glad to do that . That' s much nicer looking than that 17 and it' s lifetime . BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: And also 18 if you get any water, it just seeps right through. 19 MR. FISCHETTI : So we would be willing to do that as a Nicoloc on the 20 retaining wall, gives it a little more flexibility. It' s easier to install instead 21 of the massive cribbing, which is a little harder to install . As you' re laying it, you 22 lay it a little easier and less equipment, so we would be willing to do that . We talked 23 about that this afternoon as a response to her. 24 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Any other questions for Mr. Fischetti? I don' t have any 25 questions . So what is the square footage of February 26 , 2004 134 1 2 the house? MS . WICKHAM: This is again a 3 conceptual plan. We gave you a rendition last time of what it would look like . The only 4 change would be to reduce this side by about six feet and replace the garage door with a 5 window. So it will have the appearance on the front of the property as basically a one story 6 house . In the back there will be a cape making it a one and-a-half story. The first 7 floor will be approximately 1, 888 square feet, which is 59 by 32 . The second floor, I don' t 8 have the exact dimension, it' s going to be somewhere between 900 and 1, 000 square feet, 9 and then the garage under. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: It' s still over 10 2 , 000 square feet . MS . WICKHAM: The house would be, 11yeah. • CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Does that 12 include the garage too? MS . WICKHAM: Yeah. The first 13 floor about 1, 900 square feet ; the second floor about 1, 000, and the garage I guess 14 they' re about 600 square feet, but that will be underneath. And from the road side, as I 15 say, it will basically look like a ranch from the road. Thank you. 16 BOARD MEMBER ORLANDO : Miss Wickham, one quick question, refresh my 17 memory. The lot directly to the west -- MS . WICKHAM: To the west, YES . 18 BOARD MEMBER ORLANDO : They own this lot and they' re selling it? 19 MS . WICKHAM: That' s not correct . Mrs . Doll did own a number of properties in 20 the neighborhood and sold them years ago, I think. 21 BOARD MEMBER ORLANDO : The neighbor to the west doesn' t own this right 22 now? MS . WICKHAM: No . She owned the 23 one on the west or the east at one point . I can look that up . But it' s years ago . 24 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: The west, Mrs . Doll . Is there anybody that would like to 25 speak on this application? Yes, ma' am? MS . MORGAN: Hello, my name is February 26 , 2004, 135 1 2 Mary Morgan. I live in Brown' s Hills I think you probably answered the questions, Heidi 3 Hilde, who is my neighbor, asked me to submit her letter of February 24th. 4 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: We have that . MS . MORGAN: You all have that and 5 you' re answering the questions that she has? CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Right . 6 MS . MORGAN: In what form will the questions be answered; will she get a letter 7 back or how do the answers come to her? CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Actually, it' s 8 more in the decision. MS . KOWALSKI : Actually, the 9 answers in this letter would be addressed by the attorney for the applicant . If the 10 chairman wanted to do them one by one . MS . WICKHAM: Well, the engineer. 11 MS . KOWALSKI : Or the engineer. MS . WICKHAM: He just did. 12 MS . MORGAN: So the -- MS . KOWALSKI : Each individual 13 question? MS . MORGAN: So at this hearing is 14 when the questions get responded to? MS . KOWALSKI : Yes . It' s been 15 responded to and the court stenographer will transcribe it . That' s how it' s entered in the 16 record. MS . MORGAN: And then she can get 17 a copy of the record? MS . KOWALSKI : Yes . 18 MS . MORGAN: If she has further questions or if we haven' t covered everything 19 that concerns her, should she send another letter? 20 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: I don' t think we' re going to keep the hearing open any 21 longer. It' s gone on long enough that we' re just going to have to close it . 22 MS . MORGAN: All right, thank you. 23 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Anybody else would like to speak? 24 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: I just want to clarify one thing, Miss Wickham. You 25 said that the total square footage of the house is somewhere in the area of 2 , 000 ; is February 26, 2004 136 1 2 that correct? MS . WICKHAM: No . I said -- Miss 3 Oliva asked if it was, and I said it' s more than that . 4 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: But that' s with the garage that' s underneath the 5 house . BOARD MEMBER ORLANDO: Living 6 space is closer to 3 , 000 square feet it sounded like . 7 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: That' s why I wanted the clarification. 8 MS . WICKHAM: First floor is 59 by 32, which is 1, 888 square feet . 9 MS . KOWALSKI : That' s living area. And the second floor is a half story? 10 MS . WICKHAM: It' s a half story, and I'm guessing about 1, 000 square feet if 11 you took off the end of it . BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: It' s 12 about 2 , 800 . MS . WICKHAM: The plan is right in 13 your file . MS . KOWALSKI : How big is the 14 garage again? MS . WICKHAM: I'm assuming it' s 24 15 by 24 . Plus a hallway, maybe, not more than 600 square foot, really. 16 MS . KOWALSKI : It' s about 3 , 300 altogether. , 17 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: And how high to the ridge? 18 MS . WICKHAM: The height to the ridge -- sorry, just put that map away. 19 MR. FISCHETTI : We' re 23 feet from the first floor. Now, we lowered the house 20 one foot when we redid the grading. So the first floor elevation was lowered from 93 to 21 92 . So it' s 92 plus whatever 23 feet is . Now, 23 feet is in essence a real ranch 22 height . It' s not a two story house . It' s just that it' s a two story with a cape in the 23 back. If you looked at a ranch in the front, that' s the elevation you would have . From the 24 first floor to the peak of the ridge is 23 feet . 25 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Let me ask you this question as an engineer. As an February 26 , 2004 137 1 2 engineer, in square footage you do not take a garage and add it to the square footage of the 3 house? MR. FISCHETTI : No . I didn' t want 4 to add to that . BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: That' s 5 why I just want you to be aware of the situation. We are talking about a 2 , 800 , 6 2 , 900 square foot house here . We' re not talking 3 , 600 . 7 MR. FISCHETTI : You don' t add the garage because the garage would have been a 8 basement before, it just happens to be, we' re using that are now because we moved it from 9 the upper level now to the bottom. It would have been a basement area before . So it' s not 10 usually added. MS . WICKHAM: I wanted you to make 11 sure you understood that the garage is also there . And maybe I should give you this, 12 which is a mark-up of the plan we submitted before, showing the reduced size of the front . 13 But this might more specifically answer your questions in terms of height . Twenty-three 14 feet above the first floor is the actual top of the house, which is not how you measure 15 height under the code . This is the midpoint, but to go to the ridge is 23 feet . So that 16 might help you. BOARD MEMBER ORLANDO : We 17 shouldn' t lose focus on the notice of disapproval which is based on the setback of 18 the bluff . That' s what we' re addressing, but I don' t think it was ever talked about here 19 again, but we've lost site of, went off on tangents . 20 MS . WICKHAM: Bluff in the south side yard, yes . 21 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Do you have to go to the Trustees? 22 MS . WICKHAM: Mr. Hertado has spoken to the Trustees, and when I saw the 23 note on the agenda today, I had him go down and see them. And Lauren said that we could 24 advise you that she will give them a letter tomorrow to sign. There was no one there 25 today. She didn' t see a problem with it, but didn' t have an authorization to sign it . So February 26 , 2004 138 1 2 if we may get you that after the hearing, I 'm expecting that any day. 3 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Anybody else would like to speak. Yes, sir? 4 MR. MORGAN: Tom Morgan. I also live at Brown' s Hills . We just built a house 5 2 , 300 square feet, which is big, on a perfectly approved building lot . And we 6 needed no variances . This is a negative building envelope, that' s something else that 7 shouldn' t be overlooked. So basically it' s a bigger house on a negative space than we built 8 a couple years ago. That' s all I have to say. 9 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: I would agree with Mr. Morgan, it is a big house . There' s 10 no way we can -- MS . WICKHAM: That' s why we've 11 tried to come back -- we' re not supposed to be using height -- a number of times and 12 redesigned it and narrowed it down and limited to the one and-a-half stories rather than two 13 story. And that' s the type of house that he feels with the great room and the layout is 14 really what he would need to have . CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Any other 15 comments from the audience? MR. KEELER: Yes, my name is Brett 16 Keeler. Since when does everyone have to say what size a person' s house can be? If you 17 meet all the standards, you get a variance, whatever, whether you' re 1, 500 square feet on 18 the first floor and -- CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: It' s just that 19 because of the fragility of the site . MR. KEELER: Price -- the 20 neighborhood. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Of the site and 21 the dwelling, and the setbacks from the road, and the bluff' s right there, they' re not back 22 100 foot from the bluff as they should be, they' re much closer, and the bluff is very 23 fragile in that area, that we are concerned that we don' t have a big, heavy house sitting 24 on something, on that because the weight of that plus all the driveways . 25 MR. KEELER: Well, the weight of a one and-a-half story house versus a ranch February 26 , 2004 139 1 2 house is very equal . CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: I'm not saying 3 ' not to make it one and-a-half . I'm just saying a 2 , 800 square foot house is a good 4 size house . MR. KEELER: Right . But if a 5 person needs it, and you have a building lot that' s an acceptable building lot, then you 6 say you can' t build a house to live in, but then you paid for this lot . 7 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: I'm not saying you can' t build a house . 8 MR. KEELER: Yeah, but if it doesn' t meet a person' s needs . 9 MS . KOWALSKI : There' s no person yet . It' s for sale . 10 MS . WICKHAM: To more specifically answer your questions, that' s why we have the 11 engineering to the extent that we did to make sure that it wouldn' t be a problem. Because 12 ultimately you don' t want your house to be a problem. 13 MR. KEELER: You go through hiring professionals to tell you it' s not going to be 14 a problem, then you make a decision saying we don' t feel it' s going to be that big. There' s 15 got to be other grounds . I mean, why do we have professionals? 16 MS . KOWALSKI : Major setbacks, major variances they need, so they' re trying 17 to get it down to the minimum relief necessary. 18 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Which is our directive from the Town law is to give the 19 minimum relief necessary. MS . KOWALSKI : Not the maximum, 20 but the minimum, and can you build a 1, 200 square foot house . 21 MR. KEELER: If it was a 1, 200 square foot house on the first floor and went 22 two stories, it' s 2 , 400 square feet . MS . KOWALSKI : The Board hasn' t 23 made a decision yet . This is what they came down to. That' s a revised plan. 24 MR. KEELER: Thank you. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: No other 25 comments from the Board? Make a motion to close the hearing and reserve decision until February 26, 2004 140 1 2 later. BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Second j 3 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: All in favor? (Whereupon, all Board Members 4 responded in favor. ) CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: So moved. 5 MS . WICKHAM: Hopefully that' s the final closed meeting. 6 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: I hope so too . 7 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Our next hearing is for Towbee, and it' s because of a 8 building they' re using for storage, which had two tenants instead of just being owned by one 9 tenant . Am I correct? Okay. CAPTAIN FROENHOFFER: It' s owned 10 by one person. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: But you have a 11 tenant in there . CAPTAIN FROENHOFFER: Correct . 12 MS . WICKHAM: Since we were here quite a number of months ago for the setback 13 variances, we have been waiting for the Building Department to certify to the Planning y 14 Board the site plan. And apparently Mr. Verity had an issue with the multiple uses 15 on the property since last summer, and I gave him the hearing testimony from our last 16 hearing, where we discussed what those uses were. He was still uncomfortable with it and 17 finally issued a notice of disapproval based on the multiple uses, and your Board was kind 18 enough to get us in very quickly to address it . We feel quite strongly that the variance 19 really isn' t necessary because this property has historically had multiple uses and 20 Mr. Rich and I did spend a tremendous amount of time researching that, and we' d like to ask 21 you to recognize that . If for some reason you can' t, then I would go on to the variance 22 nature of the application. But I do think we've established a preexisting use of 23 multiple uses, which I would like you to recognize. 24 This is one of the really most interesting projects I've had in a long time, 25 and my client' s going to be glad that I'm not going to be billing him for literally hours I February 26, 2004 6A � LAW OFFICES f� WICKHAM, BRESSLER, GORDON & GEASA P.C. 13015 MAIN ROAD, P.O.BOX 1424 WILLLIAM WICKHAM(06-02) MATTITUCK,LONG ISLAND MELVILLE OFFICE ERIC J.BRESSLER NEW YORK 11952 275 BROAD HOLLOW RD ABIGAIL A.WICKHAM SUITE 111 LYNNE M.GORDON ---- MELVILLE, N.Y. 11747 JANET GEASA 631-298-8353 ---- TELEFAX NO.631-298-8565 631-249-9480 FAX NO.631-249-9484 December 15, 2003 Town of Southold Zoning Board of Appeals 53095 Main Road, Post Office Box 1179 Southold,New York 11971 Re: J&C Holdings, LP/Doll#5419 .-...4Ladies and Gentlemen: Enclosed are seven prints of prints of the survey which show the proposed dry well in the side yard, as per the Board's request. wVery t ly yours, t /,-;,/ AAW/dm / Abigail A. Wickham encl. 1/shdzba NEAGTy DE;"7-,4'EA-,4z .2/0-OZ - x/82 /a N® SOUND (ANN® LL ®NG 4�L/p/� /� TEST /-SOLE 05.5721/4-z)ByTJIE 5d OI' CDe./A/7Y DEPTOP HEALTH 6-/L TIE LINE )4 cQ��No EL -a 0 137.7/' ( "FOPS 0; N 84'47'50'E _30 oaM --_ _ NIGH WATER MARK 6/26/03 'f6 MAQL- _ _ — - �SA c/D; • CLAY' 6a2r; 4/007 s f. _ -- -- Bus cV _ -- BOTT03! — 10 ELa M - ._ a 240 _SA iv(' aEL-27.o C�,aY Q .30 --- f _- cc s/L.TY SA//D A fid,/-40 o GRAVEL o ..- --- _ --- .- _ .. _-__:- -_- - 'P5., - o . BO — _r L) z !�_ m� _ % E4-420 oc 60 0 OA A/D . . �-- - %- a AND 3 - ^_ -:_ _ j GQAVEG 1 50-71_ - ' _ „'._ — -- - 1- ---ji. - = , ,-70 z 66" _ _ _ _ ; --- 90 z \ 7B.TOP�OF BL UFE • • - 4. 1 1 �B 1 • ` j I ! F S L E D S�LEO 72_ �J i ! pT 1NE _ 55 ` c„7,R4f0AR/it, 0 /E RE�AfN/N ALL BIN 7. 0 M in , / 1 1 /r 1 / 1(J2 P•4 \`-76-~ ' 041 0A'ho 0 /-" / T .B 0 l 1% I i o�q �opY ONE STORY • ' A� [�j / <</NG FRAMENO g3`' /PLg �' ''32 i ; DWELLING / 5rJG 87.0 ' ( t' J + �cS 48 Is: \, , ' pROPSy —t, 1 ct► / AVERAGE NATURAL GRADE' 0°� ' "�' BF EL'-83 - 100' `AR' 'GF EL.91. 'It 'I i 1.4. % p - 8/.40t - O 65 p6.91. \+ l i I ( i "�1, F0.„, a� BO oM j m ,r / a 4. I 130. �O \ mw o q-,z1 / + PE E Pl, j Zm ¢ �./ * G�� /' • JF�5 W �p.99.74 N / - /'� O .99.5310° CL.99.98 0 0 aALT 3 II ;� , 96.17 +CL'9g 53 PAVEMENT Ep.100.16 / ', :, r� EP• 99.42 m 62 ♦ —1 18620 r. '�', CL.91.00 57EEr \+Ep.96123 EP Q U N w 1JcQ OO .VERNEAD E% ! z POLE v 32 WIRES J +CL'86.41g7E• +Ep,g�.86 2- V) NYT 6 +CL 82.45 ptJ B�IC Ep 86. 6 O ' C. MOIJ EP.82.35 0� n n// DRIVE ' 411,1 , NORTH EASEMENTS AN/OR SUBSURFACE STRUCTURES RECORDED OR LWRECORDED ARE - - - NOT GUARANTEED UNLESS PHYSICALLY EVIDENT AT 77/E TIME OF SURVEY. THE OFFSETS OR DGIENSIONS SHOWN HEREON FROM THE PROPERTY LINES TO ' THE STRUCTURES ARE FOR A SPECIFIC PURPOSE AND USE. THEREFORE THEY . ARE NOT INTENDED TO MONUMENT THE PROPERTY LINES OR-TO GUIDE THE ERECTION OF FENCES.ADDITIONAL STRUCTURES OR ANY OTHER IMPROVEMENT. UNAUTHORIZED ALTERATION OR ADDITIONS TO THIS SURVEY IS A-VIOLATION OF SECTION 7209 SUBDIVISION 2 OF THE NEW YORK STATE EDUCATION LAW. COPIES OF THIS SURVEY MAP NOT BEARING THE LAND SURVEYORS INKED SEAL OR EMBOSSED SEAL SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED TO BE A VALID TRUE COPT - CERTIFICATIONS INDICATED HEREON SHALL,RLN ONLY TO THE PERSON FOR WHOM THE SURVEY K PREPARED.AND ON THEIR BEHALF TO THE TITLE U.S.C. & 6.S., DATUM PERCOMPANY. GOVERNMENT AGENCY AND LENDING-INSTITUTION LISTED. HEREON. • , SUFFOLK -COUNTY SEWER WORKS STUDIES - - -CERTIFICATIONS ARE NOT TRANSFERABLE TO ADDITIONAL INSTITUTIONS OR SUBSEO£T/T OWNERS. SURVEY OF DESCRIBED -PROPERTY AT ORIENT - TOWN OF SOUTHOLD. SUFFOLK COUNTY. NEW YORK ' - - SCALE • I. - 40' SURVEYED: JUNE 26. 2003- ' - PLOT PLAN: ',JULY 28. 2003 REV/SED-' A1.16'/J57 20, Z003 - 7•7<1.5�� F N Ey/YO REV/.5 -D;DECEMBER //, 2003-- , 0VED2/1///70 S/0E) ��Q �sPNIES y/1��9 �� - , . - - lir -. -9v * ' - SUFFOLK -COUNTY -T.A,X `MAP -- , - ' .. ,',I. .-.;� ' -— ' D%STR'ICT- SECTION-' -BLOCK=` -L'O-T- ; ' _ a. /000.. I-;3'.' _ / 5. / ,r l ;i� _ ' ^f, - jt /L°L-EBR' ' ��. � • ' ,L�l 3 ,.L D�' UR,VE,Y-/.•NG.- P`: .. - . . - - �.. 500 �'.• �� - a;, "i" r`! »�. r'.;:., lH OWN, ,',NEW.. Y Rk - `N sa. i•t i!' 4 b• %`r- d - - 'u�i ve'�:` �v { li,e 'Its 3:Tti..0_aw!._,xra.:_.4",.....la.... 3J."�.i?f.:,:.i..�.-..> ._ ,.a..1fT..�. OFFICIAL USE ONLY J&C HOLDINGS (G. WICKHAM)5419 VO , NEW DWELL-FRONT PROP LINE & BLUFF 590 NORTH VIEW DRIVE, ORIENT 13-1-5.1 Check/CALL ist for new projects: - - APPLICANT/REPRESENTATIVE FOR AVAILIBILITY LABEL: (4) INCLUDE NAME, AGENT, TM#, ZBA#, ZONE, MBR'S INITIALS, PROJECT, VARIANCE, ADDRESS —top/front fldr, checklist sheet, 1st pg. appl /CTY TAX MAP 8 CPES — 2 W/NEIGHBORS CIRCLED AND #'S WRITTEN (1 FOR APPL & 1 FOR FILE TO BE STAPLED TO RT INSIDE FOLDER) MAILINGS: INCLUDE COVER LTR, SIGN, AFFS SIGN PSTG & MLG, CHAP , 58, LEGAL NOTICE - COPY OF ALL BUT AFFS & 58 IN FLDR RT vf ASSESSORS CARD PULL NOD FROM BD - 7 CPES — 1 ON FLDR RT SIDE / INDEX CARD — MAKE NEW OR ATTACH /ADD ONTO OLD IF PRIOR /RESEARCH PRIORS — INDEX CARDS, LASERFICHE, — 6 CPES OF DEC (1 RT SIDE FLDR) - CPE INDEX CARD, STAPLE TO INSIDE RT SIDE IN FLDR PB COORDINATION MEMO: ANY COMMERCIAL/SUBDIVISION PROJECTS N`K include: ZBA app, NOD, & BD app (S drive ZBA, memos) / INSPECTION PACKET: NOD, ZBA APPL, SURVEY, BD APPL, ASSESS v/ CARD, CTM, ALL OTHER CORRESPONDENCE lb ✓eA SOIL &WATER LTR: PARCELS ON LI SOUND COUNTY PLANNING LTR: for parcels located within 500' of RT 25, CR 48 or bay, sound, or estuary. Enclose ZBA app, decision, survey/map & NOD UPDATED: NEW INFORMATION: 0 LEGAL NOTICE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 26,2004 PUBLIC HEARING 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, FEBRUARY 26, 2004, at the time noted below(or as soon thereafter as possible): 2:10 p.m. J & C HOLDINGS, Contract Vendee (Owner: Doll) #5419. Applicant requests Variances under Sections 100-30A.3 and 100-239.4A, based on the Building Department's November 7, 2002 Notice of Disapproval, amended August 6, 2003, concerning a proposed location of a new dwelling with setbacks: (a) at less than 50 feet from the front property line and (b) less than 100 feet from the top of the Sound bluff,at 590 North View Drive, Orient; Parcel 1000-13-1-5.1. The Board of Appeals will hear all persons, or their representatives, desiring to be heard at each hearing, and/or desiring to submit written statements before the conclusion of each hearing. Each 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: January 27,2004. Board of Appeals Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman By Linda Kowalski 10:10 a.m. CARL AND amended August 4, 2003, con- ` ELENA PATCHKE#5428.This cerning proposed new deck con- is V`1\ri�y a request for a Variance under struction at less than 100 feet .Section 100-33, based on the from the top of the Sound bluff COUNTY OF SUFFOLK Building Department's June 27, or bank, at 1305 Soundview EW YORK ss: _,2003 Notice of Disapproval, Avenue Extension, Southold; L1SeSTAMariTEOFnatNe, being duly sworn, says concerning the "as built loca- Parcel 50-2-18.1. tion" of the hot tub structure in 1:20 p.m. MARION JONES that th an area other than a required #5420. This is a request for a Coordinatorshe ,is of thee TraveLegall er AdvWatcertihmansing, rear yard, at 95 Shore Lane, Variance under Section 100- Peconic;Parcel 86-1-4.17. 30A.3, based on the Building apublic newspaperprinted at Southold 10:20 a.m. HOWARD AND Depament's February 21,2003 in pSuffolk County; andpthat the notice of, LISA DAVIDOFF #5424. This Notice of Disapproval, for the is a request for a Variance under reason that the proposed addi- which the annexed is a printed copy, has Section 100-239.4B, based on tion will exceed the maximum been published in said Traveler the Building Department's June code limitation of 2%2 stories. 20,2003 Notice of Disapproval, Applicant proposes to convert a Watchman once each week concerning a proposed swim- cupola for accessible space, at for ming pool.at less than 75 feet 360 Ruch Lane, Southold; e. ing o t�'�oil t uccessively, from bulkhead, at 1015 Parcel 52-2-22. co he (� day of Kimberly Lane, Southold; 1:30 p.m. JOSEPH AND ��l/ /'Yl s --- Parcel 70-13-20.6. DANIELLE HELINSKI#5430. , 2003. 10:30 a.m. CHARLES AND This is a request for a Variance �pp BARBARA RODIN #5433. under Section 100-242A, based rte- This is a request for a Variance on the Building Department's j �,, C� No.,. under Section 100-30A.3,based August 14, 2003 Notice of \ on the Building Department's Disapproval, •concerning pro- August 8, 2003 Notice of posed additions at less than 35 Disapproval, amended feet from the front property line, September 8, 2003, concerning at 42300 C.R. 48 (a/k/a Middle Sworn to before me this..�G.>.....day of a proposed second-story addi- Road or North Road), Southold; /��� tion and alterations at less than Parcel 59-4-2.3. `���/�y�'`' �--� 2003. 50 feet from the front property 1:40 1 line, at 70 Strohson Road, FORCHELLI #5418. This Ris a , Cutchogue; Parcel 103-10-16. request for a Variance under } 10:40 a.m. J & C HOLD- `_- L` = 1NGS, Contract Vendee Section 100-244, based on the Building Department's April 17, Notary Public ` (Owner:Doll)#5419.Applicant 2003 Notice of Disapproval,Disa ,requests Variances under amended Au 4, 2003,100-30A.3 and 100- ceming a proposed dd in at 239.4A, based on the Building less than 10 feet on a single side Department's November 7, Emily Hamill 2002 Notice of Disapproval, yard and with total lot coverage NOTARY PUBLIC,State of New York amended002 August in excess of the code limitation No.01HA5059984 6, 2003, con- of 20%, at 405 Lake Drive, Qualified in ares May County ceming a proposed location of a Southold;Parcel 80-3-16. new dwelling with setbacks. (a) 1:50 Commission expires 06,2006 at less than 50 feet from the LYDIA DEF DSO#5438,This is front property line and (b) less a request fora Variance under than 100 feet from the top of the Section 100-244B,based on the Sound bluff, at 590 North View with an existing single-family Drive, Orient; Parcel 13-1-5.1. Building Department's August dwelling. Location of Property: 10:50 a.m. RICHARD and 25, 2003 Notice of disapproval, 855, New Suffolk. Avenue, NANCY CINCOTTA #5422. amended September 3, 2003, Mattituck. Applicants request a Special concerning a proposed front The Board of Appeals will Exception under Sectionp 100- lnorch size, at 1 ss exceedingrie0ts om hear all persons, or their repre- 30B(1) to establish an the front property line, at 1165 sentatives, desiring to be heard Accessory Bed and Breakfast Cedar Point Drive at each hearing, and/or desiring incidental to their ownership Southold;`Parcel 90-1-3. West, to submit conclusion of each and residence of the existing 2:00 before the conclusion each single-family home, for lodging p.m. JOHN AND • hearing. Each hearing will not and serving of brekfast-to no is KATHYa request fo aKVariance under start. earlier than more than four (4) casual, tran- designated sient at 26815 Main SectionD above.:Files are available for 1 Department's based on the review during business hours.If roomers,Cutchogue;Parcel 109-2- Building e'aent s August you have questions, please do 15. 6, 2003 Notice of Disapproval, not hesitate to,call (631) 765- Road,11:00 WALTER concerning a proposed addition 1809. TER 00 a m. exceeding - #5429. This is a the code limitation of Dated: October 29,2003. request for a Variance under ft. lot, at coverage1of this Mi 7,528 sq. Section 100-235A,based on the Boulevard,Southold;Parcel 87- Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman BuildingDe Southold Town Board of Department's August 2-11. Appeals 5, 2003 Notice of Disapproval, 2:10 p.m.JOSEPH PAGANO for the that a new By Linda Kowalski dwelling is not permitted when #5434. This is a request fora 1X 11/6/03 (022) 100- the lot does note have direct 2Variance under Section frontage or access to a public Department's based on the Building street in accordance with Town Department's July 16, 2003 _Law Section 280-A, at 1077 Notice of Disapproval. New Suffolk Road utchogue; Applicant proposes a new Parcel 108-7-7.2(formerly 5.2). dwelling with a front yard set- 1:00 p.m. KAREN BROWN back at less than 35 feet,at 1345 6411. This is a request for East Gillette 'Drive, East Variance under Section 100- Marion;Parcel 38-4-21. • !44, based on the Building 2:20 p.m. _________RAYMOND NINE )epartment's July 15, 2003 -#5435. This is a request for a dotice of - Disapproval. Waiver of Merger-pursuant to applicant proposes addition(s) Section 100-26; based on the i-the existing dwelling at less BuildingDe inn 10 feet ,on a single side ard,aat 130 n a -Path, p�f August 25 2003 Notice of Disapproval,o outhold;Parcel 644-6. , ari?ended September 8, 2003,to ELENP m• DIMITRI AND umnerge the' southwesterly fuse' SOLO s i FF #5'42.6 20,622 s a, N'i;l •onic. :- is request for: y -#`1`1 1 s ,., =E isle ` x�,odyialrioe �:7 r -2 if, rpPo `" ectio :�F100` , B',: B_ sez ' ?cei ;:y Y 29:4E1, Froin tlie;r` ig-d ,--in `a,;kth,e,' -B zilding posed{ParcelrA4413-44$.941: 4134$.9 1: artme sz D Ceiriber :20; '-' ~- . ,` `-',-:„:,,1$, _4 = qn Vit: 102 Notice,;of Disapproval, , See G ` 7 . ; eg{als_ ext `� . page► TOWN OF SOUTHOLD PROPERTY RECORD CARD DWNER STREET �G?� VILLAGE DIST. SUB. LOT VA', • A/61-/X Vie hi spi-elle, 0/--/ e 76" #2_ be =ORMER OWNER N E ACR. �'a v•sd /, aO '/ TYPE OF BUILDING / ES. SEAS. VL. /9 FARM COMM. CB. MICS. Mkt. Value L ) IMP. TOTAL DATE REMARKSOA-46a�7` l�A9 (7,4 P ?,/ I e, f�aa d 1-7fa s, . `���- p 712 3 Deo d 3 eiD o sf 2oiA "illabie FRONTAGE ON WATER 24 ° 3QQ� Voodland FRONTAGE ON ROAD 40.6 4V-0 Aeadowland DEPT C,e1-6 g�) .2. 2. -louse Plot BULKHEAD "otal 'SUFFot�.' APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS �,�o,,-�p`O L'pG Southold Town Hall Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman _� y� : 53095 Main Road Gerard P. Goehringer ti P.O. Box 1179 - Lydia A.TortoraW p 4 $ Southold,NY 11971-0959 Vincent Orlando �' 0' Os Tel. (631) 765-1809 James Dinizio,Jr. =�'1 Jail `0 .10 Fax(631) 765-9064 http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD June 3,2004 By Regular Mail and Fax Transmission Mr. John Hurtado do Abigail A. Wickham, Esq. Wickham Bressler Gordon&Geasa,P.C. 13015 Main Road,P.O. Box 1424 . Mattituck,NY 11952 Re: Appl.No. 5419—CTM 1000-13-1-5.1 (Orient) Dear Mr. Hurtado and Mrs. Wickham: As a follow-up to Mr. Hurtado's inquiry today, this will confirm that the attached were the recommendations issued by the Suffolk County Soil & Water Conservation District in March and May during 2003 concerning this property, and part of the ZBA review and conditions issued April 8, 2004 by the Board under Appeal No. 5419. Additionally, there were two subsequent letters which were considered as part of the entire record of November 5, 2003 and November 24, 2003, with similar recommendations. They do not appear to be in conflict, and therefore should be followed. It is suggested that the Suffolk County Soil & Water Conservation District be contacted in the event of any questions regarding the County's letters of evaluation and recommendations for preparation in the final planning stages. Copies are attached for your use and reference. Thank you. Very truly yours, Ruth D. Oliva Chairwoman Ends. cc (w/ends): Town Clerk/Records Management FEB-17-2004 16:39 FROM:WICKHAM & BRE 631 299 8565 TO:20 P.082/802 ,' �� X11, ZONING BOARD OF'APPEALS FEB 2004 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD:NEW YORK x ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS In the Matter of the Application of AFFIDAVIT J&C HOLDINGS, LLC OF POSTING Regarding Posting of Sign upon Applicant's Land Identified as 1000-13-1-5,1 x COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) ss: STATE Oil NEW YORK) I, John L, Hurtado, having azo,address at 590 North View Drive, Orient,New York,being duly sworn,deposes and say that: On the 17th clay of February,2004,I personally placed the Town's official Poster, with the date or hearing and nature of the application,in a secure position upon the above property,located ten(10) feet or closer from the street, facing each street abutting this property: 590 North View Drive, Orient.N.Y.; and that T hereby con firm that the Poster has remained in place for seven days prior to the date of the subject beating date,which hearing date was shown to be February 26,2004 • :.'-'J"o1i1i L. Hurtado Sworn to before me this 9\108. day, of February, 2004, @kiv../N, . Cdolz4k/c. Notary Pula BONNIE J.DOROSKI Notary Public,State Of NewYork AFFPOST 1 No.01D06095328,Suffolk County Term Expires July 7,20,4 . J� t „,k i� y`1,1 '� �.Jtt ,� i e — FEB 4 2004 is Fax/email ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS ebruary 24, 2004 Zoning Board of Appeals Town of Southold 53095 Main Road Southold,NY 11971 Reference: J& C Holdings, LP/Doll #5419 Dear Mrs. Oliva,Mrs. Tortora,Mrs. Kowalski, Mr. Goehringer and Mr. Horning, I apologize in advance for being unable to attend this hearing in person,but did want to request that the following items be acknowledged/addressed. First, I would like to acknowledge and thank the applicant for the revised plan submission dated, January 7, 2004 This plan,which includes a 3' retaining wall vs. 8' is significantly improved from the prior submission. The plan as submitted however is not particularly detailed and there are a few questions that were highlighted by Michael Mapes, a Professional Engineer, that I would like to ensure are addressed. According to Mr. Mapes,who was discussing the potential effects on my property: 1. The retaining wall shows only two drywells vs. four in the prior plan and there is none situated between the house and the retaining wall abutting the bluff 1. The drywells should be sized to contain all water inside the retaining walls including roof, driveway and the areas inside the wall such as lawns. Are there calculations for sizing the drywells? 2. Since the soil in this area contains clay it is not conducive to drainage do they propose excavating through the clay layer for each drywell?What are the sizes of the drywells? 3. For an area which can be very sensitive to storm runoff it would be prudent to size the drywells for a 10-year event which is 5” of rainfall. This was - recommended by Suffolk County Soil and Water in a memo for ZBA file 5272 (the original proposal). Five inches of rainfall is also the design standard for the USDA(Dept of Agriculture). 2. The retaining wall is an integral part of the house design since it is used to change the grading. It would be prudent to keep the wall as far back from the bluff as possible. We have been spared from major storms and hurricanes for a number of 111 years. A major storm could possibly take out 10 or 20 feet of the bluffs toe and in turn cause the cliff to seek to re-establish the angle of repose. This can compromise the wall if there was enough erosion to the face of the bluff since it is only 35 feet back. If the wall were to be compromised from erosion to the bluff, runoff to Ms. Sommers property could be increased since damage to the wall may not allow for runoff to be channeled to the drywells. The proposed wall is wood. Since this wall needs to be a permanent structure concrete would be a better choice. Wood has maintenance issues and will also allow water to pass through the wall during large storms with potential drainage concerns on the abutting property and by the bluff. a. Can the retaining wall be moved further than 35"from the bluff? b. Can it be constructed of concrete for long-term stability and reduced leakage? c. Given the reduction from 2 retaining walls to 1-3 ft wall what is the total height to the peak of the roof from the 78-ft elevation? 3. The area on the bluff side of the wall is graded toward the bluff from el 79 to el 74 to allow for a 5 foot elevation change. There is a small depression on the bluff side of the wall which will be filled in. This depression acts like a natural catch basin for runoff from the east to the west on the property. By filling in this depression runoff will be channeled toward the ravine on your property and could increase erosion. The Suffolk County Soil and Water group should study this design and address the issue of filling in the depression and it's effect of runoff on your property a. What alternatives can mitigate this? In addition, I would like to understand the details of how much fill will be required for this plan,what is the calculated weight of the soil and does it jeopardize the stability of the bluff? I appreciate your continued diligence in minimizing the impact to the bluff and the abutting properties. Sincerely, Heidi Hild Sommers cc: Michael Mapes cc: Mary Foster Morgan OFFICE OF ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 53095 Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Email: Linda.Kowalski(Uown.Southold.ny.us http://southoldtown.northfork.net (631) 765-1809 fax (631) 765-9064 COVER SHEET FOR TRANSMITTAL ATTN: 4/20k1GQ 3 DATE: / /2004 SUBJECT: ►-C� MESSAGE: Please find attached copies for your information. _ iL Please call us at 765-1809 if you did not receive all sheets. Thank you. Pages attached: 02. U.S. Postal ServiceTM , - °; CERTIFIED MAI.LTM RECEIPT • ' (Domestic Mail Only;No Insurance Coverage Provided) M For delivery information visit our website at www.usps.coins -0 NEOCR , NP kola,. A L U S E Postage $ 0.37 UNIT ID: 0952 rR I=1 Certified Fee 2.30 0 Postmark CI Return Reclept Fee 1.75 Here (Endorsement Required) CI rra Restricted Delivery Fee ClerkClerk: KKV5RW (Endorsement Required) Total Postage&Fees .42 02I17/04 RJ CI Sent To 1 n_1 1 c_-- S`Veet Apt.No.; ��ii or PO Box No. j7.`' tjji Aa4 ai City,State,ZIP+4 L'------ ��/- Iti 3 PS Form 3800,June 2002 L See Reverse for Instructions U.S. Postal ServiceTM CERTIFIED MAILTM RECEIPT (- Domestic Mail Only;No Insurance Coverage Provided) m For delivery information visit our website at www.usps.come - NEaRE i of 11 A L ra -� Postage $ 0.37 UNIT ID: 0952 r-1 p Certified Fee 2.30 O Postmark Return Reclept Fee 1.75 Here (Endorsement Required) Restricted Delivery Fee Clerk: KKV5RW rl (Endorsement Required) ru Total Postage&Fees $ 4.42 42/17/04 Ill 0 Sent To S`treel;Apt.No.;I. orPOBoxNo. u 3P- ./f-1p flfif City,State,ZlP+4F 4 I[ iiitiVmrarcc:roopu Anti U.S. Postal Service,. u CERTIFIED MAILTM RECEIPT (Domestic Mail Only;No Insurance Coverage Provided) m For delivery information visit our website at www.usps.come SU MFO[77 [ AL USE Postage $ 0.37 UNIT IIS: 0952 r� t� Certified Fee 2.30 Postmark I=1 Return Reciept Fee 1.75 Here (Endorsement Required) Restricted Delivery Fee Clerk: KKV5RW ra (Endorsement Required) Iv 4.42 02/17/04 Total Postage&Fees $ ru O Sent To N Street Apt.No.; ,�� or PO Box No. Q cHlizi .n...11 City,State,L' • IT a,4 . id 41"17 A. PS Form 3800,June 2002 See Reverse for Instructions 11011 e ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD: NEW YORK In the Matter of the Application of J & C Holdings, LLC AFFIDAVIT OF CTM Parcel# 1000-13-1-5.1 SERVICE BY MAIL STATE OF NEW YORK: :ss.: COUNTY OF SUFFOLK: Loann Bridenhagen,being duly sworn, deposes and says: On the 17th day of February, 2004, I personally mailed at the United States Post Office in Mattituck,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 Suffolk 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, as follows: Ms. Heidi Sommers, et al. Mr. and Mrs. Christopher T. Astley 20 Thornberry Lane 425 West 23rd Street, apt. 11 A-F Sudbury, Massachusetts 01776 New York,New York 10011 1000-13-1-4 1000-13-1-5.2 A Trenkmann Estate,Inc. 187 Lafayette Street New York,New York 10013 1000-13-1-10.1 C'L'bann Bridenh...ten Sw rn to before me this IT- day of February, 2004 otary Public 21:affmailt AMY M.BEASLEY NOTARY PUBLIC,State of New York No.01BE5039757 Qualified in Suffolk County � Commission Expires February 27, ZU U ., _ , -- i le po ), tt-,..., qo J-NIcus 8 ,,t,.., Zoo Li . _..._____ • - . Variance under Section-100-33, based -than the code,regukrect 50 feet',from.the: ._ .12-:,7„, _ „ ...„,„..,,,,__.„._- -, • ,_,_-.,..1.-„,,Each.hearmg-4yrill riphstartgarlier,Than LEGAk''NOTICES on the Building Departments May,8,,,.-1.feohtilpt-.1ine,,Pri:thiS=Nyaterfront-parcel;,j',,- '',1.1--'5Zi* ,STANLEinMALOisi,:.-+-iiesignated.above.Files are available-for —2003-Notice of Disapproval concerninirtiiiaAdtaaafraine6ior storage honsef,',.....#5'383.7„,,---,,AfPlicant requests:'=.• '.2_'(1).;. review during regular business hours If - ' -LEGAL-NOT-ICE " the location of a swimmiod, OMin a,• ,,iilocat,0!;1111,,aiirarea., other than the1,,-.1 -Variances under Sections.100,102-and you have questions please do-not liesi- ---SOUTHOLD TOWN side yard instead of the'cOdeAquired ,t4recitiired;,,,Yardr,Nat 21057Caliies'_Necie,-,T,1,109:40.,,q-'taed,-,-P.n.:.'the, „Blidding',.. tate to call(631)765-1809.- - :. , __., BOARD OF:APPEALS - rear yard, after the as-built deck was---'''''Road',','Sbiltholdi-CfM164:46.1. --r: Departments MaY-,20;2063,,Ncitice-Pf4; '.Dated:February.6,2004. ,. „ THURSDAY,FEBRUARYZ6, ' . constructed,-at $15.Horseshoe Drive,-;, ,;,- l:1,0.:p.m. VERA-s-BAKEIAAR'..;=Disapproval -4,1,,;:.!,-, -;„ '',- : -.PcYiRD„,z„_°13*-P_,._,__PAI-.:S: 2004 PUBLIC HEARINGS- ' CutChogne'i-OTM 95-4-1827.- '•- ;,'- #5479 This is ar'request`for-d Variance.'.- :tionfor'a multiple use building kialess.,-1. -_• - ' - -..%'-'" '' --Ig.-UTH D.',OLIVA, NOTICE IS HEREBY-GIVEN,pur- 10:10 a.m.'JOHN and'SANDRA- 'under Section 100-244, based on-the.- --tham-30,000 sq.'ft;permse-mid.,.NVIIIP6r-1.- ,-.--'.- ' - .. '' 'CHAIRWOMAN suant to Section 267 pf the Town Law SCOTT#5480.This is a request for a Building Departrnent!s January 5,2004- building frontage greater'than 60 linear .. ,By Linda Kowalski , and Chapter 100;(Zoning),Code of the Variance under'Section 100-30A.3; :,Notice of Disapproval,:concerning.*''feet, and (2) Interpretation,OffSeCtion A - 2924-1T Ft2 Town Of Spiitholdthe;follOWitig--public. :.,,=-hased--Vn4tifeF,13nil-ding;Department sl`t-i- proposed adilition'and'alteratfons-NFLith.a :,:l. !' 00„71-62;'Dull--54.0:.60.1.1tANI.sesi uit,tti.,(,ch hearings' will be ,'-held-Zi by the',....November 17, ,:,-200,,Notice•:16f,',/;- total lot-60Yerake-exeeedirig':-Ihe'Cod4,--..7?Building,-,DeparimentW-May.20, 20035' SOUTHOLD TOWNr"-BOARD-6FF" DiSaPiroiraf,concerning proposed addi.-'‘-_ limitation of 20%;-at 45.-BViith5Place:-'`Noticel.:Of Disapproval to determine ihg:1D- APPEALS at 'the'ToWn'Hall,'53095 , lion at less than 50-feet from the front 'Greenport;pat.Celli:SW-41,1-21: ' , --,...; multiple occupancies do not require an Main Road, P.O. Box 4179; Southold, '- lot line/. at _31025 Main Road,,'::,-,- .1:15P.M. GARY-MANGI.,10,-and-'''additional30,0,00 sq.It;of land,area perek New York 11971-0959;•pn..THURS- ',_cutChogne;eim102-2-234.), - *-" ,-4k111.1AWMEYERS-#5415.This is a.; ',..Periiiikeduse_ip'rthelt,-GenerallI3usinesS,,ng DAY, FEBRUARY 26,`2004; at the;' 10.20 a.m DARRIN. SKREZEC ...requesi for'Variance-ii.under Sections, . Zone District:The;aPpJicant,iS:.PippPs-,, times noted below(or as spon thereafter #5482. This-is,ai-request,,for ,(4.anl.,,,,119.922'39.4"and-,101Z244,-,:ba„secf-pOiie;,,"-,ilii'orie"corruiaeFiOcqiu„sture,!with up t -ay as possible): _ InterpretaiiMi;:‘.0a6r;,-Sdeii*',1013,-',,:l'i,VuiiiiiiieD*4tiOntzlietarntiet'..!:1-9 '..,Aiiii-ra,,,-Oiff4eii:t'ieriniO4.4.114witii eight 945'a.M.-JOSEPH AND ELIZA-• . 81A(6)as Yo,..4thedfdrttir-ndi*iii;iicaii:,,!-&i:dotObtice-Of-pisapii:OV4--c-iinCeriiiiiir,-;*04-Cclij)aqiei4•tlit,03.,821-:sq. BETH\ GORDON.-Location of —ing,busineik-ii:Pelinitted to..stockpileVi'irinIOSe'dadditio4andalieratiiiii!tp-the'll, ,-,f-t7-,JpirCeRs.Locatibp-AprOpertyi.3445., ill Property:• 485 - Qardiners--Lane, landscape ihaterialarraiiiii,acCeSSOry-iiSe.„$ MiistliiCiNiellint.at,:leisithari;-715,feer-,fiTA iiii,306a4C4c-liti&f,W1M-97-54'.5.,, Southold, CTM Parcel 1000270Y8-29: without the ,:',need..',for -4'''''SpeCial;:-"t:-I'lfiniii-'-the tidlkheadi'lesssthan:I04eet ni4",-:::i7injieliiitri:CO3,4Angiligii'5•,- Applicants request: '' •- -- -Exeeption,--'iiid'Ab),alterhativel*-.as1,:itaisingjd' ik;,and'ilesszthaii-g5-ft;10til -ih.,12:101*#44:-.3&efairoEDINGs,, (A) 5470=Varianees-are requested --•:"S'Oecial-FiC:Ofiriaqindq,*tiOni49:0,0-** 44-.5.,4:,*-‘129,5'jsland'Iiie :-.Eariep...,';f,Cidfiti'aq--NiTiirc:kKcOli4i:.)1).0:0419: under Sgctioria 100-242A and.1-00-244, l'81.(B)(2)ferramceritrietor/S'-:•-yaidrii;,,,iffiTRi'ee:Greenport CTM p44-6,---,1 -- ;.--1:----...-;:::-T,4-40-0*-AitAloaliVriha#cgs, under based on-the Building Department's= 32900 CR-NPer.:.aini9-;'014.7:414:A?p:!4*isi.inleWiff4iii( sitptwt:•f-fSeAtiiip§,11.0Q::39N ,00P00434A, No'ember 25,/ '2003 Notice of - Zone:timited'iIhisineki:- ,:..;`,'...:--",-;',--_ , s44p -45418 This is'i'request'fori-?=,;i1-fiaiedt On -the'i-4334104-,04artnient's Disapproval,-which statesthat the pro= 10:30 a-.M.-flOHN-anei6,YCEMr.1.-aVariance`;;Midert.:SeCtion-4.00-31k,;:ana- -;.*Overriher 1::::7i::•,?',2002i,,,,f,*tice... of posed alterations and additions to-the SAMITER05483.tTliis-ii'a:reiiitest foii ,,-ItIVO:t4'2A)-based-`-(ori the Building AiisapprihalaiiindedAtiOg„6,-i003,• existini.dwelling which'will, be less ..a'Variance":inideri‘SgZhOnk;n:lop-2-42k:il•-iDePartMent!aDee'ember-5,.2003,Nbtiee-:...- t*,e'oneerniii'i,a,pioflOS'01:focatiPmOf*new than 40 feet from the frontilot line and and 100-30A.5','zbasedpp,,,d'ie,1311ildirier;m-,,Di40-iiii0,4::,6nc,rhiiik-0,0,3§se-d.i?,---,,,diielliiig iVith-"setbaCki,:gat-al'lesS1..ilian less.than 50 feet from the rear lot line. Departniene.s DeCeniber14,-2603NPiite 'l-41.ditiPna:MidalterationS,-.att•IessrthadfciA„%feekfkikthe:-64:'Prpij-er„TY 4-10*4.-- Also,"the Building_hispeetbr-ha.Q deter- of-PisapprOval, conderniniPiciPp"-sed4gyi,-;feetitoni'aLskle.,side yard at-1250p-c*,:,:...,1,1:(0:44-il'tlian4(ibilgtiftp,ity*top of`the' mined that under Section-,160131A(1);a alterationsand additions To tli 'exitini;:t2'...-..48,1,/%11atiituCk;,:cTM„108-2,7.71 .,1,:,:":71::'''-::,LZSOmilbliiif;citfiOMffr*.„`IriP-w OH v'e;- -second-dwelling unit is not'permitted - dwelling at less thaii"-15,ft:-oU*single;:l,*-:,"J..'„,I;30''.;pini. ":MATTITUCK--,;97RE s'-f-...-pitent;:err.R1, :-A0-_ _.''''.::,,,,W,'-'F:?qe.!,.34-• above the garage for the reason that the, - side yarcl,,-.'at,t11380.-‘,Baiiierrkikprad; ''.''..DISTRICT#5485.This is a ieiflueW-ofr.,:]' •;2:30,`,p,iiiio,TOWDEEOLLC (SEA code allows „"one-family,.-detached .,-Cutchogue;rParceld000-11.8=2..12.'. ,,, '.7',:r.yAiiarCei. under Section'.100,9-2 and'-'..-T,GYV„.800THE/RS)1-#5,492'- Request- dwellings,not to'exCeed:one dwelling- 1040 all'i'.-S§TEpIIEN PISACANO tolplY,3%( ); based on the'_BOilding;',;:fPr'a Ari,ance'''Agcse0§4..lop---.142, on each lot."-^- • ,,I• - #549-0.Thisl.i's.ai-eqUest,for aNariance'.;:,,.:DePartment'S,jannary 2,2004:Noticeof,..2,:nbasiedz on-7146,atsiiiiiiiiigD4Partirtent's • (B)#5471-,,SPecialExcption-under ' -Under Sections--I00242A;'-:nifil.,100=';;;I:lDisapproval, amended January 16,,,,;-: Yantiarkf2799410iiiqq!of-00approyal,• Section 100 31B(13) for,an-Accessory - 244B,, based: Pn'',,Sthe--.1,kiildidejre200VConeerning.iprnpo'sed:ad,:litions717: 6606ininitAkcicudeil7dii:igiiiikconta4iiug,- Apartinent.in conjunction with ,the, , Departmenttze,Cenib4';'2 ,'._19,037,-:,-i.lilith a'‘front yard Setback*Iesiv'than,?40.;;:-..f:lesS4han?8(000,/,§4:',..tv-ok,146;qog'sq.:ft. owneri residence. . ,', • ' ' 'Notice of bi-SaPPrOVal,lconee-M4piO7:,",,',j'.feef,',andcbnceinitig 4-PrOpPsecl--annex;;;;:--.tief.USUri:thislriintio-446:41 Lr Zone_ 11111 9:50 am THOMAS CORNWELL- 'posecFadditions-anealterationi[At,:jei§k.i:,,,,b0ilditrig aLless.thin-iiveTeet from the .'District-,..,.c.LPeatiori!$f Property 700 #5473.,This is a request,fora,Variance, •rr,thari',40„feetl.:frairi-the,--fikuitIntlIne;,at.. -'itie'4id rear',,lot,liiieS;t'af",p9o0r-.Tik , ::,',Htiiiriel'Avenuer.,.-Si:aithOld;CTM'63:-.2c.-; under'section-,100-30A, based ori the ,_ ,16155 "aRi-,418,-4.ditdlibitiei,,,yi.fa•au!-;,*ree(*ifitudcl;CTM'14-6,33:1L1'.:•___ .'49.4 :i'A:A:;VTZ,15V:14:;- ...--- Building'DepartineniTs,.-Decernber 1, •10007101-11,5.17. -..;".r;,::\-„I,,,'..`1-;:.`!.,-„, :',;.-'n'41;1f±'4043.itil'CIIIIISTOPER:DURR :,-f--'t-, -,TheziBiaai-ct-coPyA-ppoig*ill,flear,aty, 2003 Notice-Of Disapproval concerning." 10 50 '.--,4-..1&-'fti.JKg-,',;;--s,#,*-:R.r,l'At-,:agtoki:81.gri4 A a-:T:54ii*fti-i*Aiiiiiee:::>:•12pi,i4ni:-,:07theli*pi,e$61#ftes,de'sir-- _proposed'additions and alterations;at ----;,LICALZI#5488.:,04-**iecnieSt,-ka!L;;_'.&Minler,',Sekticfn!':100,i33;51$_4413:;'Pi4litietP'.4-jde-0);44;'a4a....411eaiii,ii,-*Wier:.:. less than 15•feet,on a-sin'gle-..side set- --,,Variance tificler$SeCtiOn4b039:b4ertryic.,--*Uildifig 15-4*-t149nt's'1,1****,2-5,;WfdeWiriga:_tii;::***Nr,i;ithie,-statdmentst= back, at 00 West>, Cove...,Road on the Building'gispeCfpr*:DOOeiiibeW'"2063:Notiac'pf p,,tooig=vo,,se*gi.,.-::,b.:.*,-,ttibl,-eplicliiiiO4',X1404*id4g.: Cutchagiiei Parce1100011148.1'.' , 1 8',,2003, -Noticet^C!riDisappsoyalAaray ..aproppsed access,ufTtai#0*.te:edjn:W„ iz:'* ,VOIr*:,734:FA. 1000:,a'..m.'jOHNand=YIVIAINI' =-renewed build,thif#5,diiVconeerfuj*ali11--ikle code limitation Of-;18--fe4;;:rafr,i'lla.:14-1 :1--- -,-,-,- SEE PAGE 36A FOR ' \ FUNT04.--#5477:;Thisli-a request for,aJ---::accessolir.iTiinpiiingf«ai06iidigie, r,•;;Ntrekiihalidkiii*Nfaititti84ta:WfM,-'Q'• _- -- , , _ , -,.,,,,,r, ..A,,2,- „n.ci,k,-„-:._,,i,.:1,-,--77,„L,,,,V,-1, , ,•- ,c.:4-,-,-,-;,-r,::.-•• ,'-,.,----,:, -7,3,;-1,P.,1,'.,..:X:.9,*,-5',1.,,y,fr,,,,_,,,,i,,,..fri,,,e-,,,,,..,75,.0.4 . - _ , , ..•..,,-e-,...,',.,...'„--,-:, ...,\-,..,7, ..• -'.r'.'t -_,,,,,',:.I,'...';,' ...,—.,C."-2.',.kk:1.'"<'',..A..s•-•,.. :::4';'-‘,-;:;• .'4':•,13,"`•:-. ..,ifi'-'W'r.17,..:-•••'"'",.-`-.'---e=" . ' 14 . ''' • . ---- 1111. IP OFFICE OF ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SOUTHOLD TOWN HALL 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 (631) 765-1809 Fax (631) 765-9064 January 26, 2003 Re: Chapter 58 — Public Notice for Thursday, February 26, 2004 Hearing(s) Dear Sir or Madam: - 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) By February 9th: Please send the enclosed Legal Notice, with both a cover letter including a contact person and telephone number, and a copy of your survey filed with this application which shows the new construction area, CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED, to all owners of land (vacant or improved) surrounding yours, including land across any street, railroad tracks, or right-of-way that borders your property (please see revised Town Code Ch. 58 enclosed). Use the current addresses shown on the assessment rolls maintained by the Town Assessors' Office located at Southold Town Hall (765-1937) and 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. If any letter is returned to you undeliverable, you are requested to make other attempts to obtain a mailing address or to deliver the letter to the current owner, to the best of your ability and to confirm this in either a written statement, or at the hearing, with the returned letter. Please either mail or deliver to our office your Affidavit of Mailing (form enclosed) with parcel numbers, name and address's noted, 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 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. 2) By February 17th: Please make arrangements to place the enclosed poster on a sign board such as plywood or similar material, posting it at your property for at least seven (7) 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.) The hearing will be delayed 2 months if your property is not posted properly. Please also deliver your Affidavit of Posting to our office on the day of the hearing. If you do not meet the deadlines stated in this letter, please contact us promptly. Thank you for your cooperation. r Very truly yours, Enclosures Zoning Appeals Board and Staff , ) ihiTkiiJ , uF ARIA' A public hearing will be held by the Southold Town Appeals Board at Town Hall , 53095 Main Road , Southold , concerning this property: NAME : J & C HOLDINGS 5479 MAP #: 13- 1 -5 . 1 APPEAL: SETBACKS PROJECT : NEW 2 STORY '1 WELLING DATE : THURS . FEB . 26 2004 2 : 10 PM If you are interested in this project, you may review the file(s) prior to the hearing during normal business days between the hours of 8am and 3pm . ZONING BOARD - TOWN OF SOUTHOLD - 765-1809 -®3 002. 114:37 2037621' �•�ee�-v.e.d DAVID SUMMERStip PAGE 01 u � \I II 1c3if Via Fax l— zi/Ce)iCk-A. �2. January 4, 2004 Zoning Board of Appeals Town of Southold 53095 Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Reference: J&C Holdings,LP/Doll #5419 Dear Mrs. Oliva,Mrs. Tortora,Mrs. Kowalski,Mr. Goehriinger and Mr.Horning, I continue to be opposed to the proposed significant landscape reconfiguration, including the cut and fill activity and the total 8 feet high retaining walls precipitously close to the bluff and the abutting properties which contribute to the forty foot fortress house proposal. While I appreciate the gesture of Mr. Hurtado to move the 8 foot high retaining walls to six feet from my property line, this does not address the major issues regarding the impact to the environment and the abutting owner's property and bluffs,the safety aspects of the 8 foot walls,nor the potential negative impact on the economic value of my property. • The concerns raised here and in my letter to the board of December 19th, 2003 are critical and in my opinion must be addressed to ensure a location appropriate dwelling is constructed. Thus I have engaged the services of a professional engineer to complete an assessment of the impact to the environment and abutting properties. I respectfully request that the board re-open the variance hearing proceedings so that the results of this work may be reviewed when complete. Sincerely, A..\,h,... .. al,j bry,,,, Heidi Hild Sommers cc: Harvey Arnoff Attachment: My Letter dated 12/19/03 Oil03/15%2002 14:37 2037620110 DAVID SOMMERS PAGE 02 60 Via Fax December 19,2003 Zoning Board of Appeals Town of Southold 53095 Main Road Southold,NY 11971 Dear Mrs. Oliva,Mrs. Tortora, Mrs.KOwalski,•Mr. Goehringer and Mr. Horning, I want to reiterate my strong objection to the proposed significant alteration to the Doll property in Browns Hills, Orient. As I expressed in the hearing at the end of yesterday I have three issues/concerns with this proposal: 1. The major reconfiguration of the landscape creating a building space between contour line 74 and contour line 92... a leveling of 18 feet of sand and marl precariously close to the edge of the bluff,requiting major retaining walls. Those retaining walls are: a. 8 feet total height above the level of the property line—creating an artificial platform for building to be filled with sand. b. A total length of over 50 feet of retaining wall is required to hold in the sand in order to create this building space. c. The 2-tiered, 8 foot high retaining wall is 3 feet from my property line. d. The retaining walls are 35 feet from the bluff(the proposed house is 50 ft.), in an area where zoning requires structures to be 100 feet from the bluff. This is a major distortion of the landscape abutting the bluff and my property and one that I am vehemently opposed to. There has been significant erosion of this bluff less that 150 feet to the east of this location,this reconfiguration significantly raises the risk of bluff instability and potential erosion. 2. On top of the 8 foot raised platform on which the house is to be built,the size and height of this house will tower over the landscape. From my abutting property this supposed 1 1/2 story house will soar to 40 feet,more like a 4 story structure than the zoning intended 1 %z stories. If this is approved it is a tragedy, a, As an aside, the previously proposed Tassone home for this location, rejected by this board is FAR FAR FAR preferable,requiring no 8 foot 03/1572002 '14:37 2037629 DAVID SOMMERS PAGE 03 so walls, or massive bluff reconfiguration with a footprint size of 50 x 30 vs. the current much larger structure of 65 x 32. 3. Provision for drainage run-off appears inadequate given the depth of the drywells equal to the depth of the added fill. I am not opposed to a house on this location provided one can be constructed which does not require 18 foot cut and fill activity and 8 foot high retaining walls. I implore the board to use their better judgment and please ask the applicant to reconsider a property/home configuration that will not jeopardize the bluff, the landscape and the good nature of neighbors who truly want to protect the character and charm of the North End. Sincerely, Heidi Hild Sommers �� � Page 1 of 2 6,' � � ' ���,� zed � ' - el- Kowalski, Linda 4V° From: Venetia Hands[venetia@mindspring.com] Sent: Friday, January 02, 2004 3:53 PM To: Linda.Kowalski@town.southold.ny.us Subject: Re: Requests for Variances on Edna Doll property, Browns Hills, Orient. Hearing Jan 8th (?) To Southold Town Zoning Board: I have been a resident of the Browns Hills community in Orient since 1980, and became a friend of Edna Doll's shortly thereafter. She and I have been in touch several times regarding her need to sell her vacant lot on NorthView Drive. I wish to support Edna's right to sell her property for a good market value and for the prospective buyer to be granted variances to build a lovely home there and to join our community. My request to the Zoning Board is that you do everything you can to ensure that what is built on this land is as sensitive to its environmental conditions and contours as is possible. The current proposal, as I understand it, with an 8ft high platform supporting a 65 x 32 ft first floor, and another "half floor" on top, sounds like an effort to impose a very conventional house plan on a very unconventional site. In addition, if it is true that the overall height might be 40ft(from the road??)this seems wholly out of proportion with the surrounding homes. As the lot has become more accessible, it is beginning to reveal itself as a rather charming "notch" for an imaginative designer, who cares about the environment,the contours and the relationship of land to buildings. It begs for someone who loves this corner of Orient to create a home that hugs the hillside -- with a roof line popping up above the level of the road to a height no greater than 20 feet or so; with a variance to the road setback that allows them to come considerably closer than the current 50ft requirement; with some appropriate maximum square footage. And if there is any way you can give provisional approval subject to seeing final designs, I think that would be wonderful. I know you will do all you can to respect both Edna and the new homeowner's rights, along with those of the neighborhood and the fragility of the bluff. It's quite a challenge! And I want to end by saying thank you very much to all of you who spend so much time helping to preserve the beauty of Southold Town. Yours sincerely, Venetia Hands 255 SouthView Drive Brown's Hills. Orient 631-323-2598 1/5/04 /4' I Page 1 of 1 • c � , 40" Y kk Kowalski, Linda kir Frlom: Anne MacKay [amackayl @optonline.net] Sent: Friday, December 26, 2003 11:51 AM To: Linda.Kowalski@Town.southold.ny.us Subject: J&C Holdings Variance request �I I have lived in Brown's Hills for over 40 years, and have seen many houses built. I am very concerned about the J&C Holdings plans for the small shore-front piece. Everything about it seems wrong: the setback from the shore, the setback from the road. Instead of planning a house into the contour of the land (as other houses are)they want to end up way over the negulated height by starting with an 8 feet high platform. Going to the beach, we see this lot every day. If there has to be a house, please keep it a small modest house, appropriate to the community! II Thank you Anne MacKay, Box 97, Orient, NY 11957 12/26/03 I c--- C � zt S CA- ' 6/® 1.-/( i ' l®hwuI1 a �� Pi&a4 Kowalski, Lindab . siqo 44, From: Lynn Witt [lbwitt@juno.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2004 8:31 AM To: Linda.Kowalski@town.southold.ny.us Subject: Edna Doll property variance, Brown's Hills -Sj Zoning Board of Appeal Town of Southold 53095 Main Road Southold, NY 11971 January 6, 2004 Dear ZBA members: We are recent residents of Brown's Hills, in Orient, NY. We understand that there is a request from J & C Holdings before the board to approve a variance to the building restrictions on the small plot of land that is being sold by our neighbor, Edna Doll. We are also land owners in California, and have extensive experience dealing with the California Coastal Commission, which, among other things, regulates the size of lots and buildings on the Pacific coast. This has given us perspective from both an owner's and a neighbor' s concerns in this situation. We also share the environmental concerns that have been brought to the board's attention by some of the other Brown's Hills residents. We absolutely agree that Edna Doll, and every other property owner, has every right to sell her land and to make a profit from the sale. We also understand that whoever buys this property would want to be assured that the property is "buildable." However, having recently looked for property throughout the North Fork before buying in Brown's Hills, we are confident that Edna Doll can obtain top dollar for her lot even without the approval of the largest possible house. That said we have learned that the best way to ensure both of these goals are met is for a compromise to be reached. Generally speaking, Brown's Hills is a residential neighborhood with relatively modest houses on approximately one acre lots. We request that the board approve a building plan that is a "fit" with the rest of the neighborhood, both by size and square footage. This makes the most sense to us, and would ensure that a new house would not tower above its neighbors or be built so close to the property line as to "intrude" on neighboring property, the cliffside, or the road. Given the situation, we strongly urge that the board take the time to make the right decision, perhaps by postponing the final ruling. This would give members of the board the opportunity to visit the neighborhood and see for themselves the impact a building on this site, as proposed, would have. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Lynn Witt & Sherry Thomas 1 ol) OFFICE OF i• ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS T 53095 Main Road Southold, NY 11971 http://southoldtown.northfork.net (631) 765-1809 fax(631) 765-9064 FAX TRANSMISSION FAX# (mac 91-- g-5 ATTN: a, DATE: / / /200 y SUBJECT: - fi0 /2o- L MESSAGE: �Il/-Ayji./ ilt7k4 cZ_ P Ar 1/60 / Please feel fre-/o a I if you did not receive all sheets. Town Hall h-,urs are between 8-4. Thank you. Pages attached: it. /mp�p .L � t - M1n®��z��S "I/ 1 ) fi4'® c ✓ Page 1 of 2 �/u y` , i i l l/ �I Kowalski, Linda ' From: Venetia Hands[venetia@mindspring.com] Sent: Friday, January 02, 2004 3:53 PM To: Linda.Kowalski@town southold.ny.us Subject: Re: Requests for Variances on Edna Doll property, Browns Hills, Orient. Hearing Jan 8th (?) To Southold Town Zoning Board: I have been a resident of the Browns Hills community in Orient since 1980, and became a friend of Edna Doll's shortly thereafter. She and I have been in touch several times regarding her need to sell her vacant lot on NorthView Drive. I wish to support Edna's right to sell her property for a good market value and for the prospective buyer to be granted variances to build a lovely home there and to join our community. My request to the Zoning Board is that you do everything you can to ensure that what is built on this land is as sensitive to its environmental conditions and contours as is possible. The current proposal, as I understand it,with an 8ft high platform supporting a 65 x 32 ft first floor, and another "half floor" on top, sounds like an effort to impose a very conventional house plan on a very unconventional site. In addition, if it is true that the overall height might be 40ft(from the road??)this seems wholly out of proportion with the surrounding homes. As the lot has become more accessible, it is beginning to reveal itself as a rather charming "notch" for an imaginative designer,who cares about the environment, the contours and the relationship of land to buildings. It begs for someone who loves this corner of Orient to create a home that hugs the hillside -- with a roof line popping up above the level of the road to a height no greater than 20 feet or so; with a variance to the road setback that allows them to come considerably closer than the current 50ft requirement; with some appropriate maximum square footage. And if there is any way you can give provisional approval subject to seeing final designs, I think that would be wonderful. I know you will do all you can to respect both Edna and the new homeowner's rights, along with those of the neighborhood and the fragility of the bluff. It's quite a challenge! And I want to end by saying thank you very much to all of you who spend so much time helping to preserve the beauty of Southold Town. Yours sincerely, Venetia Hands 255 SouthView Drive Brown's Hills. Orient 631-323-2598 1/5/04 P. 1 J v * * * COMVd-CATION RESULT REPORT ( DEC. 15. 2UUi 10: 02AM ) * * * FAX HEADER: SOUTHOLD SUPERVISORS TRANSMITTED/STORED : DEC. 15. 2003 10:01AM FILE MODE OPTION ADDRESS RESULT PAGE 915 MEMORY TX 2988565 OK 2/2 REASON' FOR ERROR E-1) HANG UP OR LINE FAIL E-2) BUSY E73) NO ANSWER E-4) NO FACSIMILE CONNECTION OFFICE OF ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 53095 Main Road Southold, NY 11971 http://southoldtown.northfork.net (631) 765-1809 fax (631) 765-9064 MX TRANSMISSION FAX#� 9 ATTN:`' DATE: /4-1 //2003 ?'a/PA1 SUBJECT; !��_' . 4 ; 6-Liz 4 MESSAGE: A Please feel free to call if you did not receive all sheets. Town Hall hours are between 8-4. Thank you. Pages aitached: r/. 11/19/2003 17:20 212-254-1755 RYALL.PORTER ARC PAGE 02 411 915 South View Drive-Brown's Hills 'p P.O.Box 57 #-01,-43 Orient,NY 11957 Tib1 6 November 19,2003 ,Fr Lte Southold Zoning Board-of Appeals Town Hall P.O.Box 1179 53095 Main Road Southold,NY 11971 Re: ZBA file#5449- Area Variance for Edna Doll's Lot North View Dr-.,Brown's Hills,Orient, J &C Holdings LLP(applicant/purchaser from Doll) Dear Sir: - I am a resident of Brown's Hills and am concerned about the environmental impact of building on this small lot on Long Island Sound. I am not in principal against any house being built on-this lot,but would ask for the ZBA to look very carefully at the environmental issues before deciding whether or not the lot is buildable and to what degree the ZBA will allow it so: 1) Most importantly,the lot is tiny,and has a large natural ravine running through it and down the bluff face to the north. This is the natural route for drainage. The 65-foot-by-32-foot house as proposed cannot be built without filling the ravine. What environmental impact will this filling have on the bluff, and how will drainage occur after the ravine is filled out ' of its existence? I cannot answer this question,but the ZBA must answer it before giving any relief to the 100-foot bluff setback. • 2) The applicant requests that the 100 foot environmental setback from the bluff be reduced to 50-feet in order for this house to be built. A house COULD be built fartherthan 50 feet from the bluff and closer to the road, thus potentially reducing the environmental impact on the bluff and ravine. The house-would almost certainly have to-be smaller or narrower, than proposed. The front-yard setback might be reduced to 25-feet in order to create a greater setback to the bluff(a 25-foot front yard setback, was granted by ZBA#4851 on 09.11.2000 at 915 South View Drive- Brown's Hills, where reasonable site planning and environmental considerations were the motivating reasons for the variance). A,{ri a 3) This lot is the remainder of a larger lot which had been sub-divliand partially sold off by the current Owner. The Owner has told all neighbors, over many years, that this remaining lot would always be a nature preserve or a "bird sanctuary". The Owner has correctly said that the lot is unbuildable following the current environmental and zoning setbacks. Current neighbors,have not only purchased and built their houses with 11/19/2003 17:20 212-254-1755 RYALL PORTER ARCH PAGE 03 a . this knowledge of the existing laws,but they have also attempted to discuss with Owner the possibility of purchasing the lot in order to leave it undeveloped. Letters to this effect have been ignored. 4) The current application is a TEST by speculative builders/developers: to find out how much the ZBA will bend the rules to allow a house to be built within environmental setbacks. In today's market, the larger the house, the larger the profit. I would ask again that the ZBA take a very close look at the environmental issues raised by construction on this lot. Sincerely, William Lyall NOV 19 '03 16:02 FR IBM B-3 2K-05 914 766 3175 TO 916317659064 P.01 „ °"to, 3i ?Ai /V/9 03 5- Po( k. 20 Thornberry Lane Sudbury MA 01776 tee , . .._r 1l /® O 3 November 19,2003 Town of Southold Zoning Board of Appeals 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971-0959 Re: North view Drive/Browns Hills Variance Request for Edna Doll's Property Hearing November 20,2003 Dear Board: I am an abutting property owner at 740 Northview Drive, Orient to the J&C Holding-Doll variance request that is scheduled to be heard tomorrow. I would like to request a delay in the hearing as I have not had sufficient time to review the material submitted. l apologize in advance,but this is an important variance request given the proximity of the bluffs,the size and slope of the lot and the potential implications for runoff On our adjacent land. Sine rely, Heidi Hild Sommers 978.835.6552 hheidi@us.ibm.com r ** TOTAL PAuE.61 *�k OFFICE OF ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 53095 Main Road Southold, NY 11971 http://southoldtown.northfork.net (631) 765-1809 fax (631) 765-9064 FAX TRANSMISSION • FAX#' _o9 91---15-6 ATTN: /bGCI-[-l:• tdi �c GAO DATE: /7 / l 7/2003 Pim SUBJECT: ,-/-C / ; £ 6/ MESSAGE:/� // (el le A, es py-- , • 01 /`J2,Q II P� J _1 Pleas feel free to call if you did not receive all sheets. Town Hall hours are between 8-4. Thank you. Pages attached: / . ?ANSMISSION VERIFICATION REPORT TIME : 11/19/2003 16:29 DATE,TIME 11/19 16:28 FAX NO./NAME 2988565 DURATION 00: 00: 41 PAGE(S) 02 RESULT OK MODE STANDARD ECM A 11i'13/2003 17:25pol 212-254-1755 RYALL PORTER ARCH PAGE 01 40 k '")) jEP �'� • 915 South View Drive-Brown's Hills P.O.Box 57 � NOV 2 0 2003 Orient,NY 11957 November 19,2003 p ,D Southold Zoning Board of Appeals • G CTown Hall 1/ ` i66P.O.Box 1179 53095 Main Road Southold,NY 11971 c)- ✓ v Lk Iv Re: ZBA file #5449 Area Variance for Edna Doll's Lot -North View Dr.,Brown's Hills, Orient J &C Holdings LLP(applicant/purchaser from Doll) Dear Sir: I am a resident of Brown's Hills and am concerned about the environmental impact of building on this small lot on Long Island Sound. I an' not in principal against any house being built on this lot, but would ask for the ZBA to look very carefully at the environmental issues before deciding whether or not the lot is buildable and to what degree the ZBA will allow it so: 1) Most importantly, the lot is tiny, and has a large natural ravine running through it and down the bluff face to the north. This is the natural route for drainage. The 65-foot by 32-foot house as proposed cannot be built without filling the ravine. What environmental impact will this filling have on the bluff, and how will drainage occur after the ravine is filled out of its existence? I cannot answer this question,but the ZBA must answer it before giving any relief to the 100-foot bluff setback. 2) The applicant requests that the 100-foot environmental setback from the bluff be reduced to 50-feet in order for this house to be built. A house COULD be built farther than 50 feet from the bluff and closer to the road, thus potentially reducing the environmental impact on the bluff and ravine. The house would almost certainly have to be smaller or narrower than proposed. The front-yard setback might be reduced to 25-feet in order to create a greater setback to the bluff(a 25-foot front yard setback was granted by ZBA#4$51 on 09.11.2000 at 915 South View Drive- Brown's Hills,where reasonable site planning and environmental considerations were the motivating reasons for the variance). art r 4.4 3) This lot is the remainder of a larger lot which had been sub-divid and �� partially sold off by the current Owner. The Owner has told all neighbors, over many years, that this remaining lot would always be a nature preserve or a"bird sanctuary'. The Owner has correctly said that the lot is unbuildable following the current environmental and zoning setbacks. Current neighbors have not only purchased and built their houses with 11/19/2013 17:25 212-254-1755 RYALL PORTER ARCH PAGE 02 this knowledge of the existing laws, but they have also attempted to discuss with Owner the possibility of purchasing the lot in order to leave it undeveloped. Letters to this effect have been ignored. 4) The current application is a TEST by speculative builders/developers: to find out how much the ZBA will bend the rules to allow a house to be built within environmental.setbacks, In today's market, the larger the house,the larger the profit. I would ask again that the ZBA take a very close look at the environmental issues raised by construction on this lot. Sincerely, • William Ryall OFFICE OF r r �1\441/4 � (f& ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS' 53095 Main Road Southold, NY 11971 • http://southoldtown.northfork.net (631) 765-1809 fax(631) 765-9064 FAX TRANSMISSION FAX# 3290 ATTN: /6 a 02 DATE: i/ lad /2003 •3°- '" n SUBJECT: Ck-/-C 54cte__,/ yJ /o?o /bL MESSAGE: >G " ri--) ii._(11,v, .(JAI leetp Please feel free to call if you did not receive all sheets. Town Hall hours are between 8-4. Thank you. Pages attached: 021. /1/7-0/o3 _ ti NO V 2 0 2003 LC; Gz l r v .v 110,- NT, e_ 10 Z c / io G S /7,7_e r - ‘ 1,4_; /74_7/41. 7 0 SO ®� s� o / / e1 v— 3 6 - P-3 2,s- P. 1 * * * COWL' . TION RESULT REPORT ( NOV. 20. 20C : OOAM ) * * * FAX HEADER: SOUTHOLD SUPERVISORS TRANSMITTED/STORED • NOV. 20. 2003 10:59AM FILE MODE OPTION ADDRESS RESULT PAGE 669 MEMORY TX 2988565 OK 2/2 REASON FOR ERROR E-1) HANG UP OR LINE FAIL E-2) BUSY E-3) NO ANSWER E-4) NO FACSIMILE CONNECTION ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 (631) 765-1809 (631) 765-9064 FAX Email: Linda_Kowalsk,& Town.Southold.nv.us Jessica.Boger(aTown.Southold_nv.us httn://southoldtown.northfork.net TO= FAX#: 9-Sk� _ 5(0S- DATE: (DATE: \ \ • a:.p - 0 PAGES: 4 to follow APPL OF: d` C_ HEARING:- t • C)3 A-01 RE: i, S ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD:NEW YORK NOV 1 9 2003 x f, In the Matter of the Application of AFFIDAVIT J & C HOLDINGS OF POSTING Regarding Posting of Sign upon Applicant's Land Identified as 1000-13-1-5.1 x COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) ss: STATE OF NEW YORK) I, John Hurtado,having an address at 3400 Lighthouse Road, Southold,New York, being duly sworn, deposes and say that: On the ? day of November, 2003, I personally placed the Town's official Poster, with the date of hearing and nature of the application, in a secure position upon the above property, located ten(10) feet or closer from the street, facing each street abutting this property: 590 North View Drive, Orient; and that I hereby confirm that the Poster has remained in place for seven days prior to the date of the subject hearing date, which hearing date was shown to be November 20, 2003. 40/ Hurtado Sworn to before me this ?fkday of November, 2003. , l / ota Puo is AMY M.BEASLEY NOTARY PUBLIC,State of New York No.01BE5039767 AFFPOST1 Qualified in Suffolk County Commission Expires February 27, ri C- dncr °ill l/%/03 p6 LaSalle Avenue "-it/ Cranford, NJ 07016 ei59 tp fGagdzis 908-276-4365 rr 7et/L� November 3, 2003 Lydia A. Tartora, Chairwoman Southhold Planning Commission Southhold Town Building Main Street Southhold, NY 11971 Dear Ms. Tartora, Greetings to you, and to the members of the Southhold Planning Commission. Having worked with an environmental group in NJ, I know how many complex and difficult matters you must have before you at this time. I also know you have but one meeting a month to finalize decisions relating to these complex problems. I most humbly come to ask if you can do anything to expedite the sale of a permit on my Browns Hills lot on Northview Drive in Orient. As you know, all pre-requisite conditions have been met in the procedures that have dragged on for more than a year. I am sure the buyer would appreciate whatever you could do to expedite the granting of the permit as quickly as possible so that he could proceed with plans before the wicked weather of the winter causes a cessation of all work. Sincerely yours, Edna Doll U.S. Postal ServiceTM `O CERTIFIED MA!LTM RECEIPT co =(Domestic Mail Only;No Insurance Coverage Provided) m For delivery information visit our websitetggat Www.usps.com® Irl f,, 1 4 ;Fm1 n r, f ':1 € � 9 Ff. �, ,f' , 1��l,.tw l�OF: :;7'.I 1C:q...n (s�a r.'�a > t'�µ 1-4 `D Postage �C�S 1.': ,JNIT ID: 952 r-1 Q Certified F:e Q -, �� Postmark CI Return Recie t ee (EndorsemenfRequ d) `.,1 .!. 4i Here Restricted Delriery F e lerk: VOKZCll ra (EndorsemerifFlequired) MI %� `s- 6f, - O' 11/1'0/4: lajli Total Postage&Fee " RJ cam'- \A i)(.. CI Sent To h173 4 _ , r`" Street Apt. o., � I1 or PO Box No. Y � 3 r .c t 4p 1 l I City,State,ZIP+4 tai FIJf"Y- l `VC� PS Form 3800,June 2002 u 0 See Reverse for Instructions 1 U:.S. Postal ServiceTM rn CERTIFIED MAILTM RECEIPT co Domestic Mail Only;No InsurancetoverageProvided)m For delivery information visit our website at wwini.iiaps.cOme ia', ,., --..i r A -'.. -ri r4FIATIRIL i.i41 -,:. t,W,] I. ii.*1 L J S .1= 1-1 _,- -0 Pps0 - $ UNIT ID: 0n52 .--1 rzi c 'ti.11,1,idd Fee g):.c9 4, CI Postmark Return 1:1'S-slept Fee c=,"i 4.- -;(1)., 173Here (Endorsem r .peguired) / -1 Sll-, CO L=1 Restricted ery.Fee ZD ClEti: VOKZCn 1-R (Endorseme t tared) .1'R) ' X D ,,, Total Postage Fre? 4i 11- 49 11/10/03 • Us ni , -----• r=i Sent To , i I=1 ¶(4.1 /.. 11-1AA\-4:X......DS1-- fIrC=-, N Street,Apt.No.; or PO Box No. 1 Ea.142;ad4,029-je, S--/— City,State,ZIF'+4 4 jk CYO PS'Forro 3800,June 2002 It If See Revere for Instructions U.S. Postal ServiceTM CERTIFIED MAILTM RECEIPT I:0 (Domestic Mail Only;No Insurance Coverage Provided) m For delivery information visit our website at www.usps.come Ln r-1 SU�:yE. � ii ? A L USE .-n Postage li 'TT ID: 0932 rqp Certified Fee . x,4,0 m �� t��, Postmark MI Return Reciept.Fee `` Here (Endorsement Required), 1 _; ` 9 Restricted Delivery Fee gum _`- Cleo'e vonco r-9 (Endorsement Required)? ° Total Postage& ee/ritttr5�% 10/03 •` \V ru � /S1ytf, \ O Sent To CI N Street,,dot. o.; , /� or PO Box No. 2-.5.. WA-0_• k -.-!l City,State,ZIP+4 I r .1.4<I/,,) , pi • • , PS Form 3800,June 2002 See Reverse for Instructions BOARD OF APPEALS '.. TOWN OF SOUTHOLD: NEW YORK !� a 1t\k;') d'" In the Matter of the Application oft \ )14..:./ J&C HOLDINGS AFFIDAVIT OF CTM Parcel# 1000-13-1-5.1 SERVICE BY MAIL STATE OF NEW YORK: :ss.: COUNTY OF SUFFOLK: Loann Bridenhagen, being duly sworn, deposes and says: On the 10th day of November, 2003, I personally mailed at the United States Post Office in Mattituck,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 Suffolk 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, as follows: 13 - ► — 14 I3 - I - 5 . Ms. Heidi Sommers, et al Mr. and Mrs. Christopher T. Astley 20 Thornberry Lane 425 West 23rd Street, Apt. 11 A-F Sudbury, Massachusetts 01776 New York,New York 10011 ( - Jp . I A Tr I ann Estate,Inc. 187 Lafayette Street New York,New York 10013 '/ A� , / 1 �' r'oann Brie agen / SwSrn to before me this / day of November, 2003 NotW- -4 ,A.ea.A1 ary Ptiblic 21:affmailt AMY M.BEASLEY NOTARY No.01 PUBLIC, ® EState d 5039767 New York Qualified in Suffolk County ____1 Commission Expires February 7. N ASnegaog a h4ozaecO s elaog 3gZZ Ilili603 S'IVMddv 30 02wVOEI ONINOZ • USUZATI Rai 'passanas aq ( ) paws-gum aq ( )zo}oadsai 2uppimg aq;3o saopgtoep snoreazd aq;;fig; pun paivap aq ( ) palunz2 aq ( ) aanarsen pa;sanbaz aq; rug; paurcnzalap .unri.rtv sem ;; 'aso;azaq; pps astraim gat asneaaq prx{srp aq; aq;a2uega (;on pinom) (pinata) pun eousuppz0 aq; ;o ;izrds ag; onrasgo (;ou scop) (scop) aaueuen eqs (a) asnnaaq;opz;sip asn aunts aq;up pun S;zadozd sig;3o 6;puiaw a}srpauaun aq;us a3pRa sargadozd its Sq pazegs aq (;ou ppnom) (pinom) pus anbiun (;on sr) (ss) paw= digsprnq nt (q) SORMATIU esnsaaq digs-p.m; Szsssaaauun .10 sapinoi 4p inapanzd eanpozd (;ou pinom) (pinom+) aoueaipz0 aq;;o uo naiidda apz;s (n) ;sii3 pauiutza;ap mita;I pzsog ark uopniosas SEC•gOIZVTlIVd 'Z ' I 'O0'Sl$ ;Iva ssTa'it =leg LI Zo044 E" $ 2/ e # g o& Aq Rums t lro •g Aq ;seta g' o9 warn � quot 3s. 'tdt? c Y}unoq teATag;d:paog-ptroa. wmAT.74 os E 4 x. o3d trtommoex •vs a It ro' ett! .izn ' zreprpro n4T4 zot apl 1p O uoTswp=sd XO 3Ttlpr " y nue put 41 ;04 4,/11 cvgn74 411zulatTplo EuTtios Ottl STA 0,,UVVZONW.14-17a4ptaVA 114 X204 AOR slAMTIO tioavimog stag s oi 'tvol. ps iev-, 4,01 ,g0TAextros 0g5a0 ;0 uoT4ev t de €po t (,z*vsti . «4, ';4 • asnaaaq F?am214uga a4 ( ) paszaeaz aq ( ) zoyoadsul 2uipting ag; ;o uoLspaap agm pin? aotret .O 2aruoz-'aq} 3t- .; gdas2ezed uogaasgns uopaas appzy o;;uansznd aura a P P 4 C, ) Pale aq ( ) uopdeaxa 'Moods n PRI pauraua;ap sem ;p pzeog 0%70 uopniosnz SS'NOTW X'3*IyiO3�s 'i ( ) aauaurpz0 5uiuoz ag;o;aatraizee u zo;;Sanbag ( � aauni4ps0 2uci1o' at zapun uopdaoxa iartads a zo;;sanbag ( ) tizedozd o; ssaoaa ;o Raaf 0;aup aanepzsa zo;;Sanbag ( snob Ito silsem m0Ia4 P� siut uop�atl pun paapia sem inadde aq} tot 46 otzertrnat no sinaddy;o pzeog 2uiuoZ aq;;0 2upaana a;s - •r a" 4 pao ar rte ue enuave vett g in 9 mettaddV nee =a / ox Q'IOHSRO5 30 RAWL 313.1. 30 S'IVgddV 30 CDIVOa ONINOZ g is 30 NOIS.OV -i Ti 9tx0000194 Pact coot 'oN paddy S'IViddV 30 Quvoff ONIMOZ MI 30 NOISOV ILO/ ff'6-'uvr axya aaoa msx'CIOU 1OS .IO xmos _ . • After investigation and itapection the izoard fiade that applicant requests permission for to divide lot with existing building, w th insufficient width and area, on the north side of Private Road-Werth Drive, Brown's ::ills states„ Orient. The findings railings of the Board are that applicant is the owner of a let comprising 1.81 acres which she wishes to divide into two parcels. The neighborhood has been da eloped for may years and many of tha neighboring parcel Bch have hem built upon are smaller than the Iota which Dula be created by division of appl .cant 4 a property:„ The wootoa anal rolling topography of the property roty %O,id provide pdva fYsurroundingneighbors ffrthe existing house iavpp arq house onthe westerly aide of the proert . The Board greeo with the reasoning of the applicant. The d finds that strict ct applica of the OrdicarCe Would produce practical difficulties or rneCessars.' i ariship s the hardship created is unique and would not be shared by all properties as;iiRe in the ismeai to vicinity cf this' p,_o,;ertLL Rer and in t ::ase lee district: ant' the vmra ar..nc• will net change the character c? the nelY far?'>ccrl. ane, will obser. the ev ir'it of the Ordi ance. vaBsEraRE "%' IRS RESOLVED, GeorTm 8tan%evichp Elsat Woo + oil c II-dawn's Ellis 3states, Orient, mow Fors he GMBNM BBBMISSZON TO divide Ica with existing bonding, with in- sufficient sidth and area, on the north side Private Rce4- . northZrow0a Bills 3etates, Orient, York, as applied for. ,C Vete "soles, ,9 the Boards Ayes:- ere Gi1Lispie, :Bergen, G i ed , es, EDo a J A' \`)\l� ` OFFICE OF ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 53095Main Road Southold, NY11971 http://southoldtown.northfork.net (631) 765-1809 fax (631) 765-9064 ,\ FAX TRANSMISSION FAX#,o91 ATTN: 4iJ , Au L-i7 Gid_ DATE: /--/ /3—/2003 P."6-z)gill SUBJECT: 11_ •, U_ ,i . / '. e• 6-17L/ ". MESSAGE: di A re, /+ 2�a-e-oA-Pct` 1410:j "-K..) ,) 1 11 . - Please feel free to call if you did not receive all sheets. Town Hall hours are between 8-4. Thank you. Pages attached: ,I . APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS W sJuthold Town Hall Ruth:D. Oliva, Chairwoman 53095 Main Road Gerard P. Goehringer ' P.O. Box 1179 Lydia A. Tortora Southold, New York 11971-0959 George Horning Telephone(631) 765-1809 Vincent Orlando ZBA Fax(631)765-9064 /IRAN http://southoldtown.northfork.net /IRAN BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD November 19, 2003 By Fax (727-3160) and Regular Mail Ms. Nicole Spinelli Soil District Technician Suffolk County Soil & Water Conservation 423 Griffing Avenue, Suite 110 Riverhead, NY 11901 Re: Appl. No. 5419 —J & C Holdings (Owner: Doll) Dear Mrs. Spinelli: Please find enclosed a copy of the one-page report dated September 25, 2003 from the applicant's engineer, Joseph Fischetti, and copy of a Sedimentation Control Plan prepared by Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. for the applicant, which were not included in the previous mailing to you. Also enclosed is a copy of a proposed survey plan dated July 28, 2003, if needed. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely yours, Ruth D. Oliva Ik Encls. (3) 1ISSION VERIFICATION REPORT TIME : 11/19/2003 12:38 DATE,TIME 11/19 12:33 FAX NO./NAME 7273160 DURATION 00:05:28 PAGE(S) 05 RESULT OK CHECK READABILITY OF TRANSMITTED PAGE(S) 02 MODE STANDARD !�j■ : NRCS/SWCD Riverhead milk PHONE NO. : 6317273160 Aigh Nov. 25 2003 09:18AM P1 • ■• n{1 ■•. i Nr 9j1• ;1.1 p3# '` � ��� `\ FAX TRANSMISSION NOV 2 5 2003 , � t� �� NUMBER OF PAGES (inc. this one): �~ TO: R 11 I l \/ C- St U D\o\ Z ‘()• V FAX NUMBER: FROM: NS DATE: i112-5)0.3 SUBJECT: $ e i k, I o - - COMMENTS: 1 \A-t- -Po 1 ay`J A-10-Y\ Q53\1VA \Ant vV S Y)oLS.0 ov\ C. S 4(X12v� ( 0.vt 1 j-e ( )-003 \ko?t_. -6:LS \i\tT al &t it Som<- 0-C over C wI C y‘s If you do not receive all pages, please contact: Suffolk County Soil and Water Conservation District 423 Griffmg Avenue, Suite 110 Riverhead, NY 11901 Phone: (631) 727-2315 FAX: (631) 727-3160 • APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road Ruth D. Oliva,Chairwoman P.O.Box 1179 Gerard P. Goehringer Southold,New York 11971-0959 Lydia A.Tortora Telephone(631)765-1809 George Horning ZBA Fax(631)765-9064 Vincent Orlando http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD October 28, 2003 Suffolk County Soil & Water Conservation District County Center—2nd Fl. Room N-210 Riverhead, NY 11901-2100 Re: ZBA File No. 5419 —J & C HOLDINGS / DOLL Gentlemen: We have an application for proposed new construction at 590 North View Drive, Orient, adjacent to the Long Island Sound. This Department has jurisdiction with regard to the proposed location from the bank, as well as the front yard. A public hearing has been advertised for November 20, 2003. Copies of the sketch and map furnished as part of our application record are attached for your use and reference. May we ask for your assistance in an evaluation and recommendations for this proposal, when possible? Thank you for your assistance. Very truly yours, 41;f Jess Boger 0 Enc. LEGAL NOTICE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 20,2003 PUBLIC HEARINGS 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, NY 11971-0959, on Thursday, November 20, 2003, at the time noted below: 10:40 a.m. J & C HOLDINGS, Contract Vendee (Owner: Doll) #5419. Applicant requests Variances under Sections 100-30A.3 and 100-239.4A, based on the Building Department's November 7, 2002 Notice of Disapproval, amended August 6, 2003, concerning a proposed location of a new dwelling with setbacks: (a) at less than 50 feet from the front property line and (b) less than 100 feet from the top of the Sound bluff,at 590 North View Drive, Orient; Parcel 13-1-5.1. The Board of Appeals will hear all persons, or their representatives, desiring to be heard at each hearing, and/or desiring to submit written statements before the conclusion of each hearing. Each 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: October 28,2003. By Order of the Southold Town Board of Appeals. OFFICE OF ZONING BOARD OF APPEAL 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 (631) 765-1809 fax (631) 765-9064 October 28, 2003 Re: Chapter 58— Public Notice for Thursday, November 20, 2003 Hearing(s) Dear Sir or Madam: 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) Between November 3`d and 10th: 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, railroad tracks or right-of-way that borders your property (please see revised Town Ch. 58 enclosed). 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 November 10th: 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 November 10th, 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, when 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 November 18th, please file your Affidavit of Posting with our department to show proof that the sign has been posted at least 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 BOARD OF APPEALS Southold Town Hall P.O. Box 1179, 53095 Main Road Southold, NY 11971 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 C Cu , tai. TO: ( ( aq NOTICE oF HEAR1NG A public hearing will be held by the Southold Town Appeals Board at Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, concerning this property APPLICANT: J & C HOLDINGS - 5479 TAX MAP #: 13- 7 -5. 1 APPEAL: VARIANCE - SETBACKS PROJECT: NEW DWELLING qik TIME & DATE : THURS . NOV. 20 - 10 :40 AM 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 . ZflhIF " B' ARD •Trwuro nF SnUTHoLD • 631 -765- 1809 . . ... ...,—. . ‘.' ,., . , , a CD S t CD N . C) ® NI T F2 L P L.I°-�.. N __ __. _._ _. _ _..__.. RECEIVED a . Drainage Calculations N APR 2 8 2003 s i T E PL.". N Dwelling: Dwelling Footprint = 1303 square feet Rear Porch Footprint = 340 square feet , ZONING BOARD OF APPEALSFront Porch Footprint = 501 square feet . Total =2144 square feet Design standard: 2"(0.166') rainfall • SOI.) ED L.CO NI S �_iA y 2144 x 0.l 66 = 357.33 cubic feet 13638' Drywell capacity (8'x 4'cylindrical leaching pool) =200.95 cubic feet ' HAY BALE DETAIL Use two 4' x 8' leaching pools " BEACH (NTS) Driveway: Gravel Parking Area: 1780 square feet Design standard: 1"(0.08') rainfall 1780 x 0.08 = 148.33 cubic feet _—--- — — 1 I, 7�1 {��(�� g fryi `l _. 5 i'f Snow Fence TOE OF BLUFF l = _ '' � _ '--� A .; Use one 4' x 8' cylindrical — _••_ _ • 1 .-- — y a) leaching pool , — — ---- .--- �-- 20 1 — --Silt Fence .r` .. `` _„_, 1 Ir... ] : i 1 - IF. I I (1 ;iT I ...-••..— SS' l it ilr111_.-, !,-.11.. II 111 Il n j� Il ;i Hay Bale ` �_ -- • — I 11�. is i i , I? 11!Ji� ,; I II 1= _: — ____ _ ._._ ._._ - it I Road Catchment • -- Stake 45" Course Gravel So r (excavate 2' x 2' x 14') Stake. Raised Curb (4") (back fill with course gravel) Raised Curb (4 ) - — — — — —•--_ 5 ----- --- --_ Il . 6 to - I I . ..,I IYlAiVr(�A'rvrrrv�wrntr r i - �•• '. -- -- -'.— CS E 1•..• • - . . • . • . . • . .h ------ - -�. -.-`_ d d Q 6- .. -_ - - O p O co O 1 F (____4______f_ ti. 7a o ► TOP O ,,_ . �Z Silt Fence \ 80,82 g4711 _ I -- lh-=- I \ ,COASTAL ERO LOt HAZ RD LIN�� qu ,11�F�--1 =➢ _- 'moi r- 1 = 1►1 '� Snow Fence Leaching Pool Perforated Pipe (8"diameter) Hay Bale - ;ii i r.: i (4'x8' diameter; 6" slab) , . "jr „,„ ; ,11lir l ) 9 — 1„l . fi1_na_ _ . 70I Z / AI7 a. / III NATURAL DRAINAGE AREA 7Z I III 9+ III TO REMAIN /! 5 J 96 4i STABILIZATION DETAIL -1‘ PORCH // J LINE OF HAYBALES / Pe NTS I PROPOSED f • ‘....„ G WIN ELLG1 1 . . . . . , . J ` 1 ( / 78V. f DRIVEWAY �' GRAVEL / !J Cedar railing and / PORC}1 c4;. � balusters m / PROPOSED CURB lik • Iii J aj W4114/ ) ' i — _. V j: n 4 . i �>t yg a.J K ; J 76 �- o al a ` ZIN 9 94. 96 ., a ° 84 86 �• 9° �” aVE.\Alf PROPERTY OF NULTY-TASSONE - COURSE GRAVEL U,,.- Lua or Z PROPOSEDi 4' �- • n t° ,••• SITUATE: NORTH VIEYI DRIVE, ORIENT CURB o N 10 SCALE: 111 301 APPROVED BY: DRAWN BY BAA Bnck support piers 412S/03 /-- i ( DATE: 1 REVISED` PREPARED BY: SUFFOLK ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING,- INC. . .Concrete(ootingforI I BRIDGEHAMPTON, NEW YORK ' - - new brick support piers n C DRAWING NUMBER BASED UPON SURVEY PREPARED BY PECONIC SURVEYORS LAST DATED JULY 5, 2002 SCTM#: 100 -13-01-5.1 1I, 17 X 22 PRINTED ON NO.100014 CLEARPRINT• •