Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-07/29/1982APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER. CHAIRMAN CHARLES GRIGONIS. JR. SERG1E DOYEN. JR. ROBERT J. DOUGLASS JOSEPH H. SAWlCKI ,% Southold Town Board of ppeals MAIN ROAD-STATE ROAD 25 BDUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11g71 TELEPHONE (5161 765-1809 MINUTES REGULAR MEETING JULY 29, 1982 A Regular Meeting of the Southold Town Board of Appeals was held on Thursday, July 29, 1982 at 7:30 o'clock p.m. at the Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, New York. Present were: Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman; Charles Grigonis, Jr.; Serge Doyen, Jr.; Robert J. Douglass; and Joseph H. Sawicki. Also present were: Victor Lessard, Executive AdministratOr (Building Depart- ment); Shirley Bachrach, League of Women Voters; Henry Lytle, Southold- Peconic Seniors Club; Ann S., Suffolk Times reporter. The Chairman called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. and proceeded with the first public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 3010. Application of JOHN E. and PATRICIA A. CLARK, 800 Albo Drive, Laurel, NY for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-31 for permission to construct addition to dwell- ing, leaving an insufficient rearyard setback, at 800 Albo Drive, Laurel, NY; boujnded north by Albo Drive; west by Krogman; south by Schonewald and Macri; east by Hubbard; more particularly known as County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-126-3-9. The Chairman opened the hearing at 7:30 p.m. and read the legal notice of hearing in its entirety and appeal application. MR. CHAIRMAN: I have a copy of a survey, which the date is cut off, indicating the position of the house, indicating this structure which is approximately 15 x 20' affixed to the southwesterly...the proposed struc- ture affixed to the southwesterly part of the house, reducing.the rearyard to approximately 35 feet. And I also have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating!this property and the surrounding properties in the area. Is there anybody that would like to be heard upon this application? (None) Is anybody in favor? Anybody against? (None) Hearing no con~&ent~ I'll make a motion closing the hearing and reserving decision. MEMBER DOUGLASS: Second. ~outhold Town Board of Appeals -2- July 29, 1982 Regular Mtg. (Appeal No. 3010 - John E. and Patrlcla A. Clark, continued:) On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Douglass, it was RESOLVED, to close the hearing and reserve decision in the matter of JOHN E. AND PATRICIA A. CLARK, Appeal No. 3010. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonis, Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted. PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 3012. Application of PAUL PEDERSEN, by Rudolph H. Bruer, Esq., Main Road, Southold, NY for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-31 for permission to construct addition to dwelling leaving an insufficient rearyard setback at 300 Summer Lane, Southold, NY; bounded north by Ragsdale; west by Summer Lane; south by Norklun; east by Tillistrand; more particularly known as County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-78-9-23. The Chairman opened the hearing at 7:35 p.m. and read the legal notice of hearing ~n its entirety and appeal application. MR. CHAIRMAN: We have a copy of a survey prepared on July 24, 1972 indicating an area in red, which is the nature of this application of an addition to the rear, approximately 21' by 30', to the dwelling. We have a copy of the County Tax Map indicating this property and the sur- rounding properties in the area. Mr. Bruer, would you like to speak in behalf of this application? RUDOLPH H. BRUER, ESQ.: Yes, I would. I would like to point out that a denial of the application, I think, would create an unnecessary hardship on Mr. Pedersen and his sister, who are here. You have here a substandard lot created well before the present zoning ordinance. It's 110 by 110', not taking into consideration the adjoining lot owners but if you go by the 50' frontyard setback and 50' rearyard setback, you would have been allowed a 10' wide house here. The intended use of the proper~y to put on this room is to make basically living in this place more enjoyable. It is a small house, and I don't think it would hurt the neighborhood, the adjoining lot owners have additions to their houses, grant you they're not as large as this particular one. I'd like to point ous, and it was pointed out to us by Mr. Hindermann that the granting of this particular variance to build this would not exceed the lo~ coverage. It would be well within the 20%. Going back to the question on the application regarding uniqueness...it is unique in the sense to~the applicant here to have this would enable him to enjoy it much more. And I think it is quite necessary for his family because he has his mother there with him, and his sister and her family, and they do enjoy it. And we respectfully request that the board please grant this. And, by the way, I don't think it would change the character of the neighborhood of that particular street, and I'm sure you have all been up there. As a matter of fact, I know you have. Thank you. MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Is there anybody else that would like to ~ Southold Town Board of Appeals -3, July 29,-!.1982 Regular Mtg. (Appeal No. 3012 - Paul Pedersen, continued:) be heard in behalf of this application? MR. BRUER: By the way, if anybody has any questions, they can speak to the applicants, who are here. MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Is there anybody wishing to speak against the application? (None) Any further questions from anyone? Questions from board members? (None) Hearing no questions, I'll make a motion closing the hearing and reserving decision until a later date. MEMBER DOUGLASS: Second. On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Douglass, it was RESOLVED, to chose the hearing and reserve decision in the matter of PAUL PEDERSEN, Appeal No.' 3012. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonis, Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted. PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 3008. Application of MATTITUCK AIRBASE INC., Airway Drive, Mattituck, NY for a Special Exception to the Zoning Ordinance, Article VIII, Section 100-80B(1) for permission to alter and construct addition in a "C-Light" District located at 410 Airway Drive, Mattituck, NY; bounded north by New Suffolk Avenue and Wickham; south by Park Avenue; east by Wickham, Parkin, Tandy, Wickham and Holman; more particularly known as County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-123-1-2. The Chairman opened the hearing at 7:40 p.m. and read the legal notice of hearing in its entirety and appeal application. MR. CHAIRMAN: We have a large survey indicating the entire piece of property which comprises Mattituck Airbase Inc. The addition is basically a rehabilitation of a shed to the west side of the building leaving a rearyard of approximately 59½ feet. Mr. Wickham, would you like to be heard on this application? J. PARKER WICKHAM: I wo~ld answer any questions~ MR. CHAIRMAN: Ok. We'll see if anybody has any. Would anybody else like to speak in behalf of the application? Anybody like to speak against the application? (None) Hearing no further commen~, any question from any board members? (None) I will say this, Park~r¥~i_that we were lucky enough to find Jay when we went up there, and he showed up the whole thing, so we are very well aware of it. Ok? MR. WICKHAM: Find. MR. CHAIRMAN: Hearing no further comment, I'll make a motion closing the hearing and reserving decision until a later date. Southold Town Board of Appeals -4- July 29, 1982 Regular Mtg. (Appeal No. 3008 Mattituck Airbase Inc., continued:) On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Grigonls, it was RESOLVED, to close the hearing and reserve decision in the matter of MATTITUCK AIRBASE INC., Appeal No. 3008. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonls, Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted. SOUTHOLD BEACH MOTEL Off-premises advertising APPEAL NO. 1105. s~gn. WHEREAS, this board has received written notification from the Southold Beach Motel that this sign is no longer up and is no longer needed as was granted by the Board in Appeal No. 1105, NOW, THEREFORE, on motion by Mr. Grigonis, seconded by Mr. Sawicki, it was RESOLVED, to terminate Sign Appeal No. 1105, SOUTHOLD BEACH MOTEL. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen, Gr±gon~s, Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted. On motion by Mr. Douglass, seconded by Mr. Goehringer, it was RESOLVED, that the following sign appeals are hereby RENEWED for a period of one year from the date hereof, and that said signs are approved SUBJECT TO THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY BEAUTIFICATION ACT AND FUNDING LAWS FOR HIGHWAYS, WHEN APPLICABLE: Silvermore Bungalows - Appeal No. 930 Drossos Restaurant - Appeal No. 2422 Mr. Nicholas Aliano - Appeal No. 2384 Mr. Nicholas Aliano - Appeal No. 1405 Patricia Drossos Zeller - Appeal No. 1927 Drossos Restaurant - Appeal No. 1785 Port of Egypt Fishing Station - Appeal No. 915 Walter Sled~eski - Appeal No. 1042 Woodholtow Properties, Inc. - Appeal No. 909 Theodore Klos - Appeal No. 1025 Pond Enterprises, Inc. - Appeal No. 2059 Ralph Conklin - Appeal No. 1035 Wells Pontiac Cadillac - Appeal No. 1312 Mattituck Inlet Marina & Shipyard, Inc. - Appeal No. 1321 Mattituck Inlet Marina & Shipyard, Inc. - Appeal No. 1727 Mattituck Inlet Marina & Shipyard, Inc. - Appeal No. 1725 ~o~thold Town Boa 2 of Appeals (Sign Renewals, continued:) -5- July 29, 1982 Regular Mtg. Matt. In. M & S, Inc. - No. 1726 i Matt. In. M & S, Inc. No. 1322 Matt. Inlet ~arina No. 1753 Matt. Merchants Assoc. No. 1027 P~tt. Merchants Assoc. - No. 279 Frohnhoefer Elec. Co., Inc. - No. 1028 Reeve L & Ww Co., Inc. No. 1020 Bill Balian, Inc. No.1033 Lions Club of Matt. No~ 1065 John Wickham - No. 1009 Russel P. Sil!eck, Ag. No. 1013 San-Simeon By The Sound - No. 1224 Mr. Fred Kae!in - No. 900 Fleet Lu~sr, Inc. - No. 1067 Mr. & Mrs. Thomas Jurzenia - No. 206 Jack Levin - No. 1037 Mr. & Mrs. Thomas Jurzenia - No. 1073 Mr. & Mrs. Thomas Jurzenia - No. 1072 Armando Cappa - No. 1428 Lawrence A. Mitchell - No. 1550 Walter Teresko - No. 1088 Howard Zehner - No. 442 Robert Tabasco - No. 2026 Steve J. Doroski - No. 1029 Sound Shore - No. 1252 Agway, Inc. No. 1898 Volinski Olds, Inc. - No. 1582 Robert DeMaria - No. 920 Alfred J. Terp - No. 1932 Alexandra Hargr~ve - No. 2309 Claudio's Restaurant - No. 2562 Sunset Motel - No. 902 Sunset Motel - No. 901 Rhumb Line, Inc. - No. 2438 Matt. P & ~iCorp. - No. 935 Herbert Sanders - No. 1007 John Koroleski - No. 1784 John Case - No. 1134 Mr. Arthur Siemerlin~ - No. 960 G.A. Metzger - No. 921 Mr. and Mrs. Donald Tuthiil - No. 1173 Brian's Song, Inc. - No. 2288 C.S. Jackson - No. 1039 J. Richard Holmes - No. 959 Mr. Herbert W.. Wells, Jr. - No. 2075 Goldsmith's Boat Shop, Inc. - No. 1166 Sound Shore - No. !25~ Matt. Pres. Church No. 932 J. Cherepowicz - No. 889 Sacred Hear~ R.C. Church-No. 2712 Edna A. Brown - No. 1084 Bernard Kaptan - No. 977 R. & S. Hardware - No. 962 Manor Grove Corp - No. 963 Village Marine of Matt. - No. 17!~ Pawling Views, Inc. - No. 1188 Rev'. Alan J. Placa - No. 926 New Suffolk Shipyard - No. 904 Mr. L. Duetl - No. 907 St. Peters Luth. Church - Nc. 244~ St. Peters Luth. Church - No. 244~ Joseph Krukowski - No. 1136 Mr. & Mrs. Jurzenia - No. 1073 Grnpt. Methodist Church - No. 257~ Grnpt. Methodist Church - No. 257~ Grnpt. Methodist Church - No. 257~ Southold Town Board of Appeals -6- July 29, 1982 Regular Mtg. (Sign renewals, continued:) Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonis, Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted. On motion by Mr. Grigonis, seconded by Mr. Sawicki, it was RESOLVED, to approve the June 26, 1982 Special Meeting minutes as submitted, and that the same be filed with the Town Clerk accordingly. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonis, Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted. PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 3009. Application of WARREN E. and ELLEN HUFE, by Rudolph H. Bruer, Esq., Main Road, Southold, NY for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XI, Section 100-118(d) for permission to retain former nonconforming one-family dwelling use of existing house located in this "B-i" District. Location of Property: 3900 Youngs Avenue, Southold, NY; bounded north by Harris; west by Youngs Avenue; south by C.R. 48; east by Edson; more particularly known as County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-55-2-16. The Chairman opened the hearing at 7:55 p.m. and read the legal notice of hearing in its entirety and appeal application. MR. CHAIRMAN: We have a copy of a sketch indicating this house and the other two structures, major structures, on the property and a copy of the County Tax Map indicating this property and the surrounding properties in the area. Mr. Bruer, would you like to be heard in behalf of this application? RUDOLPH H. BRUER, ESQ.: Yes, thank you. I would like to point out that in the file there there is a letter from the D.E.C. stating that they take no jurisdiction on the matter. There is a letter from an adjoining neighbor saying there's no objection to this. A number are signed by neighbors on the street. Going on the unnecessary hardship here, I believe you will also find a letter in your file dated today from Mr. Hindermann...it was put in there late this afternoon...it says, "Dear Mr. Bruer: This is to confirm that ourrecords show that this wood-frame building facing Railroad Avenue can only be used as an accessory use at this time .... " Based upon that letter and Mr. Hindermann's opinion to me today, the only thing that this can be used for would be as an accessory use to the main structure. And it's not needed as an accessory use to the main structure. It's a building that was built to be a resi- dence, and for all practical purposes, it's non-usable. This, I think, creates a situation wherein it's not capable of giving any yield or any return on it. I'd like to point out au this time as I did on an earlier hearing, the land was purchased for $90,000~ I've been advised by Mr. Hufe that he would expect that the annual maintenance, until such time as he physically goes into the larger building, would be around $560. I'm Southold Town Board of Appeals -7- July 29, 1982 Regular Mtg. (Appeal No. 3009 - Warren E. and Ellen Hufe, continued:) MR. BRUER.continued: sure the board has been up there and you'll notice that it's been cleaned up considerably since the last time there was an appeal here. The lawn is maintained, and so on and so forth. I think you'll also notice, if you're recollection is, is the building, the wooden structure that we're talking about has been extensively cleaned up, revitalized on the outside. There's a letter in your file, I believe, from Mr. Hufe that the expense at this point just for the outside is $17,720.50. By the way the land taxes here are for the '81-82 year were $2,243 and he told me that the assessment had been increased for next year. The existing mortgage upon the place is approximately $55,600 at a monthly cost of 488.07 per month, for a total mortgage payment per year of $10,560.84. The income from this particular building...the wooden structure.., is zero, and unless this appeal is granted, will remain zero. And I think it's consistent with the request here that it should be allowed. I have Mr. Albertson here, and I'd like to ask him a couple of questions with respect to value of the proper~y with or without the use of this building. If I may. Mr. Albertson, what would you say that present is worth today in your opinion? MR. JUNE ALBERTSON: Without the property, I~would say it's worth around $45,000. MR. BRUER: The structure itself? MR. ALBERTSON: Yes. MR. BRUER: On that property and not being able to use it as a residence, what do you think its practical value is? MR. ALBERTSON: Nothing. Because he doesn't need the building as an outlet...he needs it as a residence. MR. BRUER: Now, in your opinion as a real estate b~ok~r in the Town of Southold, do you feel that, in your experience, that there is a need for rental housing? MR. ALBERTSON: We have almost none. people at this point looking for places. people. We have a list of about ten We're losing a lot of good MR. BRUER: Do you think if it was fixed up to the present code, that it would be a rentable place? MR. ALBERTSON: It would be rented in abou~ two days. MR. BRUER: Thank you very much. I think with respect to maintaining the character of the neighborhood, let's face it, everything on that street, Youngs Avenue, is residential. It would.conform to it. It exists. It is a house that was built to be a house. And we would res- pectfully request that the board grant the variance. MR. CHAIRMAN: While you are up there, Mr. Bruer, would you object Southold Town Board of Appeals -8- July 29, 1982 Regular Mtg. (Appeal No. 3009 - Warren E. and Ellen Hufe, continued:) MR. CHAIRMAN continued: restrictions, such as no further additions? MR. BRUER: Onto the building? MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes. MR. BRUER: I think so. MR. CHAIRMAN: Other than that rehabilitation of that rear part that's existing now. MR. BRUER: Yeah. I think he's going to clean up the shed and things like that. I would say "Yes, subject to allowing us to come back to you for whatever purpose we have and consider it in the future to be a legitimate addition...you know, and hearing this." MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Would anybody else like to be heard on this application? Anybody like to speak against the application? Any questions from any board members? (None) Hearing no questions, I'll make a motion closing the hearing and reserving decision. MEMBER GRIGONIS: Second. On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Grigonis, it was RESOLVED, to close the hearinq and reserve decision in the matter of WARREN E. AND ELLEN HUFE, Appeal No. 3009. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonis, Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted. PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2986. Application of PETER D. PIZZAR- ELLI, by Edson and Bruer, Esqs., Main Road, Southold, NY for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Sections 100-30(A) (C) for permis- sion to construct an addition to an existing accessory building, converting same into a two-bedroom cottage for family and guest use in an "A" Zone, in addition to the main dwelling. Location of Property: 5710 Indian Neck Lane, Peconic, NY; bounded north by Bolson; west by Wood; south by Hog Neck Bay; east by Tuthill; more particularly known as County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-98-5-14.3. The Chairman opened the hearing at 8:05 p.m. and read the legal notice of hearing in its entirety and appeal application. MR. CHAIRMAN: When we did go down there last week, we did see that there were cooking facilities in the structure. RUDOLPH H. BRUER, ESQ.: What do you define a cooking facility? Southold Town Board of Appeals - 9 - July 29, 1982 Regular Meeting (Appeal No. ~986 - Peter D. Pizzarelli, continued:) MR. CHAIRMAN: A kitchen. MR. BRUER: Well there is a refrigerator. There is a sink and things like that, but there are no hot burners and things like that. MR. CHAIRMAN: Ok. MR. BRUER: And that's what we meant. MR. CHAIRMAN: Fine. Thank you. MR. BRUER: I think it was Howard Terry's old definition of what a cooking facility was. I think that's cha~ged~ ~This is one application in all my years coming before this board where I think there is really a true hardship, particularly with the individuals involved here. We have here a situation where children are taking care of their elderly parents, who do have medical problems. I believe in your file there is a letter from Doctor Arm, wherein he states that it is his opinion,~_it is advisable that the Gioscias, who are here and I believe who you met on two occasions, need to be in close proximity to their children. The existing house there can only handle six people of the immediate family, Mrs. Pizzarelli, in other words themselves and their four children. You have here a situation where had this been an attached garage, and they probably could have gotten a building permit, would have gotten the building permit to add additional rooms on for these people as long as there wasn't a kitchen facility, et cetera. I think we have here a situation where if this petition is denied, they will not be able to live on the premises; they will not be able to be properly cared for; they would have to go otherwhere, other places that would entail a great deal of expense personal expense. The nursing home charges something like $58 a day. That's a substantial amount of money over the course of a year. It's not the same pleasant situation as where it is now. I'd like to point out that as the application stated the property is approxi- mately three acres. It's conceivable that a subdivision could be applied for, for the ~elief. They don't want to do that. They just want to be able to have the use of this building for their parents for their own personal use...promise that it would never be used for rental purposes, et cetera. The meals that are taken by the people have been and are now taken in the main house. At one time they did have a facility there to be able to have coffee in the morning...we'll admit to that. But how- ever the main purpose is to be near. I believe if you looked at possibly old pictures of the premises,~it was an old, delapidated building. I think from your photographs in your file, you notice that it hasi~.been nicely done up and~particularly suited for the purposes being requested for here. Again the property is large and I would like to point out that there is a precedent by this board to grant such an application in a situation where you have a large part of land,.i~back in October 1981, your Appeal No. 2864 was fairly similar. There you granted it on a piece of property that was 5.45 acres and a much more extensive and elaborate guest cottage with cooking facilities, et cetera Southold Town Board of Appeals - 10- July 29, 1982 Regular Meeting (Appeal No. 2986 - Peter D. Pizzarelli, continued:) MR. BRUER continued: there. It was again, it was granted with certain conditions that the use will be only for family and guest purposes; that it never be rented; and no other buildings would be permitted on the property in the future. We would again, using the same reasoning of that application, and the board determined at that time that the .Code requirements in that instance were not substantial, the circumstances were unique, and practical difficulty had been shown, that the relief if granted would not change the character of the neighborhood. You notice that when you went there this particular piece of property is way off in the Woods. It's not going to change the area and nobody is ever-going to see it or even know abou~ it for the mos~ part...these people there. I'd like to point out, I believe it's in the file...~here's a letter from the assessor. He says that they are already being assessed for that cottage as a cottage and not as a garage. And the town and its other departments have been treating it as a guest cottage. Mr. Pizzarelli has spent a considerable amount of money fixing that building to the tune of approximately $22,000. The land which he purchased is well over $100,000. I don't have anybody here to substantiate that except I know when he bought it the price was that. He's put substantial improvements ~o it. The taxes on the premises are $2,279. There's an existing mortgage on the premises for about $15,000 and the property has no income. Now to force these people to go out and rent or be put in a nursing home will cost a considerable amount of money; it would be an extreme hardship ~o the individuals. The request that's being asked here would not vary the standards of the town that much due to the size of the property. We respectfully pray that the board grant this particular applica- tion, please. Oh, there is a letter by an adjoining neighbor saying that he has no objection. I don~t think anybody has objected ~o the application. MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Is there anybody else that wishes to speak in behalf of the application? Are you finished...I'm snrry, Mr. Bruer. J MR. BRUER: I would just like to read that letter of Doctor Arm: "...To whom it may concern: This is to state that Mrs. Anna Gioscia is suffering from severe diffuse, crippling arthritis .... Mr. Joseph Gioscia has a heart condition with angina and diabeter melletus and is handicapped because of this .... It ~s advisable that Mr. and Mrs. Gioscia live near their daughter, Mrs. Peter Pizzarelli ..... " MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Is there anybody else that would like to speak in behalf of the application? Anybody like to speak against the application? (None) Any questions from any board members? (None) Hearing no further comments from anybody, I'll make a motion Southold Town Board of Appeals -11 - July 29, 1982 Regular Meeting (Appeal No. 2986 - Peter D. Pizzarelli, continued:) MR. CHAIRMAN continued: closing the hearing and reserving decision. MEMBER DOUGLASS: Second. On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Douglass, it was RESOLVED, to close the hearinq and reserve decision in the matter of PETER D. PIZZARELLI, Appeal No. 2986. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonis, Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted. John C. Cornell asked for an explanation as to why a decision could not be made at the end of the hearing rather than "reserving decision" since people spend weeks and months waiting. The Chairman explained that by law the board must take any and all testimony presented at the public hearing, in addition to other considerations, and therefore the board choses to close the hearing and reserve decision in o~der to deliberate at the end of all the matters on this evening's agenda in "closed session." The Chairman..said that probably two-thirds of the matters on the agenda ~onight will have decisions tonight and that the applicant or~ his attorney is asked to call the Town Hall (our office, Building Depar~men~ or Supervisor) the next day for the action[s] taken. Mr. Cornell said he didn't understand why a decision couldn't be made immediately at the end of the hearing if there were no objec- tions made. M~. Cornell~was advised that some times there are matters which may require legal consultation and which may require further information for the record such as the history of the proper~y, et cetera. PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2856. Application of REICH BROTHERS AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE INC., by William H. Price, Jr., Esq., 828 Front Street, Greenport, NY, for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article IX, Section 100-93 for permission to divide premises into two parcels, each having insufficient area and width, and proposed Parcel 2 having insufficient setbacks due to the location of the proposed lot line. Location of Property: East side of Rocky Point Road, East Marion, NY; bounded north by Yanas; west by Rocky Point Road; south by Muir; east by Nowell; more particularly known as County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000- 31-2-20 and 21. Zone District: C-1 General Industrial. ~ _Th~Chairman opened the hearing at 8:20 p.m. and read the legal notice of hearing in its entirety and appeal application. MR. CHAIRMAN: We have a copy of a survey prepared on July 14, 1981 'Southold Town Bo~d of Appeals 12- July 29, 1982 Regular Meeting (Appeal No. 2856 Reich Brothers Automotive, continued:) MR. CHAIRMAN continued: indicating Parcel 1 of 21,589 square feet, Parcel No. 2, which is the nature of the application 17,561 square feet with a rather large build- mng mn the center of it. And we have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map for this parcel and showing the surrounding parcels. Mr. Bruer? RUDOLPH H. BRUER, ESQ.: Thank you. The board is very familiar, I guess, with this application...not this particular one but the property some three years ago having a Special Exception discussed and had before this board, and it was granted with certain conditions at that time. We have here a situation of a piece of property that is slightly under an acre that is zoned commercial~ C-l, which by the present town ordi- nance requires I think 200,000 square feet if you're starting out from scratch. So, obviously it doesn't comply. It couldn't even comply if it was a vacant piece of property. We have here property that has two separate distinct bUsiness uses that have been separate and distinct, though not particularly by my clients as to an automotive repair but part of the property that they occupy has for years and years and years been used as a business. I think before this it was a broom factory and before that it was some other commercial use. The property adjoin- ing the same property to the north is being used by Agway for fuel... fuel tanks,etcetera, and it was previously used by Ike Edwards in his business when he was a fuel service man from Orient and East Marion for many, many years prior to the present ordinance. We're here for an area variance. I'd like ~o point ou~ and I'm sure the board members know it...the site plan approval has been approved by the. Planning Board and well as their approval for the division. It is, of course, before this board because it doesn't meet the requirements of the ordinance of this particular district... 200,000 square feet, et cetera. I'd like to state tha~ this property ...if this application is denied... I believe as a practical matter, makes it unsaleable. Who is going to buy two separate, distinct, types of businesses with res- pect to this particular type of property? I have here Bob Scott. He's a real estate broker from Greenport. He is familiar with the property, and we'll disclose to the board that he does have an interest in it. He would get a commission if this sale goes through, and so on and so forth. But he, I believe, will give you a very impartial opinion with respect to the value of this property if it's unable to be divided. Mr. Scott. BOB SCOTT: If it's unable to be divided, and there are two separate and single businesses on there, the value will be minimal if any.., and the thing is also, we .have asked Agway and Agway does not want to pur- chase it (if it is not approved), the portion of it, so it would be left vacant...so that would leave relatively any value at all to the property if it wasn't zoned or the zoning wasn't changed to this. MR. BRUER: My clients have this proper~y, or are leasing it now as your records will show from the prior hearing. They are leasing it with the idea in mind that they are permanent members of the ~Southold Town Boa~ of Appeals - 13- July 29, 1982 Regular Meeting (Appeal No. 2856 - Reich Brothers Automotive, continued:) MR. BRUER continued: community, want to contribute to the community and want to own their own business. They have now financially got themselves into a position where they can buy this building, and have contracted and exercised their option to purchase. It's like anything else. You gentlemen are businessmen. Do you really want to work and no~ be able to own something that you build up, and you've put your sweat and your ~ears and whatever into it. I think as a humane gesture, it should be granted. I believe that if the use of this proper~y was ever changed, we would again have to come back to both the Planning Board and probably this board, due to the commercial use and the approval of the ZBA on the change of use in it, like they had to come before. I don'~ under- stand why at the time of the first Special Exception...I'll withdraw that. We respectfully request that the variance be granted...that it will have practical difficulties to my client that would be unable to purchase this property. They can't afford the whole piece and they don'~ want the whole piece...they just wan~ this particular piece, which they've established a business for the last three years. And established the clientale. It's not going to change the character of the neighborhood. It's already there. Actually what we're asking for is ~o legitimize by way of a conveyance what's a practical matter without it by way of leases. It's an existing situation. Let's face it. You'd possibly, conceivably have 100-year lease. But it's not the same thing as owning it yourself. And we request that the board grant this variance. The Planning Board in its wisdom has decided that it would be a proper application under the circumstances. And again we res- pectfully request that the variance be granted. My clients are here if you have any questions to ask them about it. Thank you. MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Is there anybody else that would like to speak in behalf of the application? Anybody like to speak against the application? (None) Mr. Bruer, would they have any objection to constructing a fence? MR. REICH: We put a fence up when we moved in there originally. MR. CHAIRMAN: Thereby adding some screening, some additional screening? MR. REICH: Where? ~R. CHAIRMAN: We haven't discussed it, but I wanted your opinion on it. MR. REICH: We put a fence up when we first moved in three years ago f~om the south side of the building at-the p~operty line, across the back and all the way across the back meeting up to the fence that Southold Town Boa~d of Appeals 14- July 29, 1982 Regular Meeting (Appeal No. 2856 - Reich Brothers Automotive, continued:) was existing. It would be impractical to put a fence anyplace else. We won't be able to get in and out of the building. MR. CHAIRMAN: Certainly with a gate, not just a permanent fence. MR. REICH: The only part exposed is the front of the building and the people drive in there. I don't think there should be a fence there. I can't see putting a fence there. It would be in the way. MR. BRUER: It would be practical difficulty for them to have everybody drive around and getting out of a little entrance. MR. CHAIRMAN: I didn't mean that. I meant from a certain portion of the building to the rear. It's only an opinion. I'm just asking a question. MR. REICH: Well there is a fencs already there. The only other... we couldn't pu~ up-~a fen~e~bet~e~n~A'gway's property and ours because it would be inconvenient for Agway where they pull in the tractor trailers and they use our property. We use their property sometimes. That would be the only other place you could put a fence. MR. CHAI~{AN: Thank you. Any questions from anybody concerning this application? Any questions from any board members? (None) Hearing no further comments, I'll make a motion closing the hearing and reserving decision until a later date. On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Douglass, it was RESOLVED, to close the hearing, and reserve decision in the matter of REICH BROTHERS AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE..I~.C., Appeal No. 2856. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonis, Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted. RECESSED HEARING: Appeal No. 2987. Application of NORTH FORK BANK & TRUST COMPANY, by Abigail A. Wickham, Esq. for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance for permission to construct drive-in facility with canopy extending into the frontyard area at the Mattituck Shopping Center. This hearing was recessed from the last regular meeting of the board (July 8, 1982. MR. CHAIRMAN: I have a letter from Abigail A. Wickham, Esq. requesting "the public hearing on this matter be recessed until the next regular meeting on August 17, 1982," I'll make that in a motion. MEMBER SAWICKI: Second. Southold Town Board of Appeals -15 - - July 29, 1982 Regular Meeting (Appeal No. 2987 - North Fork Bank, continued:) On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Sawicki, it was RESOLVED, that the matter of NORTH FORK BANK & TRUST COMPANY, Appeal No. 2987, be and hereby IS RECESSED UNTIL THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING OF THIS BOARD, to wit, AUGUST 17, 1982. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonis, Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted. The Chairman asked Mr. Carnes if he would like to leave his tele- phone number, and we would call him as soon as a decision is rendered. ~77-2~26. On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Grigonis, and unanimously carried, it was RESOLVED, to enter into "closed session for deliberations". At 10:15 p.m., the Chairman reconvened the Regular Meeting, after motion was made by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Grigonis, and duly carried. RECENTLY-FILED APPEAL NO. 3019 - Application for A.J. BODENSTEIN by Mr. Garrett A. Strang as agent, for permission to construct retail store on a substandard..~lot pursuan~ to Article VII, Section 100-71. Location of Property: 31855 Main Road. Cu~chogue; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-097-05-010. The board reviewed the file for A.J. BODENSTEIN filed with the Town Clerk on July 28, 1982, and the following resolution was duly adopted: On motion by Mr. Douglass, seconded by Mr. Douglass, it was RESOLVED, that Appeal No. 3019, application for A.J. BODENSTEIN be held in abeyance pending review and comments by the Southold Town Planning Board for this proposed retail store in this "B-l" District. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonis, Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted. 'Southold Town Board of Appeals - 16- July 29, 1982 Regular Meeting The board discussed the invitation received for the Board of Appeals ~o attend the Fishers Island Annual Trip on Wednesday, Augus~ 18, 1982. Those planning to attend are: Gerard Goehringer, Robert J. Douglass, and Linda Kowalski, Secretary. NEW FILE SET-UPS: On motion by Mr. Douglassj seconded by Mr. Goehringer, it was RESOLVED, that the following appeals be scheduled and advertised pursuant to law for public hearings to be held at our next Regular Meeting, to wit, August 17, 1982, at the Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, New York, commsncing at 7:30 p.m.: Appeal No. 3010 - John E. and Patricia A. Clark. Addition to dwelling with insufficient rearyard setback. 800 Albo Drive, Laurel. Appeal No. 3012 - Paul Pedersen. To construct addition to dwell- ing leaving an insufficient rearyard setback. 300 Summer Lane, Southold. Appeal No. 3008 - Mattituck Airbase Inc. (provided that the Planning Board has no objection ~o this layout as proposed). Special Exception to alter and construct addition in a "C-Light" District. 410 Airway Drive, Mattituck. Appeal No. 3009 - Warren E. and Ellen Hufe. Request to retain former nonconforming use of one-family dwelling house. 3900 Youngs Avenue, Southold. Appeal No. 2986 - Peter D. Pizzarelli. To construct addition to existing accessory building, converting same into a two-bedroom co~sage for family and guest use'~at 5710 Indian Neck Lane, Peconic. Appeal No. 2856 Reich Brothers Automotive Service Inc. Permission to divide premises into two parcels, each having insuffi- cient area and width, and proposed Parcel No. 2 having insufficient setbacks due to location of lot line~. 'E/s of Rocky Point Road, East Marion. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonis, Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted. Southold Town Board of Appeals 17- July 29, 1982 Regular Meeting RESERVED DECISION: Appeal No. 3010. upon application of JOHN E. AND PATRICIA A. CLARK, 800 Albo Drive, Laurel, NY for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 1G0-31 for permission to construct addition to dwelling leaving an insufficient rearyard setback at 800 Albo Drive, Laurel, NY; bounded north by Albo Drive; west by Krogman; south by Schonewald and Macri; east by Hubbard; more particularly known as County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-126-3-9. The public hearing on this matter was held earlier this evening, at which time the hearing was declared closed, pending deliberations. The board made the following findings and determination: By this appeal, appellants seek permission to construct a 20' x 15' screened-in porch addition to existing dwelling, reducing the rearyard setback by 20 feet. The premises in question contains an area of approximately 17,500 square feet, having frontage along Albo Drive of 126' and an average depth of 152'. Existing on these premises is a one-family private dwelling situated 53.6' at its closest point from Albo Drive, situated 40' from its closest point to the rear property line and approximately 50' from the rear property line in the area of this proposed addition. The board agrees with appellants in the reasoning of this application and find the relief requested to be practical and feasible under the circumstances. In considering this appeal, the board determines that the variance request is not substantial; that the circumstances herein are unique and practical difficulties have been shown; that by allowing the variance no substantial detriment to adjoining properties would be created; that the difficulty cannot be obviated by a method, feasible to appellant, other than a variance; that no adverse effects will be produced on available governmental facilities of any increased population; that the relief requested will be in harmony with and promote the general purposes of zoning; and that the interests of justice will be served by allowing the variance as indicated below. On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Grigonis, it was RESOLVED, that Appeal No. 3010, application of JOHN E. and PATRI- CIA A. CLARK for permission to construct (screened-in porch) addition with an insufficient rearyard setback, be and hereby IS GRANTED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION: That the proposed addition remain as a porch (and not living or sleeping quarters). Location of Property: 800 Albo Drive, Laurel, NY; County Tax Map District 1000, Section 126, Block 3, Lot 9. Vote of the Board: Douglass and Sawicki. Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonis, This resolution was unanimously adopted. Southold Town Board'of Appeals - 18- July 29, 1982 Regular Meeting RESERVED DECISION: Appeal No. 3008. Upon application of MATTITUCK AIRBASE INC., Airway Drive, Mattituck, NY for a Special Exception to the Zoning Ordinance, Article VIII, Section 100-80B[1) for permission to alter and construct addition in a "C-Light" District located at 410 Airway Drive, Mattituck, NY; bounded north by New Suffolk Avenue and Wickham; wes5 by Bagshaw, Peconic Corp. and Wickham; south by Park Avenue; east by Wickham, Parkin, Tandy, Wickham and Holman; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-123-1-2. The public hearing on this matter was held earlier this evening, a~ which time the hearing was declared closed pending deliberations. The board made the following findings and determination: By this appeal, appellant seeks permission to construct a 30' x 125' addition attached to the existing shop building, leaving a rearyard set- back of approximately 59' from the rear property line (presently abutting Bagshaw). The premises in question is trapezoidal in shape and has a frontage along Airway Drive of 260 feet. Existing on the premises are the principal building and an accessory building located in the northerly sideyard area. The principal building is extensive, with an office, stock rooms, waiting room, et cetera. For the record it is noted that appellant has previously applied to this board under Appeal No. 2893 for permission to construct an addition with an insufficient frontyard setback for office space. That variance was given a conditional approval at a Special Meeting held November 7, 1981. In considering this appeal, the board determines that the variance request is not substantial; that the circumstances herein are unique and practical difficulties have been shown; that by allowing the variance no substantial detriment to adjoining properties would be created; that the difficulty cannot be obviated by a method, feasible to appellant, other than a variance; that no adverse effects will be produced on available governmental facilities of any increased population; that the relief requested will be in harmony with and promote the general purposes of zoning~ and that the interests of justice will be served by allowing the variance as indicated below. On motion by Mr. Douglass, seconded by Mr. Goehringer, it was RESOLVED, that Appeal No. 3008, application for MATTITUCK AIRBASE INC. for permission ~o alter and construct addition to existing build- ing in this "C-Light" Zone, be and hereby IS APPROVED AS APRLIED FOR. Location of Property: 410 Airway Drive, Mattituck, NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-123-1-2. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs~ Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonis, Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted. Southold Town Board ~of Appeals -19 - O~ly 29, 1982 Regular Meeting RESERVED DECISION: Appeal No. 3009. Upon application of WARREN E. AND ELLEN HUFE, by Rudolph H. Bruer, Esq., Main Road, Southold, NY for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XI, Section 100-118(d) for permission to retain former noncon- forming one-family dwelling use of existing house located in this "B-l" District. Location of Property: 3900 Youngs Avenue, Southold, NY1 bounded north by Harris; west by Youngs Avenue; south by C.R. 48; east by Edson; more particularly known as County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-55- 2-16. The public hearing on this matter was held earlier this evening, at which time the hearing was declared closed pending deliberations. The board made the following findings and determination: By this appeal, appellants seek permission to "use the existing two-story house as a one-family residential dwelling." The existing two-story house, to the board's knowledge, was used prior to 1980 as a one-family residence, and pursuant to Section 100-118D of the Zoning Code, "whenever a nonconforming use of a building or premises has been discontinued for a period of more than two years..., the nonconforming use of such building or premises shall no longer be permitted unless a variance therefor shall have been granted .... " Upon information and belief, this structure was built in the mid-19th century as a dwelling house and applicant states $17,720.50 are the costs incurred to date refurbishing the outside of the structure. The premises in question contains an area of approximately 37,700 square feet and is a corner lot with 244.85' along County Route 48 and 132.93' along Youngs (Railroad) Avenue. The premises is in a "B-l" General Business District. Existing on the premises are the two-story frame structure which is the subject of this application, a large concrete-block "showroom" building, and steel storage accessory building. For the record, it is noted that the appellants have previously applied to this board in Appeal No. 2890 for permission to use the large concrete-block building and premises for industrial purposes, to wit, manufacturing of small mechanical parts, said application having been granted a conditional approval on October 15, 1981. In considering this appeal, the board determines that the variance if allowed will not produce adverse effects on available governmental facilities of any increased population; that the circumstances herein are unique and that an economic hardship has been shown; that the variance request is not substantial; that the relief requested will be in harmony with and promote the general purposes and intent of the zoninq code; that the use will not prevent the orderly and reasonable use of permitted or legally established uses in the district wherein the proposed use is to So~thold Town Board o~JAppeals -20 - J~L_y 29, 1982 Regular Meeting (Appeal No. 3009 - Warren E. and Ellen Hufe, continued:) be located, or of permitted or legally established uses in adjacent use districts; that the use will not prevent the orderly and reasonable use of adjacent properties or of properties in adjacent-use districts; that the safety, health, welfare, comfort, convenience and order of the town will not be adversely affected by the proposed use and its location; and that the interests of justice will be served by allowing the variance as indicated below. On motion by Mr. Sawicki, seconded by Mr. Grigonis, it was RESOLVED, that Appeal No. 3009, application for WARREN E. and ELLEN HUFE for permission to retain former nonconforming one-family dwelling use in this "B-I" District within the two-story dwelling structure existing on the premises, be and hereby IS APPROVED SUB- JECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION: That there shall be no further additions to this dwelling structure without the express written, prior consent of this board after formal application therefor. Location of Property: 3900 Youngs Avenue, Southold, NY; bounded north by Harris; west by Youngs Avenue: south by C.R. 48; east by Edson; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-55-2-16. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonis, Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted. Southo!d Town Board of Appeals -21- Juiy ~9,k1982 . " ENVIRONFiENTAL DECLARATION: Appeal No.. 3018.. Application of ANN O'SLrLLIVAN. Permission to construct accessory Storage ~hed. On motion by Mt. Douglass seconded by Mr. G'~fgonls' it was · RESOLVED~ to declare the following Negative Environmenna! Declaration concerning the matter of ~nn O'Sullivan: E~;VIRON~IENTAL DECLA3~ATIO~i: Pursuant to Section 617.13 of the N.Y.S. Deuart~ent of Environmental Conservauion Act, Article 8 of the-Environments! ~n~c=C°nservati°nis ' ~¼Law' and Sectzcn 44-4 of the Scutho!d Town Code, [ .... ne_~v given that the Southcid Town Board of Apueais nas dete-~mined %hen the subj= ~ · ~ ~c~ prelect as proposed in this appeal application is hereby classified as a Tvo II Action nc~ having a ~.=. ~ e s~l=!c=~t adverse ~= ~ ' e_~~c ~ upon the envzr©n~ae~ for the following reason(s): - ~.~e Short Forum has beeJ. submitted which indicates tha~ no significan- *~-- tm~e_y to occur should this adverse effects project planned. be lmpl ~men%ed ~s This declaration Shoui~ not be considered a determination made for any other depar~en~ or agency which may also be in- volved, nor for any other pro]oct not covered by-the subject appeal application. Location of Property: 5692 Main Bayview Ro'ad~ Southold Vote of the Board: Ayes: Dougla'ss and Sawicki M~ssrs. Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen, 'Sou~ oa_d of A~opeals ~.old 'Town B ~ -22-- -'Ju~y.'29} 1982- " '-. ~ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION: Appeal No-. 30161] Application of>ALFRED&'SUSAN STRETZ2-~.Va-riance for permis'sion to construct3 · deck with insufficient rear and side yards. ' ' On motion by Mr. Douglass,~seconded bY ~r.~rigohis' RESOLVED, to declare the following Negative Environmental Declaration concerning the m~tter of- Alfred& 'Susan Stretz:. ' ENViRONHENTAL DECL~ATION- Pursuant to Section 617.13 of*:~h== N.Y.o.~ Depar~menu of =a= Conservation Act, Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation La~.z, and Section 44-4 of the Scutho!d Town Code~ ncuice is hereby given that the Southold Town Board of Appeals .has~=deue~ined that the subject projecu as proposed in thms ~rr-a! application is hereby c fcr the foi~-~g reason{s): · .¥-'~onmenta± Assessment in the c' ~- has '==~ · ~o_ ~ Form suzmin=ed which indicates that no szgnificant adverse effects were likely to oc .... should ~. '~ · planned. ~ ~hz= project be lmpl~mented as This declaration should not be consider=d a de~e-~n-ination made for any other depar~t~ent or agency which may also be in- volved, nor for any other project not covered by the subject appeal applicationl Location of Property: 555 Mill Creek Drive~ Southold Vote of the Board: Ayes: D°ugla~s and Sawicki M~srs. Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen, S~u~,o!d Town Bo=_rm of Appeals ~23- J~ly-29% 1982. ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION: Appeal No. 3016. Application of FLORENCE JOHNNIDIS. Variance for approval of the construction. of accessory building in frontya~d area. On motion by Mr. Douglass, seconded by Mr. Grigo~is[ it was RESOLVED, to declare the following Negative Env!ronmental Declaration concerning t~he ma' tter of _Florence . Johnnid~s: Pursuanu to Section 617.13 of the N.Y.S. Department of Environmental Conservation Act, Article 8 of the Enviromsaenta] Conservation Law, and Section ~-~ of th_ ~-~ ' .... Southold Town Code, ...... e is hereby given that the Sou~hoid Town Board of Appeals has determined that the subject prcjec~ as Proposed in this appeal app!ica~ion is hereby classified as ~ Type ii Action, · - '- -- ........ ~ e~e=ae effes~ U~on the env!ro~men~ for the following reason(s): ~.v~o~men~aZwhich ~ ~ ~Assessment in the Shor~ Form has b~.'. submitted ~n~caues that no significant adverse effects were likely to occur should ~ ~- planned. ~h~ pro.ject be impI~mented ~s This declaration should not be considered a determination made for any other departlent or agency which may also be in- volved, nor for any other project no~ covered by-the subject appeal application. ~ Locauion of Property: ~D0'Sound Beach Drive, Mattituck Vote of the Board: Ayes: Me. ssrs. DouglaSs, Sawicki : * . . Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen, S~uthold Town Boar~of Appeals -24- July 29, 1982 Regular Mtg. RESERVED DECISION: Appeal No. 3001. Upon application for HAROLD E. WALTERS, by Richard J. Cron, Esq., Main Road, Cutchogue, NY for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XI, Section 100-115 for approval of suitable screening around the periphery of the existing junkyard located at 400 Nokomis Road, Southold; more particular- ly known as County Tax Map District 1000, Section 78, Block 3, Lot 20 at Laughing Waters. The public hearing on this matter was held on July 8, 1982, at which time the hearing was declared closed pending deliberations. The board made the following findings and determination: By this application, applicant seeks approval of suitable screening at these premises upon which applicant stores scrap materials and has stored since prior to zoning. The premises in question is zoned "A" Residential and Agricultural, and contains an area of 9,600 square feet with 75' frontage along Nokomis Road. Existing on the premises are a 1½-story frame, one-family dwelling house and two accessory buildings in the rearyard used for storage. Section 100-115 of the Code requires "...all automobile yards or other junkyards in existence as of the effective date of this chapter, as first enacted in 1957, shall within three years from such date provide suitable screening in the form of fencing or hedges completely around the periphery of the area used for such purposes, and the type of fencing and hedges shall be subject to the approval of the Board of Appeals .... " It is the opinion of this board that the periphery of the entire rear- yard should be enclosed with a six-foot stockade fencing. Now, therefore, on motion by Mr. Sawicki, seconded by Mr. Doyen, it is RESOLVED, that the screening outlined below is required for the existing scrapyard located at premises of HAROLD E. WALTERS and known as 409 Nokomis Road, Southold, NY, and such screening is SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING: 1. That the paraphernalia (used materials) shall be limited to the rearyard area; 2. That the rearyard area must be enclosed with a six-foot stockade fence to encompass the north and south lines from the rear of the house and the entire west line; 3. This stockade fence must be maintained in good condition dur- ing the operation of this business. Location of Property: 400 Nokomis Road, Southold, NY; County Tax Map District 1000, Section 78, Block 3, Lot 20. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen, Douglass and Sawicki. (Member Grigonis abstained from vote.) This resolution was adopted by majority vote. · ~outhold ToWn Board of Appeals -25- July 29, 1982 Regular Mtg. RESERVED DECISION: Appeal No. 3012. Upon application of PAUL PEDERSEN, by Rudolph H. Bruer, Esq., Main Road, Southold, NY for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-31 for permission to construct addition to dwelling leaving an insuffi- cient rearyard setback at 300 Summer Lane, Southold, NY; bounded north by Ragsdale; west by Summer Lane; south by Norklun; east by Tillistrand; more particularly known as County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-78-9-23. The public hearing on this matter was held earlier this evenmng, at which time the hearmng was declared closed pending deliberations. The board made the following findings and determination: By this appeal, appellant seeks permission to construct a 21' by 30' addition/family room at the southeasterly corner of the existing one-family mobile home reducmng the rearyard area by 30 feet. The premises mn ques- tion contazns an area of approximately 11,000 square feet, having frontage along Summer Lane of 100 feet and depth of an average of 110 feet. Existing on the premises are a one-family mobile home on foundation, a detached above-ground 20' by 31' swimming pool, and small accessory 6.7' by 9.5' metal shed in the rearyard area. This parcel is known as Lot No. 24 of the major subdivision entitled, "Map of Bayside Terrace" filed March 11, 1953 under File No. 2034. The board agrees with appellant's reasoning under the circumstances. In considering this appeal, the board determines that the variance request is not substantial; that the circumstances herein are unique and practical difficulties have been shown; that by allowing the variance no substantial detriment to adjoining properties would be created; that the difficulty cannot be obviated by a method, feasible to appellant, other than a variance; that no adverse effects will be produced on available governmental facilities of any increased population; that the relief requested will be in harmony with and promote the general purposes of zoning; and that the interests of justice will be served by allowing the variance as indicated below. On motion by Mr. Grigonis, seconded by Mr. Sawicki, it was RESOLVED, that Appeal No. 3012, application for PAUL PEDERSEN for permission to construct a 21' by 30' addition to dwelling with reduced rearyard area, be and hereby IS APPROVED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CON- DITION: No further additions or buildings on this parcel. Location of Property: Lot 24 of "Bayside Terrace," Filed Map No. 2034; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-78-9-23; 300 summer Lane, South- old, NY. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonis, Douglass and Sawicki. This-resolution was unanimously adopted. ~' %Southold Town BOA-~d of Appeals -26- July 29, 1982 Regular Mtg. RESERVED DECISION: Appeal Noo 2998. Upon application of MARGARET DELLANO, by Rensselaer G. Terry, Esq., Main Road, Southold, NY for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-30A & B for permission to use pre-existing tourist home altered to a three-apartment building for use as three-dwelling apartments in this A-Residential and Agricultural Zone. Location of Property: 51255 County Road 48 and 50 Clark Road, Southold, NY; bounded north by Corey; west by Clark Road; south by C.R. 48; east by Aurichio; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-135-2-7.1. The public hearing on this matter was held on July 8, 1982, at which time the hearing was declared closing pending further research and deliberations. By this appeal, the appellant seeks a variance to permit the continued use of three apartments on her premises. The premises are located at the northeasterly corner of County Route 48 and Clark Road in the Hamlet of Southold. The premises have an area of approximately 22,000 square feet with a frontage of 135 feet on the north side of County Route 48 and a frontage of approximately 173 feet on the east side of Clark Road. The premises are and have been since the enact- ment of the Zoning Code located in the "A" Residential and Agricultural District. Appellant acquired the premises in 1952, at which time there was erected thereon a two and one-half story main dwelling house together with a small seasonal guest cottage in the rear thereof. The dwelling house had been operated as a seasonal tourist house for many years prior to the enactment of the Zoning Ordinance in 1957. In 1966, this board granted permission to maintain a tourist house sign on the premises (Appeal No. 855). In April 1976, this board granted a variance to permit the set-off of the cottage in the rear together with a parcel with a frontage of 125 on Clark Road and a depth of 132 feet (Appeal No. 2116). Appellant's application states that she continued to conduct a tourist house business on the premises "long after the adoption of the Zoning Ordinance on April 23 1957" and tha~ when two of the tourists desired to remain permanently, the second floor of the building was altered to pro- vide two apartments, each with separate kitchens. No permits were obtained for such conversion. Appellant asserts that she was not aware that any permits or other authorizations were required for such conversion. The first floor of the building is occupied by appellant as her private residence. The properties located on the west side of Clark Road directly opposite the subject premises consist of 50-foot lots con- talning small seasonal cottages. The subject premises fronts on County Route 48, one of the two main heavily-traveled east-west highways in the town. Appellant asserts that she has entered into a contract for the sale of the premises which is conditional upon the granting of this variance. She also states that if this variance is not granted, that she will be unable to sell said premises to a bona fide purchaser. ~outhold Town Board of Appeals -27- July 29, 1982 Regular Mtg. (Appeal No. 2995 - Margaret Dellano, continued:) This board finds that the plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances and not to the general conditions of the neighborhood. The building in question has never been used as a single-family residence. Its use as a tourist house predates the Zoning Ordinance and continued for many years thereafter. This board also finds that the premises cannot yield a reasonable return if used only for the purposes permitted by the Zoning Code, and further finds that the use to be allowed by this variance will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. However, this board does believe that the size and circumstances of the building and the size of the lot upon which it is constructed does not warrant its use for more than two families. Accordingly, the variance applied for is granted to the extent of permitting the use of the building on the premises as a two-family residence, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner of the premises must reside therein; 2. That the use of the premises is limited to a two-family dwelling with a minimum of 600 square feet of floor area for the second-story dwelling unit; 3. That no sleeping or living quarters shall be permitted on the third floor; 4. That the building and premises must comply with all appicable State, County and local laws, rules and regulations as well as the code regulations of the County Health Department for a two-family dwelling; 5. That the building inspector shall inspect the premises annually to assure compliance with the provisions hereof. Location of Property: 51255 County Road 48 (a/k/a 50 Clark Road), Southold, NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-135-2-7.1. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonls, Sawicki and Douglass. This resolution was unanimously adopted. ~Southold Town B6~rd of Appeals -28- July 29, 1982 Regular Meeting APPEAL NO. 2970. JAMES MANOS. WHEREAS, on July 8, 1982, this board granted a "conditional approval" in the matter of James Manos, Appeal No. 2970; and WHEREAS, on July 20, 1982, the board's formal decision concerning the July 8, 1982 resolution of this board, ~was filed with the office of the Town Clerk and simultaneously forwarded to the applicant's attorney; and WHEREAS, on July 29, 1982, this board received a written request from the applicant's attorney, Rudolph H. Bruer, Esq. requesting that this matter be withdrawn in order that the relief may be reconsidered under a new application; NOW, THEREFORE, on motion by Mr...Grigonis, seconded by Mr. Sawicki, BE IT RESOLVED, to rescind this board's decision rendered July 8, 1982 in the matter of JAMES MANOS, Appeal No. 2970, and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that Appeal' No. 2970, application of JAMES ~tANOS, be and hereby is WITHDRAWN WITHOUT PREJUDICE, as requested by Rudolph H. Bruer, Esq. on July 29, 1982. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen, Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted. RECONSIDERATION FOR~REHEARING IN THE MATTER OF NORMAN C. BOOS: WHEREAS, on July 8, 1982, this board rendered a conditional approval in the matter of Appeal No. 2914, which application of Norman C. Boos was held for public hearing on May 26, 1982; and WHEREAS, on July 15, 1982, the formal findings and determina- tion were officially filed with the Office of the Town Clerk and simultaneously forwarded to the applicant's attorney; and WHEREAS, on July 27, 1982, this board received written corres- pondence from Stephen F. Griffing, Jr., Esq., attorney for the applicant Norman C. Boos requesting a rehearing of the board's July 8, 1982 decision and indicating his reasons for same; and WHEREAS, this board received correspondence from prior officials of the Town concerning this property, to wit, Howard Terry, Re~ired Building Inspector; Robert W. Gillispie, Jr., Retired Chairman of the Z.B.A.; John Wickham, Retired Chairman of the P.B.; · - ~Southold Town Board of Appeals -29- July 29, 1982 Regular Meeting (Appeal No. 2914 - Reconsideration for Rehearing: Norman C. Boos:) NOW, THEREFORE, iT IS RESOLVED, that a r~hearing in the matter of Appeal No. 2914, application of Norman C. Boos, be and hereby is scheduled to be held at the Board's next Regular Meeting, to wit, Tuesday, August 17, 1982 at 8:00 p.m., at the Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, New York; and IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED, that a notice of publication shall be advertised in the Suffolk Weekly Times, Inc. and Long Island Traveler- Watchman, Inc. giving notice of this rehearing. Location of Property: Skunk Lane, Cutchogue, NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-104-08-2.1 and 2.3. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonls, Doyen, Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanImously adopted. APPEALS NO. 2985 and 3020. ALICE G. LEVIEN. Location of Prop- erty: Beebe Drive, Cutchogue, NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000- 97-7-9; Lot 25 of Moose Cove Subdivision. WHEREAS, this date an application was filed in the matter of Appeal No. 3020 for the same and similar relief as was denied by this board on May 26, 1982 in Appeal No. 2985, for ALICE G. LEVIEN; and NON, THEREFORE, IT.IS RESOLVED, that Appeal No. 3020, application for ALICE G. LEVIEN for permission to construct storage shed on a vacant lot, for the same and similar relief as applied for in Appeal No. 2985, not be scheduled for hearing; and IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED, that the board's decision rendered May 26, 1982 concerning this property not be changed, altered, modified or reheard. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen, Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted. RESERVED DECISION: Appeal No. 2986. Application of PETER D. PIZZARELLI, by Edson and Bruer, Esqs., Main Road, Southold, NY for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Sections 100-30(A) and (C) for permission to construct an addition to an existing accessory building, converting same into a two-bedroom cottage for family and guest use in an "A" Zone (in addition to the main dwell- ing). Location of Proper~y: 5710 Indian Neck Lane, Peconic, NY; bounded north by Bolson; west by Wood; south by Hog Neck Bay; eas~ ~%~ ~Southold Town Board of Appeals -30- July 29, 1982 Regular Meeting (Appeal No. 2986 - Peter D. Pizzarelli, continued:) by Tuthill; more particularly known as County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-98-5-14.3. The public hearing on this matter was held on July 29, 1982, at which time the hearing was declared closed pending deliberations. The board made the following findings and determination: By this appeal, appellant seeks permission to convert an existing accessory building into a two-bedroom cottage for family use without cooking facilities and which shall be used by the appellant's parents (in-law), Mr. and Mrs. Joseph Gioscia. A statement has been submitted for the record from Dr. Herbert S. Arm stating that"Mrs. Anna Gioscia is suffering from severe diffuse, crippling arthritis...Mr. Gioscia has a heart condition with angina and diabetes melletus and is handi- capped because of this...It is advisable tha5 Mr. and~ Mrs. Gioscia live near their daughter, Mrs. Peter Pizzarelli .... " The premises in question contains an area of 2.979 acres and is known as Lot No. 3 of "Minor Subdivision for Peter and Marie Louise Pizzarelli at ?econlc." Existing on the premises at the southerly end are a private one-family dwelling house, accessory garage structure and two small shed structures in the frontyard area, and the subject accessory building in the westerly sideyard area. Access to the premises in question is from a 30' right-of-way extending southerly f~om Indian Neck Road approximately 743.91 feet. Appellant has ~ndicated no objection to conditions as imposed by the board, such as, %o rental of the accessory building being permitted, et cetera. It is the feeling of the board that the relief as requested is minimal and the amount of land area available is adequate. However, it is the opinion of this board that 40,000 square feet in land area should be applied 5o this accessory structure for this proposed use, and of course the remaining area to be applied to the main dwelling. In considering this appeal, the board determines that the variance request is not substantial; that the circumstances herein are unique; that the relief if granted will not change the character of the neigh- borhood; that if the relief is granted no adverse effects will be produced on available governmental facilities of any increased popu- lation, and that the interests of justice will be served by allowing the variance subject to the condition specified below~ On motion by Mr. Grigonis, seconded by Mr. Sawicki, it was RESOLVED, that Appeal No. 2986, applicatio~ for PETER D. PIZZAR- ELLI for permission to convert accessory building for use as a two-bedroom cottage for family and guest use, be and hereby IS ~Southold Town Board of Appeals -31- J~ly 29, 1982 Regular Meeting (Appeal No. 2986 - Peter D. Pizzarelli, continued:) APPROVED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION: A line shall be drawn equally distant between both structures (the main house and the subjec~ accessory building) to comprise a minimum of 40,000 square feet for the guest cottage. Location of Property: 5710 Indian Neck Lane, Peconic, NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-98-5-14.3. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonis, Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted. RESERVED DECISION: Appeal NO. 2997. Application of ANNETTE GOLDEN CARNES, 1445 Bay Shore Road, Greenport, NY (by A.A. Wickham, Esq.) for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Sections 100-31 and 100-36 for approval of the construction of swimmingpool and deck with insufficient side and rear yard setbacks at 1445 Bay Shore Road, Greenport, NY; bounded north by Pipes Cove; west by O'Brien; south by Bay Shore Road; east by Koehler; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-53-4-4. The public hearing on this matter was held on July 8, 1982, at which time the hearing was declared closed pending receipt of further information, and pending deliberations. The board made the following findings and determination: This is an appeal from an Order tO Remedy Violation of the Southold Town Building Department dated August 27, 1980 which directed the appli- cant to comply with Sections 100-31 and 100'36 of the code and to remedy the violations of the setback requirements for this attached deck area. The fac~s leading up to this appeal are as follow: By application dated March 1, 1980, appellant applied to the Building Department for a building permit to construct an inground swimmingpool with fence enclosure on her premises (approximately 19,780 square feet) located in the rear yard approximately 45 feet from the high water mark and three feet from the easterly property line and 76 feet from the westerly property. The application shows the pool area to be separate from the existing house and the fence enclosure would extend to the rear (water side) of the existing house. The dimensions of the entire new construction is "Front 36', Rear 36', Depth 18'," as shown on the building permit application. The building permit was issued on March 24, 1980 under Permit No. 10597Z. On July 25, 1980, an amendment to Building Permit No. 10597Z ~.S~uthOld Town Bo~ _.d of Appeals -32- J ~y 29, 1982 Regular Meeting (Appeal No. 2997 - Annette Golden Carnes, continued:) was issued by the building department permitting a deck. The dimensions of the deck are shown to be 10' at the north edge, 5' at the east edge, 4' at the west edge, and 5' at the south edge of the pool. The fence enclosure shows an extended open area within the enclosure at the south end for steps. Also, the construction of the pool, deck and fence are shown to be in the sideyard area rather than the rearyard area as originally permitted by Permit No. 10597Z. Apparently the original plan submitted to the Building Department with the application for building permit No. 10597Z did not show the "existing deck area" at the rear of the house as is shown on the "amended plan" of July 25, 1980. It appears from the records on file tha.t one of the building inspectors approved one or more amendments and/or revisions to the plans for the pool, deck and fence structures, either by mistake or upon the belief that he had the authority to permit such revisions. On July 29, 1980 an application for a certificate of occupancy was filed with the Building Department. On August 25, 1980 an inspec- tion was made by one of the Building Inspectors,. at which time he found that: (!) the gates of the fence enclosure and enclosure of the pool was not adequate and (2) the deck was attached to the existing deck of the dwelling, and that the sideyard clearance was insufficient. On or about the 27th of August, 1980, Mrs. Carries was apparently informed by one of the Building Inspectors that the "amendment" to the building permit was in error and that the pool must be located in the rearyard, not the sideyard, and a three-foot setback from the property line would be permissible if the pool and deck were detached from the dwelling and if an application was made to this board for approval of the sideyard area as a means of correcting this violation. On August 27, 1980, an order to remedy violation was issued as mentioned above. On August 28, 1980 an application for a variance was filed with this board under APpeal No. 2740, which was withdrawn without prejudice as requested; and on May 24, 1982, this amended application was filed. The distance between the garage and the northwesterly property line is approximately seven feet, and there is an opening between the garage and the hedges of approximately 5½ feet. At the southeast side, the distance between the fence enclosure and the property line is four feet, and there appears to be no opening between the fence and the property line because of the hedges. The total sideyard area is approximately 11 feet. The total area of the parcel in question is 19,780 square feet. The area of the house and garage per applicant's attorney is 2,040 square feet; the patio 210 square feet; the existing deck 624 square feet, the pool and walk 2,228 square feet; for a total area of lot coverage 5,102 square feet. The percentage of lot coverage is 25.8%. Section 100-31 of the code requires a maximum permitted percentage of 20 for lot coverage. This application does not request this relief Southold Town Board of Appeals -33- July 29, 1982 Regular Meeting (Appeal No. 2997 - Annette Golden Carries, continued:) and it is the opinion of this board that an application to this board for same must be made. It is the opinion of this board that under the circumstances, practical difficulties have been shown, and it cannot be denied that actions of the Building Department may have contributed to the cir- cumstances in which the appellant finds herself. In view of the manner in which the difficulties arose, it is the opinion of this board that the interest of justice will be served by allowing the variance. Now, therefore, on motion by Mr. Douglass, seconded by Mr. Grigonis, it is RESOLVED, that the application of ANNETTE GOLDEN CARNES for approval of the insufficient side and rear yard setbacks of the inground swimmingpool and deck, be and hereby is GRANTED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. That the fence be improved around the pool to meet the code requirements; 2. That a new application for a variance be filed fOr considera- tion by this board on the excessive lot coverage; 3. That no construction of any type be permitted without the~ express prior written approval of this board after formal application therefor. Location of Property: 1445 Bay Shore Road, Greenport, NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-53-4-4. Vote of the Board: Douglass and Sawicki. Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonis, This resolution was unanimously adopted. Being there was no further business properly coming before the board at this time, the Chairman declared the meeting ~djourned. Respectfully submitted,