Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTR-21-5-7Albert J. Krupski, President James King, Vice-President Henry Smith Artie Foster Ken Poliwoda Town Hall 53095 Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1892 Fax (631) 765-1366 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD COASTAL EROSION MANAGEMENT PERMIT Date: April 26, 2000 SCTM#21-5-7 Name of Applicant/Agent: Jill Doherty Name of Permittee: NANCY ~ PHIL WEBER Address of Permittee: 160 The Strand, East Marion Property Located: 160 The Strand, East Marion DESCRIPTION OF ACTIVITY: Construct a 4' high fence along the bluff, 15' from the beginning of the walkway, along the first bend. SPECIAL CONDITIONS: (apply if marked) __ Bluff restoration through a re-vegetation plan is a necessary special condition of this permit. A relocation agreement is attached hereto and is a necessary special condition of this permit. __ A maintenance agreement as attached with application and is a necessary special condition of this permit. Albert J. President, AJK/lms Krupski, Jr. Board of Trustees Telephone (516) 765-18q2 Town Hall. 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold. New York 11971 SOUTHOLD TOWN CONSERVATION ADVISORY COUNCIL At the meeting of the Southold Town Conservation Advisory Council held Tuesday, April 11, 2000, the following'recommendation was made: Motion Carried Moved by Ken Meskill, seconded by Scott Hilary, it was RESOLVED to recommend to the Southold Town Board of Trustees APPROVAL WITH A STIPULATION of the Coastal Erosion Permit Application of NANCY & PHIL WEBER 21-5-7 for a 4' high fence along top of the bluff approx. 10' down from the bluff line. 160 The Strand, East Marion The CAC recommends Approval with the Stipulation that any vegetation disturbance is to be restored and that erosion on the east of the staircase is to be replanted. Vote of Council: Ayes: All Motion Carried Aprflll, 2000 Southold Town Board of Trustees Feather Frill Southold, NY 11971 RE: Nancy & Phil Weber SCTM #1000-21-5-7 Dear Board Members: Enclosed for your info/mat/on P/ease find a above referenced site. site plan dated April 10, 2000 showing all proposed work on the Also enclosed is a report t~orn Sod and Water Conservation District received by the Z.B.A. on April with regard the the blu~ 3, 2000 The proposed fence will be hand, At this ' ' ' ' · · p/ease let me know. a chmn link fence w~th mammal disturbance to the bluffas it will be placed by t/me a revegetat/on plan is being worked on and if you have any Suggestions or Concerns, Thank you for your Consideration. S/ncerely, ,~ Jill Ooherty J ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRIAGE OFFICER RECORDs MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone, (5]~6) 765-1800 OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC ACCESS TO RECORDs ~N~T?U, CTIONs: Please co . ~f~ce (agency Freedom of TnP;neta .S. ectlon I of this for .... ,,J response to yOur r~,~ ..... ,-urmatlon Officer). r~__ .., o~u 'give to Town Clerk's ~.~u~t, or as an in*~- .- ~,,e copy will be returned to you '~'"" response. (D&p~men~ t or Officer, ff k~, that h~ ~k~ ~ has th~ ~nformation RECORD YOU WISH TO /o~ ~,e requesting.) INSPECT: (Describe the record SOught. If possible, date, file title, tax map n~mber, and any other pertinent information.)SUpply Signature of Applicant:~__ Printed Name~.~~ Mmhng Address (if different from above) :~ Telephone Number:' Date: [ ] APPROVED ~ ~=-'~- .... ====================-~-=====--~--~_====== ........ [ ] APPROVED WITH DELAy*  [ ] DENIED* EECEIV~n, Freedom of Information Officer Date * If delayed or denied see reverse side for explanation. ~outhold l'ow~ Cb~ I/ Albert J. Krupski, President James King, Vice-President Henry Smith Artie Foster Ken Poliwoda Town Hall 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Telephone (516) 765-18,~2 Fax (516) 765-1823 BOARD OF TOWN 'r~USTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Office Use Only ~oastal Erosion Permit Application ----Wetland Permit Application Grandfather Permit Application Waiver/Amendment/Changes ~-/~eceived Application: ~]~ ~,'Received Fee:$ ~ ~Completed Application~/~O~ Incomplete SEQRA Classification: Type I Type II Unlisted Coordination:(date seDt)~ 7CAC Referral Sent: --~ate of Inspection: Receipt of CAC Report:' TLead Agency Determination: echnical Review: ~ublic Hearing Held: Resolution: Name of Applicant {~3JAL7 ~ ~i~ L~~ Address i~d9 '~'-!,.~ ~'~Yd'~%~ ~ ~ ~[69~ [~(~ ~ g~ Phone N~ber: (~[) ~77- [q[~ Suffolk County Tax Map N~ber: 1000 ~ - ~- ~ Property Location: ~ (provide LILCO Pole ~, di~ance to~{oss street, (If applicable) and location) B~Of Trustees Applicatio~ GENERAL DATA Land Area (in square feet): Area Zoning: ~P Previous use of property: intended use of property: Prior permits/approvals for site improvements: Agency Date No prior permits/approvals for site improvements. Has any permit/approval ever been revoked or suspended by a goverr~ental agency? t"" No Yes If yes, provide explanation: Project Description (use attachments if necessary): COASTAL EROSION APPLICATION DATA Purposes of proposed activity: ~ ~C~-~Osc- yog~ f~C Are wetlands present within 75 feet of the proposed activity? No Yes Does the project involve excavation or filling? ~"~' No Yes If Yes, how much material will be excavated? (cubic yards) How much material will be filled? (cubic yards) Manner in which material will be removed or deposited: Describe the nature and extent of the environmental impacts reasonably anticipated resulting from implementation of the project as proposed. (Use attachments if necessary) 817,21 Appendix C State Environmental Quality Review SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM For UNLISTED ACT[ONS Only PART I--PROJECT INFORMATION ~o be completed by Applicant or Project soonsor) I1. APPLJCANTISPONSOR I 2. PROJECT NAME 5. OSSCRleE PROJECT SRIEFLY: 7. AMOUNT OF ~_AND AFFECTED: WILL PROPOSED ACTION COMPLY With ~'(ISTING 7.QNING CR OTHER -:;(ISTING ~-:,NO USE ~ESTRICT',ONS? ~-. Yes ~No If NO. describe ~riefiy DOES ANY ASPECT OF THE ACTIOI4 HAVE A CURRENTLY VALID PERMIT OR APPROVAL? ~ Yes I~o If yes. Iisi agency name and bermitlaooreval ii{ the action is in the Coastal Area, and you are a state agency, complete the Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this a~s, essment OVER ! B~ of Trustees Application0 AU'rmORIZATION (where the~ applicant is not the owner) (print 'owner of property) (mailing address) do hereby authorize ( Agent ) to apply for permit(s) from the Southold Board of Town Trustees on my behalf. .%ignature ) 8 Board of Trustees Application County of Suffolk State of New York DESCRIBED PERMIT(S) AND THAT ALL STATEMENTS CONTAINED HEREIN ARE TRUE TO THE BEST OF HIS/HER KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF, AND Tt~AT ALL WORK WILL BE DONE IN THE MANNER SET FORTH IN THIS APPLICATION AND AS MAY BE APPROVED BY THE SOUTh{OLD TOWN BOARD OF TRUSTEES. THE APPLICANT AGREES TO HOLD THE TOWN OF SOb~fHOLD AND TRETOWN TRUSTEES HARMLESS AND FI~EE FROM ANY AND ALL DAMAGES AND CLAIMS ARISING UNDER OR BY VIRT~3E OF SAID PERMIT(S), IF GRANTED. IN COMPLETING THIS APPLICATION, I HERRRY ALViq{ORIZE THE TRUSTEES, THEIR AGENT(S) OR REPRESENTATIVES(S), TO ENTER ON~D MY PROPERTY TO INSPECT THE PREMISES IN CONJUNCTION WITH REVIEW OF THIS APPLICATION. SWORN TO BEFORE ME THIS Signature DAY OF t~yQ~ ~.~ Publi~ LINDA J, COOPER Notary Public, State of New Yore No. 4~22563, Suffolk C~u..Qty -,, .-~ ~) Te~'m E~pk~$ December 3~, ~ ~-0~' mART _oETE?,MINATiCN OF SiGNIFiCANCE(To me como~eted by Agency) :-- .-,. ,* · :,ox ff '/au have identified one or more cotentialW large .ar significant acversa imc, ac:s WhiCh ,','IA' ocaur. Then ~r¢ceed direc'4y to :~e FULL -ZAF ~no~or greo&re a posidv~ dec,ara:iota. FROM : NRCS/S~CD Riv~p~ad SOIL A~)~ CON~I~VA~ZON DISTRZCT ~AX:(631)727-3160 PHONE NO. : 5167272[~51 COUNTY OF SUFFOLK Apr. ~3 20~ 07:2~ P2 T~,~= J. l~&l~on D$$TRZCTMANAG;R ($31)727-2315 'Gerhard P. Goehringer, Chairman Southold Town Board of Appeals P.O. Box 1179 53095 Main Road southo,d.. ]1111 March 28, 2000 Dear Mr. Goehringer. We have completed a site inspeotion at the Nanoy Weber property known as Lot 137 of Pebble Beach Farms, The Strand, East Marion, The front of the house lot slopes towards the road. Downspouts on the house exit onto the ground surface. The rear yard slopes gently towards the northeast comer of the bluff. Ground cover is dense sod in very good condition to the blufftop edge. Our measurements from the proposed pool area that was staked out show 71' to the bluff edge on the east side and 58' to the stairwell on the west side from the comers of the area. Itwas 28.3' to the house from the southeast corner of the area, The staked area was laid out as in Proposal B or 2, parallel to the house. Our only comparison to the layout shows the 58' where the plan shows 63'. However, due to the irregular bluff top edge, they may have measured in another spot. The bluff face is very heavily vegetated by trees, shrubs, vines and grasses. Shrubs and trees had bean trimmed back and the cuttings left on the bluff face. These cuttings should be removed so as not to add unnecessary weight to the face or smother any existing vegetation, The stairwell is in excellent condition: There is no toe stabilization present on this parcel otto either side. High fide appears to be approximately 15 to 20 feet from the toe of the slope. It does appear that storm tides reach the toe. The bluff face appears to be relatively stable at this time. RIV~B/{EAD COUNTY CENTER ]00 CENTER DRIVe, ~OO~ N-Z10 B-IVEP, H~AD, NY 11901 FROM : N~RCS/SWCD RiverK~ad PHONE NO. : S1672720S1 Apr. 0~ 2000 07:29AM P3 There does not appear to be any problems with the pool location. However, the pool should not be emptied by allowing water to flow over the bluff face. If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact us again. Paul TeNyenhuis 2 Weber's Application to the Zoning Board for a Variance to Southold's "100-foot Setback from Bluff" Code 1. Two findings are immediately evident when one examines the Weber's application(s) for a variance to the Town's Zoning Ordinance pertaining to a pool being built within 100 feet of the bluff at 160 The Strand. a. The first is that the three "surveys" in the Weber's file are nearly 25 years old. The remaining drawing cannot be considered a survey, is not dated, and does not contain the name of the person who drew it. b. The second is that all of the paperwork associated with the Weber's application was processed in less than 5 weeks whereas a local attorney needed nearly 3 months to get the Lempl's application processed. c. It seems that someone who is intimately familiar with the workings of local government has been able to get the Weber's building permit submitted on March 2, get a Notice of Disapproval from the Building Dept. on March 2, submit A Request for a Variance to and get the request accepted by the Zoning Board's office on March 6, and have a hearing for a variance scheduled for April 6. d. On the basis of knowledge and belief, a recently retired employee of the Town of Southold has been instrumental in having these papers processed. e. That being the case, why haven't the appropriate public disclosures been filed with the Building Permit and with the Application to the Zoning Board for a variance? it appears that the file does not contain all of the material that the "Southould Town Board of Appeals INSTRUCTIONS FOR VARIANCE APPLICATIONS" requires. The required "QUESTIONNAIRE FOR FILING WITH YOUR Z.B.A. APPLICATION" does not answer questions F. or G, much less provide a copy of the building permit and map of the planned additions to the existing building as approved by the Building Department. The file contains three (3) drawings that are being represented as "surveys." a. One drawing - "Plan A" penciled in left edge, depicts a pool that is situated such that its 32-foot length is parallel to the northeastern edge of the Weber's property line. This pool is completely surrounded by a 4-foot high fence immediately adjacent to the pool so that complete access to the rear yard is available. b. A second drawing, labeled "Amended B" depicts the 32-foot length of the pool's edge to be parallel to the northern edge of the property line, e.g. parallel to the rear of the existing house. Again, this pool is completely surrounded by a 4-foot high fence immediately adjacent to the pool so that complete access to the rear yard is available. R. S. Trowbddge, Ph.D. President Pebble Beach Farms Lot Owners Association 4/6/00 1 of 4 A third drawing, dated March 29, 2000 depicts the 32-foot length of the pool's edge to be parallel to the northern edge of the property line and parallel with the rear of the existing house. This pool is completely surrounded by a 4-foot high fence such that the entire rear yard of this property is fenced in. 5. The fence depicted in this third drawing appears to extend a significant distance seaward from the bluff's top. Why? 6. Not one of these drawings has the Coastal Erosion Hazard Area Line on them. Why? Doesn't the law require this to be on a I such drawings? The three drawings are a modification of a survey prepared in 1975. This 1975 survey has been altered and has had additions made to it. Such alterations and additions could be interpreted as violations of Section 7209 of the State's Article 145, commonly referred to as the State's Education Law. The drawings submitted state "There are no dwellings within 100 feet of this property other than those shown hereon." This is NOT true! There is a dwelling on lot #136! The drawings depict a "2 story Fr. House & Gar." That is NOT true! This property currently contains a 2 ~-story frame wooden house with a basement. It was modified according to a building permit #23836 issued on December of 1996. An examination of the rear of this building shows it to have three full floors above ground. This building is currently being prepared for further very significant alterations according to building permit #26173 issued in November of 1999. 10. It is not clear which of these 3 drawings was submitted to and rejected by the Building Department. Possibly the drawing labeled "Plan A?" Which of these three drawings are to be considered in the appeal? Shouldn't the only one to be considered be the one that was submitted to and rejected by the Building Department on March 2? 11.The only indication that there is another alteration proposed for this property is a copy of a drawing with "Proposed 2 Story Addition" noted on the plan. This drawing is not dated or stamped with the information required by section 7209 of the Education Law. Consequently, it cannot be considered a survey. 12. Not one of the "surveys," drawings.or plans submitted with this appeal comply with the Section 7209 of the State's Education Law. 13.The submitted drawings do not show the conditions as they exist today. They show conditions that existed in 1975. R. S. Trowbridge, Ph.D. President Pebble Beach Farms Lot Owners Association 4/6/00 2 of 4 14. Two of the three submitted drawings do not show where a dry well is going to be situated - such a dry well will be necessary to accept the fluids that are generated when the pool's filter is cleaned by being back-flushed. 15. The third survey, dated March 29 depicts a dry well in the southeast corner of the rear yard. Will this dry well be nearly adjacent to the cellar hole that will be dug to accommodate the new construction that has been approved for this home? This is the ONLY drawing to show a dry well! And this is the only mention of a "dry well" in this proposed construction. 16.The submitted plans do not show how the septic tank, distribution box and leaching field will be relocated and affected by the proposed new construction on this site, their relation to the pool and its dry well, or their relation to the property's driveway. 17.The submitted plans do not show where pool s chem'cals will be stored. Will a separate shed be built to store these hazardous chemicals? 18.The submitted plans do not show where the pool's heater is to be located. Will another shed be built to house the pool's heater and fuel supply? What fuel will be used to heat this pool? How will the fuel be transported to this shed? How will the heater's fuel be transported to the rear of the house? 19.The submitted plans do not show where the pool's pumps will be located. Will they be placed in such a way that the noise they generate will not be a nuisance to the neighborhood? 20.The Building Department says that the proposed construction is within 51 feet of the bluff's top. A representative from Suffolk County Soil and Water Conservation District states it is 71 feet to the bluff's top and 58 feet to the stairwell (stairwell is on top of and at edge of bluff). Owner's "surveyor" states the distance to be 63 feet. Who are we to believe? 21.The Suffolk County Soil and Water Conservation District used "Proposal B or 2," for comparison to what they found at the site. Assuming this Proposal B or 2 to be the one labeled "Amended B", this drawing does not show where a dry well will be placed. 22.A pool of this size, assuming it to have an average depth of six feet, will contain 23,000 gallons of water. That is equivalent to 91 tons. A very significant structure, indeed! 23. How is it Suffolk County Water cannot provide new homes with water yet can supply water to fill swimming pools? R. S. Trowbridge, Ph.D. President Pebble Beach Farms Lot Owners Association 4/6/00 3 of 4 24. The Suffolk County Soil and Water Conservation District representative states that the pool's water is not to be dumped over the bluff in the event the pool has to be emptied. HOW ARE YOU GOING TO GUARANTEE THIS NEVER OCCURS? 25.What assurance do we have that these pools will never be abandoned or neglected and thereby become a health hazard? 26.The property owners state that their pool will be surrounded with 4-foot high fences with self-closing and locking gates. Yet a recent inspection of the pools in the neighborhood revealed that the gates of the fences surrounding these pools are neither self closing nor locked! Indeed, one pool in the community is only surrounded by a snow fence, and that is lying on the ground! 27.What assurance do we have that the owners will not enclose their pool for year- round use? On the basis of these questions, discrepancies and observations, I request that the Zoning Board deny the Weber's application(s) for a variance to the Town of Southold's code governing building within the 100-foot setback of bluffs. Building a pool on the Weber's property will represent a threat to the integrity and well-being of the bluff, will pose both environmental and health hazards to the community and will significantly alter the character of the neighborhood in a deleterious way. R. S. Trowbridge, Ph.D. President Pebble Beach Farms Lot Owners Association 4/6/00 4 of 4 Preamble to Zoning Board of Appeals' April 6, 2000 Meeting Concerning Applications for Variances to Town's "100-foot Setback from Bluff" Code I am Richard Trowbridge. I am a relatively new member of your community. I moved here in 1997 to work at Plum Island. I lived one year in Greenport before I bought my home in Pebble Beach Farms in East Marion. You are indeed very fortunate to have the natural resources that make living here so enjoyable. Is it any wonder that you want to protect them? But it must be a real challenge for you to accommodate everyone who comes before you asking for a variance, it must be awkward at times for you to tactfully find ways that will make everyone happy and still abide by the Town's codes. I can well understand just how difficult it must be for you to make sure these beautiful resources remain unspoiled for our grandchildren and their children too. I hope that what I have to say will help make your job a bit easier. The Board of Directors of the Pebble Beach Farms Lot Owners Association inducted me to be their vice president three months after I moved into Pebble Beach Farms in 1998. I am now the Association's president. Many of the property owners have contacted me about pools being built on the bluff. So I am here representing not only myself but the lot owners too. Pebble Beach Farms is a development containing 143 lots, each approximately % acre in size. There are eighty-three (83) homes in Pebble Beach Farms. This development has been experiencing significant growth these past two years. The properties on top of the bluff overlooking Long Island Sound have been very dramatically altered by construction during this past two years. There are thirty-three (33) lots located on this bluff. Currently, there are twenty-five (25)homes occupying this very narrow stretch of water front property. In this past year alone, we have seen four new houses built on the bluff. The owners of another home on the bluff made a very significant addition to theirs. Of these 25 homes overlooking the Sound, 7 have installed swimming pools within 100 feet of the bluff's edge. These seven were installed prior to 1997. I have been told that one of the lot owners who began construction this year has asked for and received a variance to install a pool between his home and within 100 feet of the bluff's edge. Now we have before us another two new applications for a variance to the Town's Code concerning building within the 100-foot setback from the bluff. So, to summarize, we'll have a total of ten swimming pools, two of which are being applied for tonight, on a bluff containing 25 homes. All of these swimming pools will be within 100 feet of the bluff's edge. All of this recent construction on the bluff has had a very deleterious impact both on the community and to the top of the bluff. People buy property abutting the Sound believing that the bluff will not fall down, believing that the beach at the bottom of "their" bluff will Richard S. Trowbridge, Ph.D. President Pebble Beach Farms Lot Owners Association 4/6/00 I of 3 remain nice and clean to sun on, to play on, and to store their boats and beach furniture on. Past experience has shown these to be unreasonable beliefs. What has happened to our community's beaches during just the past two years since I've lived at Pebble Beach Farms has demonstrated that the winter storms are relentless in their attack on the Sound's beaches and its bluff. The community's beach has experienced significant erosion each year. Prior to my moving to Pebble Beach Farms, contractors were able to clean and groom the entire stretch of beach below the Pebble Beach Farm's bluff. In contrast, only half of the beach could be accessed for cleaning and grooming last year. A simple walk along this beach reveals that both this bluff and the underlying beach are under considerable attack by the elements we have no control over. Property owners are already asking how are we to restore the beaches below their bluff. They are asking us to divert the money from what the Association has set aside to maintain the community's private roads to reconstruct their "private" beaches. The Suffolk County Soil and Water Conservation District's representative has stated in his March 28~ letter to your chairman, Mr. Goehringer that "It does appear that storm tides reach the toe" of this bluff. That is an understatement! One only has to visit the bluff during one of the many storms out of the southwest or west to witness the devastation such tides bring. What will happen to the bluff if it is attacked from the top too? Is it too hard to imagine a pool breaking and emptying its contents over the bluff? After all, these pools contain at least 90 tons of water. Indeed, just the weight of water alone in these pools make them very significant structures. Or maybe a thoughtless and greedy pool contractor will pump a pool's contents onto or over the bluff's edge so he can cheaply clean the pool. He most definitely will not pay to haul this waste out in a tank truck! Would he empty over 20,000 gallons of polluted water into the community's streets? Would that not be like someone pumping the contents of his cesspool onto his neighbors' lawns and streets? Where else is he to dispose of a pool's contents? After all, to him it's just dirty water. What is it to you and me? Does he care? It is for these reasons that I have decided to come before you this evening to speak about these two new applications for a variance to the Town's 1004oot setback rule as it relates to the bluff along Long Island Sound in Pebble Beach Farms. I understand that the Town of Southold defines what a bluff is in Chapter 37 of its Code, titled "Town of Southold Coastal Erosion Hazard Area Law." This code was adopted by the Town Board in October of 1991. This code defines the landward limits of a bluff as being "twenty-five (25) feet landward of the point of inflection on the top of the bluff. The 'point of inflection' is that point along the top of the bluff where the trend of the land slope changes to begin its descent to the shoreline." Consequently, the bluff includes all land between the top edge of the bluff and 25 feet from the bluff's edge landward. Richard S. Trowbridge, Ph.D. President Pebble Beach Farms Lot Owners Association 4/6/00 2 of 3 The town's fathers have, in their wisdom, seen fit to add an additional 75 feet to this line to thereby provide a 100-foot setback. Article XXIII, Section 100-239, 4(A)(1) states "all buildings located on lots adjacent to sounds and upon which exists a bluff landward of the shore or beach shall be set back not fewer than one hundred (100) feet from the top of such bluff." Is it possible this lO0-foot setback was created specifically to protect the bluff from being encroached upon and destroyed by our desire to have everything built on the bluffs? If that was their intent, why are we giving variances to it for things like swimming pools? I have analyzed each of these two applications for a variance to this code. My observation of the Lempl's application for a variance will be stated at the time the Board has scheduled for their application to be heard. My observations on the Weber's application for a variance follow. Richard S. Trewbridge, Ph.D. President Pebble Beach Farms Lot Owners Association 4/6/00 3 of 3 WEBE RE _R SIDENCE ?.~,,, LOb, tO ISLANE::> /' ' '..~e,, sou ;> ,/ --.*.% % M~P OF LOT NO, PE6E~LE 'E~EACN FARM5 51.JFFQLK COUNTY MAP NO. ,AT ~A6T MARION, NELg 'SCALE: LICENSE NO. 'NOTE: ',/EARIF'T' LUITN 5LI~V'E"r'o~ ALL p~ho~ TO OONST~LICTION, NOTIF"r' A~C. NITECT OF ~N¥ I::)I$~FREPANC, IE~ P~IO~ PFRhOR TO ~ONETRLI~TION. E×I¢TING / / PFROPOEED BUILT-IN POOL, YIN'FL LINED 4' X 4.8' DIAMETE~ M.41NTAIN I¢' FROM AND P~OPE~T~ LINE5 ] ,~,E)P ITtON (N,~,5 tSUILDINI~ PERMIT) M. TortorWe Ard~ita(,'t, P.C. ARCHITECTURE PROJECT DEVELOPMENT 127 E Main Street Rlverhead, New York il~ul 831. 208.8088 EEl, 208.8888 fax email, mt ator t orloeepe¢onlc.net REVISIONS, WEBER RESIDENCE 180 THE STRAND EAST MARION N.Y. PROJECT, SITE PLAN DRAWING TITLE, DRAWN BY, T.L.V. SCALE, AS NOTED DATE, 4/10/00 SP1 DRAWING NUMBER,