Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-02/26/1982Southold Town Board of Appeals MAIN ROAD- STATE ROAD 25 BOUTHDLD, L.I., N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR. SERGE DOYEN, JR. ROBERT J. DOUGLASS JOSEPH H, SAWICKI MINUTES REGULAR MEETING F.e~.r.u.a.ry 26, 1982 A Regular Meeting of the Southold Town Board of Appeals was held on Friday, February 26, 1982 at 7:30 o'clock p.m. at the Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, New York 11971. Present were: Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman; Charles Grigonis, Jr.; Serge Doyen, Jr.; Robert J. Douglass; and Joseph H. Sawicki. The Chairman called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2724. Application of Clara Prout, 107 Greenacres Avenue, White Plains, NY 10606, for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-31 for permission to construct deck addition to dwelling with an insufficient rear- yard setback at 465 Private Road No. 3 (off Pine Neck Road), Southold, NY; bounded north by Jockey Creek; west by Dyer; south by Norris; east by Shector; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-70-6-16. The Chairman opened the hearing at approximately 7:32 p.m. and read the legal notice of hearing in its entirety and appeal applica- tion. MR. CHAIRMAN: We have a copy in the file of a survey indicat- ing the decision which is pencilled in to be 16' by 28' And we have a copy of the tax map indicating the area in which this parti- cular parcel of property is in and the surrounding property. Is there anybody that would like to speak in behalf of this application? MRS. CLARA PROUT: Well I filed the application. MR. CHAIRMAN: Are you Mrs. Prout? MRS. PROUT: Yes. Do you have any questions that you want to ask me? MR. CHAIRMAN: Not right at the moment. We'll wait until we see if there are any objections to the application, Mrs. Prout. Southold Town Board of Appeals -2- Feb£uary 26, 1982 (Appeal No. 2724, Clara Prout, continued:) Is there anybody else that would like to speak in behalf of the application? Anybody that would like to speak against the appli- cation? (None) Any questions for Mrs. Prout from the board? (None) Hearing no further questions or statement or conjecture, a motion is in order, gentlemen. MEMBER GRIGONIS: I'll offer a resolution granting this as applied for. MR. CHAIRMAN: Second. The Board made the following findings and determination: By this appeal, applicant seeks permission to construct an 16' by 28' deck at the rear of the proposed dwelling, leaving an insufficient rearyard setback of 28 feet. The prior dwelling is claimed to have had a small deck area. Applicant has applied to the N.Y.S. Department of Environmental Conservation and received approval for this construction under Permit #TW 15276-0367 on November 20, 1981. Upon inspection, the board found that the applicant has limited buildable area, which would be to the rear or to the front yard areas. The board agrees with applicant's reasoning. In considering this appeal, the board determines that the variance request is not substantial in relation to the code require- ments; that the circumstances herein are unique; 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 applied for. On motion by Mr. Grigonis, seconded by Mr. Goehringer, it was RESOLVED, that the relief requested in Appeal No. 2724, appli- cation of Clara Prout to construct a 16' by 28' deck with a rearyard setback of 28 feet, be granted as applied for. Location of Property: 465 Private Road No. 3, Southold, NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-70-6-16. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen, Douglass and Sawicki. Southold Town Board of Appeals -3- FeD£uary 26, 1982 On motion by Mr. Douglass, seconded by Mr. Goehringer, it was RESOLVED, to approve the following minutes of meetings held by this board: September 3, 1981 Regular Meeting; September 17, 1981 Regular Meeting; October 2, 1981 Special Meeting; February 4, 1982 Regular Meeting. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen, Doug- lass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted. PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2947. Application of Anastasios and Anna Parianos, 43-21 Astoria Blvd., Long Island City, NY 11105 (by Gary Flanner Olsen, Esq.) for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Sections 100-30 and Bulk Schedule, for permission to reconstruct and locate second dwelling as existed prior to destruction by fire with insufficient yard area(s) at the southwesterly corner of Peconic Bay Boulevard and Sigsbee Road, Laurel, NY; more particularly known as Lot 108A on Amended Map of Mattituck Park Properties, Inc., Map No. 801; County Tax Map Parcel NO. 1000-126-5-13. The Chairman opened the hearing at approximately 7:40 p.m. and read the legal notice of hearing in its entirety and appeal application. MR. CHAIRMAN: We have a copy of the survey or sketch indicat- ing the location of the existing structure and proposed location of the second structure, and a copy of the tax map indicating this particular property and surrounding properties to the south of this parcel, and pictures of the parcel including the cottage. Is there anyone here wishing to speak in behalf of the application? GARY FLANNER OLSEN, ESQ.: Yes. My name is Gary Olsen. I'm an attorney having my offices at Main Road, Mattituck. I represent Mr. and Mrs. Parianos, who are seeking permission to construct a one-family residence on premises which they own at the intersection of Peconic Bay Boulevard and Sigsbee Road, Mattituck. The property is known as Lot No. 108A, Amended Map of Mattituck Park Properties Incorporated, Map No. 801. The applicants purchased the subject property on October 29, 1973 for $45,000. There was a purchase-money mortgage held by the sellers in the amount of $25,000; and there is still due and owing on the mortgage approximately $18,000. I'll submit to the board a copy of the contract to purchase which was September 17, 1973 as Exhibit A. (Pages 1, 2 and 3 of the Contract dated September 17, 1973 and executed was submitted for the record.) At the time of purchase, the property contained a small one-story frame building and a separate one-and one-half story frame house. Southold Town Board of Appeals -4- February 26, 1982 (Appeal No. 2947 - Anastasio Parianos, continued:) GARY FLANNER OLSEN, ESQ. continued: Both buildings were constructed prior to April of 1957. I understand the buildings were approximately, at least over 50 years old. Some time in March I believe of 1979, I'm sure of the exact time. The one and one-half story frame building was destroyed by a fire, and the applicants now seek to rebuild a single-fa~nily residence in the old location, and if you go down and see it, which I know you've done, part of the old foundation is still present. When the appli- cants applied for a building permit from the Southold Town Building Inspector, a Notice of Disapproval was issued on two grounds: (a) that only one dwelling is permitted, and (b) the proposed main dwelling would have insufficient yard areas. With reference to the first basis of disapproval, it is the intention of the applicants not to use the existing small building already on the property as a dwelling. Said building is intended to be used strictly as an acces- sory building to the main new house, which they seek to build. It would be used basically as a cottage for overflow guests that are part of the main house. The present building meets the requirements of an accessory building as defined in Section 100-32 of the Southold Town Zoning Code in that: (a) such building does not exceed 18 feet in height, (b) such building is set back at least three feet from any lot line, and VanTuyl survey of March 5, 1980 which you have shows setbacks of seven feet and five feet, and (c) such building only contains 560 square feet and occupies less than 40% of the lot area. The total lot area of this parcel by the way is about 11,000 square feet. Mr. and Mrs. Parianos understand that the existing small build- ing located on the property will not be used as a separate residence, so that there will be two dwellings but only as an accessory build- ing to the main house. It would be inequitable to require the des- truction of the present building as a prerequisite to granting a building permit for a new dwelling. The applicants have had the present structure appraised by Lewis Edson of First Towne Realty, Main Road, Southold, and its replacement value will be approximately $14,000. So it doesn't make any sense to tear the building down. There are many such accessory buildings that you're aware throughout the township of Southold that are used as guest cottages. Due to the fact that the building is already on the property and existed prior to the fire which destroyed the main dwelling, the character of the neighborhood does not change by the construction of this dwelling. Since the applicants understand that the present small building will only be used as an accessory building, there's no need for the zoning board to entertain an application for a use variance to utilize the property for two dwellings instead of one. With reference to the second basis of disapproval by the building inspector, that is the insufficient yard area, I have the following Southold Town Board of Appeals -5- February 26, 1982 (Appeal No. 2947 - Anastasio Parianos, continued:) GARY FLANNER OLSEN, ESQ. continued: comments: (a) the subject property is a corner parcel with front- age on the south side of Peconic Bay Boulevard of 147 feet, and frontage on the west side of Sigsbee Road of 75 feet. The total lot area is 11,000 square feet. Due to the fact that this is a corner parcel, the zoning code requires that there be two frontyards and that the applicants elect one sideyard and one rearyard. Due to the fact that the present zoning requirements call for a 50-foot frontyard setback and a 50-foot rearyard setback, the application of such regulations would leave no room for the construction of a house, except for a small rectangular-shaped portion, which is approximately 10' wide by 45' long. Such a small portion of the property creates serious practical difficulties in constructing a house of reasonable size. In the event the frontyard setback variance is not approved, the only buildable portion of the property is shown on Exhibit B, which I submit to you now. The only room that would be left is outlined in red ink. (Mr. Olsen submitted a photocopy of a survey outlining the small area in red for the record.) The applicants seek to set their house 23' from Peconic Bay Boulevard and 24' from Sigsbee Road which is the old location. Their sideyard to the south would more than exceed the required 11.7' that the building inspector requires, and their rearyard area to the west would more than exceed the required 50 feet. Furthermore, the proposed house location will comply with the requirements of Section 100-34 of the zoning code in that there would be no construction within the triangle formed by the street lines 30 feet distant from their point of intersection. That's the section that talks about corner lots. The denial of the frontyard setback variance application would create a significant economic injury to applicants as will be demon- strated by the testimony of Lewis Edson, which is to follow. Furthermore, other homes located on Sigsbee Road both on the east and west sides are located less than the required 50 feet so that the granting of the variance would not change the character of the neighborhood. It is respectfully submitted that no legitimate purpose would be served by restricting the only usable building area, the portion of the property as outlined in red ink, Exhibit B. Lastly, I wish to advise the board that I spoke with Charles Brigham of the Suffolk County Health Department earlier this week, concerning an application which is presently pending by Mr. and Mrs. Parianos in conjunction with obtaining permission from the Health Department to reconstruct the new house on the old location, and Mr. Brigham has advised me that the application is being handled Southold Town Board of Appeals -6- February 26, 1982 (Appeal No. 2947 - Anastasio Parianos, continued:) GARY FLANNER OLSEN, ESQ. continued: by Roy Reynolds in this office who indicated to him orally that there would be no problem in obtaining Health Department approval after the affirmative action of the Zoning Board of Appeals of Southold. Mr. Reynolds is on vacation this week, so I couldn't talk to him directly. I'd like to just ask a few questions of Mr. Edson. Would you please state your name and address for the record. LEWIS EDSON: Lewis Edson, Main Road, Southold. MR. OLSEN: What is your occupation? LEWIS EDSON: I'm a licensed real estate broker. MR. OLSEN: Would you please tell the board as to your quali- fications as a licensed real estate broker and appraiser? MR. EDSON: I've been involved in several hundred transactions in the Town of Southo!d and have been qualified as an expert witness before the Supreme Court of New York and United States Federal Tax Court. MR. OLSEN: Have you had an opportunity to appraise the property owned by the applicants, Mr. and Mrs. Anastasio Parianos, located at the corner of Peconic Bay Boulevard and Sigsbee Road in Mattituck. MR. EDSON: Yes, I have. MR. OLSEN: And when did you make that inspection? MR. EDSON: Wednesday of this week. MR. OLSEN: Would you please describe to the board what your inspection revealed insofar as it relates to the subject premises? MR. EDSON: The foundation is left from the fire. There's a depression in the middle of the property. And there's a small accessory building about 560 square feet off to the southwest corner. MR. OLSEN: Are you aware that the applicants are seeking to rebuild a new residence on the subject property? MR. EDSON: Yes. MR. OLSEN: In the event that the Zoning Board of Appeals should require the removal of the present building prior to the construction of a new residence, what is your opinion as to the Southold Town Board of Appeals -7- FeDruary 26, 1982 (Appeal No. 2947 - Anastasio Parianos, continued:) MR. OLSEN continued: applicants' not being able to utilize the existing structure, accessory building? MR. EDSON: Well, using a depreciated value at $25 a square foot for the accessory building, times 560 square feet, comes out to $14,000 value of the building. MR. OLSEN: Are you aware that the applicants seek to locate their new dwelling 23 feet from Peconic Bay Boulevard and 24 feet from Sigsbee Road, thus require a frontyard variance? MR. EDSON: Yes. MR. OLSEN: In the event that the Zoning Board has not approved the frontyard variance, and requires the owners to only build within areas of 45' by 10', what is your opinion as to the value of the property? MR. EDSON: The value of the property in that case with only building -- I don't know if anybody would build a place like that-- I pretty much think it is an unbuildable piece of property which would be $3,000. MR. OLSEN: If the Zoning Board of Appeals grants the frontyard variance as applied for, what is your opinion as to the value of the property of that? MR. EDSON: My opinion in that particular location with the beach down there and the values that I know in the area, the value would probably be about $20,000. MR. OLSEN: Did you have an opportunity to inspect the area surrounding the subject property? Would you please describe the result of your inspection insofar as it relates to the frontyard setback of other houses within the area. MR. EDSON: Going immediately to the south down Sigsbee if you follow on the tax map, the properties ir~nediately adjacent to the south are south back quite a distance. The buildings are on the rear part of the property. On the next property down, about 10 feet of setback, and on the third property down the setback is about 13 feet. There's one house on the other side directly across from the third property down which is also about 10 feet setback. MR. OLSEN: In your opinion, would granting of the frontyard variance prevent the orderly and reasonable use of the adjacent properties? MR. EDSON: No. MR. CHAIRMAN: Is that it, Mr. Olsen? Southold Town Board of Appeals -8- FeDruary 26, 1982 (Appeal No. 2947 - Anastasio Parianos, continued:) MR. OLSEN: Yes. MR. CHAIRMAN: Is there anybody else that would like to speak in behalf of this application? Anybody like to speak against the application? Any questions from the board? (None) Two points, Mr. Olsen, concerning the application. Number one, since I've been on the board I really have not been aware or cognizant of any time that the board has been asked to literally to tear down their house or an existing dwelling on the premises. Nor has anybody been asked to severely rehabilitate one that has been existing. I think the point basically here is that we are not talking about a dwelling. We're talking about the existing building now. We're basically talking about a structure. And the point at which point it became a dwelling is really a moot point at this particular time because you had said that you are willing to, or the applicants are willing to consider this particular dwelling now a structure, ok, and use it as a -- MR. OLSEN: If the board requires that, we do it. MR. CHAIRMAN: Right. Would your applicants have any objection to the normal restrictions that we place on dwellings--excuse me, on structures, in the town, such as no kitchen facilities. We usually do put a restriction "no sleeping quarters." At this particular point, would they have an objection to that to your knowledge? MR. OLSEN: There is already a kitchen in that house. To require that they remove it would cost money and would create an economic loss and hardship to them, and the only real purpose that the building would have, the accessory building to the main house, would be to utilize the sleeping facilities. There are numerous instances throughout the township of guest cottages being used in conjunction with the main residence. Again this is something that is already there, and to just basically use it for storage really' wouldn't make any sense. That's my feeling. MR. CHAIRMAN: I think in the investigation of this application what we basically came up with was that based upon the assessors' records they seem to indicate that in 1959-1960 was probably about the time that this particular existing dwelling, which of course in question and I'm referring to as a structure came into being. It might have been a garage prior to that; it might have been a storage building, and so on. So the question basically here is, is there any way that you could furnish the board with some sort of evidence to the fact that was preexisting in 19577 MR. OLSEN: If you look at the design of the building, it does not, it looks as though it was built at what it is today rather than being a converted garage. It doesn't look to me like it has been a garage. It always looks like it was a separate cottage. As to the history of it, I don't know how I could find that out, unless-- MR. CHAIRMAN: Are the prior owners still alive, or-- MR. OLSEN: Oh, sure. I believe one of the prior owners is Southold Town Board of Appeals -9- February 26, 1982 (Appeal No. 2947 - Anastasio Parianos, continued:) MR. OLSEN continued: still alive. I could if you want to adjourn this hearing, I'll see if I can locate the prior owner and perhaps get some affi- davits from the prior owner. Maybe some other people within the neighborhood, as to how long that building has been there. Mr. Parianos has pointed out to me that the building is still on posts-- MR. CHAIR~N: Can I just stop you one moment--is there anybody that cannot hear Mr. Olsen that would like him to use the mike? (None) MR. OLSEN: The building was constructed on posts. If it was a garage, it would have been built on a concrete floor, but I guess it was built on posts. That would certainly be an indi- cation that it was never a garage. MR. CHAIRMAN: Well at this particular point we have either option, of course to close the hearing and still ask you to fur- nish any information that you might have concerning the actual time that this particular structure came into being, or, to recess the hearing until the next regularly scheduled meeting and do the same. MR. OLSEN: Why don't we adjourn it and reschedule it for the next meeting? MR. CHAIRMAN: Ok, recess it for the next scheduled meeting-- MR. OLSEN: When is the next meeting? MR. CHAIRMAN: We haven't really come up with a date yet. MR. OLSEN: Are you meeting every two weeks now, or -- Every three weeks. What prompted bringing the variance at this time was the applicant received a notice from the building in- spector concerning the hole, and said either start to put a floor on it, get started on it, or fill it in or enclose it in. It has now been enclosed with a fence, but he didn't want to start rebuild- ing it until he had a building permit. When he went to get it and filed his building plans, that's when we got the Notice of Disapproval from the building inspector. MR. CHAIRMAN: Do you want to spend a couple of moments with your client? MR. OLSEN: Why don't we recess it until the next meeting, and I'll see what additional information I can get to you. MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Is there anybody else, anybody on the board that would like to say to Mr. Olsen and the applicant? (None) Hearing no further comments from anyone, I'll make a motion recessing this particular application until the next regularly scheduled monthly meeting. Southold Town Board of Appeals -10- February 26, 1982 (Appeal No. 2947 - Anastasios Parianos, continued:) On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Grigonis, it was RESOLVED, to recess Appeal No. 2947, matter of Anastasios Parianos until the next regular meeting of this board (March 19, 1982). Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen, Douglass and Sawicki. PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2948. Application of Dimitrios Pavlidis, by Garrett A. Strang, Box 1412, Southold, NY for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-31 for permission to construct one-family dwelling with an insufficient rearyard setback at 790 Hickory Avenue, Southold, NY; bounded northwest by Williams; west by Hickory Avenue; southeast by Carroll; east by Dow; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-54-6-6. The Chairman opened the hearing at approximately 8:05 p.m., and read the legal notice of hearing in its entirety and appeal application. MR. CHAIRMAN: We have a sketch indicating the placement of the proposed dwelling, indicating a rearyard of 34 feet to acces- sory deck. And we have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indi- cating all the parcels along Hickory Road. Is there anybody that would like to speak in behalf of this application? GARRETT A. STRANG: Garrett A. Strang, with Sacco and Ahlers, representing Mr. Pavlidis in this particular action. As can be seen from the site plan that was presented, the lot is substandard in width, depth and area. We have dealt with the code in preparing the house be set back adequately from the street side as well as sideyard. However, we are falling short as can be seen in the rearyard. Therefore, we have made application for the necessary variance to allow construction of this house with an inadequate rearyard as shown. MR. CHAIRMAN: I have some questions that I'll ask you after. We'll see if anybody else has any questions, or would like to make any statements. Is there anybody else that would like to speak in behalf of this application? In favor of. (None) Anybody like to speak against the application? Would you please state your name. PETER ABATE: Peter Abbate, adjacent to the property that is in question here. We feel that we bought the property last year, and one of the reasons why we bought our property was that of the strict town ordinance. And that was one of the reasons -- we could have bought other property, but we picked that lot just the way it is, and I don't think we want somebody that close. Why can't they move their house closer to the road? That's the question I have. MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Southold Town Board of Appeals -11- February 26, 1982 (Appeal No. 2948 - Dimitrios Pavlidis, continued:) There's 15 feet difference of the ordinance. MRS. ABBATE: That's a lot. MR. CHAIRMAN: MRS. ABBATE: MR. CHAIRMAN: May I have your name, ma'am? I'm Mrs. Abbate. Thank you. Is there anybody else that would like to speak against this application? (None) Mr. Strang, could you tell us the approximate square footage of the house? MR. STRANG: Yes. The approximate square footage of this house is 2700 square feet, 2800 square feet. It's a single-story house, and contains four bedrooms. The reason we did not attempt to put it on two stories is that we felt it does not lend itself to the neighborhood being two stories. MR. CHAIRMAN: Does that include the garage and the deck? MR. STRANG: That's correct. MR. CHAIRMAN: Do you think you could furnish the board from your firm the exact square footage, and I'll tell you the reason why. We have a 20% lot coverage minimum. MR. STRANG: Yes. MR. CHAIRMAN: And you feel this particular structure lies within that 20% lot coverage? MR. STRANG: Yes, I do. MR. CHAIRMAN: So you will furnish the board with adequate square footage? To the last foot? MR. STRANG: Yes. Would the board be receptive to receiving a set of plans of the house? MR. CHAIRMAN: Surely. Any time next week, during the day? MR. STRANG: Ok. Thank you. MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Is there anybody else to speak for or against that have any comments. Anybody from the audience? Any questions from the board? (None) Hearing no further comments, I will make a motion closing the hearing and making a decision at a later time, hopefully tonight or at such time that we receive the actual square footage from Mr. Strang. MEMBER SAWICKI: Second. On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Sawicki, it was Southold Town Board of Appeals -12- FeDruary 26, 1982 (Appeal No. 2948 - Dimitrios Pavlidis, continued:) RESOLVED, to close the hearing and reserve decision in the matter of Appeal No. 2948, application of Dimitrios Pavlidis. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen, Doug- lass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted. After the hearing was closed, Mrs. Abbate inquired as to why Mr. Pavlidis requires this variance rather than complying with the setback restrictions. The Chairman explained Mr. Pavlidis' need, that the house was at a certain depth, and that the lot was at a certain narrowness. The Chairman said the board would take everything said at the hearing into con- sideration when making a decision. PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2949. Application of Barney Monticello, Basin Road, Southold, NY (by William B. Smith) for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Sections 100-30 and 100-35 for permission to construct tennis court on a corner lot, described as Lot 6 on Map of Paradise Point, Map No. 3761; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-81-1-12. The Chairman opened the hearing at approximately 8:15 p.m., and read the legal notice of hearing in its entirety and appeal application. MR. CHAIRMAN: We have a copy of the survey of said property indicating the size of the lot of approximately 26,986 square feet on which shows the proposed tennis court and proposed garage- storage-recreation area. We have a copy of the County Tax Map showing this and all the surrounding properties in this district. WILLIAM B. SMITH: Mr. Monticello owns a house, just finished, on Lot No. 5 and is very happy with the area and decided he would like to have a tennis court, and he wants to buy Lot 5 (6) and I went to Mr. Fisher and he said we could build a tennis court any place, but the minute we put up a fence for the tennis court, then we're into above-ground construction and we would have to get a variance. We have a fence four-foot high, but no higher. In the meantime Mr. Cichanowicz who landscaped the house lot because this lot has at least a eight or nine foot slant from the high point to the low point suggested we recess the tennis court with so-called railroad ties and take the fill from the high side to the low side and have a recessed tennis court with only a four-foot fence, so that it wouldn't be unsightly. And if and when you do go down to the property, you will see the house on Lot 6 how it's landscaped, and the lovely job that's been done in the past. In the process of talking about a tennis court, we finally came up to a so-called tennis penthouse and that was discarded because Mr. Fisher said we could not have an accessory building in the garage without a house first. So Mr. Cichanowicz has drawn the plan of a two-car garage with a room downstairs and enough area upstairs to qualify us for Southold Town Board of Appeals -13- February 26, 1982 (Appeal No. 2949 - Barney Monticello, continued:) WILLIAM B. SMITH continued: an 850 square-foot house, which will be with all the facilities. However, Paradise Point has a restriction on a 2400-square-foot house, and we would have to get, sign an affidavit that this would not be used as a house. As far as Paradise Point is concerned, a yearround house, until it was made into a 2400-square-foot house. Probably in the meantime doing away with the tennis court. Mr. Monticello does not want to put the two properties together because they're not, they're only joined by about 65 feet, as you can see by the map, and according to Mr. Fisher if we built an 850 square-foot house a variance would not be needed. That part is all right. So what a variance calls for is just a tennis court recessed in the ground. But George feels that all of the bulkhead would not be in the ground, but it will be in the ground because it will have to be in the ground--that's the way he feels about it. He thought that, you'll see on the map there, on the south side it shows some of that bulkhead above ground. That will not be above ground; that will be all filled in on the outside, and landscaped accordingly. MR.CHAIRMAN: Is there any way, Mr. Smith, of your telling us how much will be below ground and how much will be above ground? MR. SMITH: About four feet. MR. CHAIRMAN: Approximately four feet will be below? MR. SMITH: Below ground. MR. CHAIRMAN: And on top of that would be a four-foot fence? MR. SMITH: Yes. MR. CHAIRMAN: And the entire tennis court area will be fenced? MR. SMITH: Except where the building abuts the court. MR. CHAIRMAN: Ok. Thank you. Is there anybody else that would like to speak in behalf of this application? Anybody like to speak against the application? Any questions from any of the board members? (None) MEMBER GRIGONIS: I think Mr. Smith has explained it pretty well. MR. CHAIRMAN: Hearing no further questions, I'll make a motion closing the hearing and reserve decision until a later date. MEMBER SAWICKI: Second. On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Sawicki, it was RESOI~ED, to close the hearing and reserve decision until a later date in the matter of Appeal No. 2949, Barney Monticello. Southold Town Board of Appeals -14- FeDruary 26, 1982 Vote of the Board: Ayes: Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen, Doug- lass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted. PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2950. Application of Mr. and Mrs. James Mullins, Box 882, Southold, NY for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-31 for permission to construct addition to dwelling with reduced frontyard area off Sunset Lane. Location of Property: Corner of Sunset Lane and West Lane, Southold, NY; bounded north by Dickerson; west by Sunset Lane; south by West Lane; east by Mullins; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-88-6-6. The Chairman opened the hearing at approximately 8:24 p.m., and read the legal notice of hearing in its entirety and appeal applica- tion. MR. CHAIRMAN: We have a copy of the application indicating the approximate location of the addition to the house, indicating 25½ feet from Sunset Lane. We also have a copy of the County Tax Map indicating the lot in question and the surrounding properties. Is there anybody wishing to speak in behalf of this application? JAMES A. MULLINS: My name is James A. Mullins. I am the applicant, and my wife is sitting there, her name is Eve C. Mullins. We came to Southold probably 25 or 28 years ago when my wife's father purchased the property in the Goose Bay Estates area. I'm the Senior Assignment Editor for the American Broadcasting Company in the television news division in New York. We've always wanted a summer home, so we purchased the property near our inlaws, or near my inlaws. When we purchased it, we purchased two lots, the lot on the bay which is bayfront which we now have bulkheaded, and not on the waterline but quite a distance back from the water line. That property is approximately 110' by 200' There is a 50-foot right-of-way that goes in front of our house and our house is approximately a lot 110 by 256' I believe, I'm not sure on those figures. The house was built probably 30-35 years ago. It is quite small. And when we first moved into it with our three small children it was adequate at that time. Adequate in that we could live there most of the summer and the early off summer. Now as we are older and our children are all out of college and all working, my son is an officer in the nuclear navy and serving on a submarine at sea and spends a lot of time in New London and comes home all the time with his shipmates. My daughter is married to a Southold boy, and they spent a lot of time at the house. We find now the house is inade- quate, because we really don't have the room and we wanted to put on the side of the house since we must have 50-foot on the front and on the side because it's a corner lot, a 12' by 15' additional dining room of one story in height with no basement, just a crawl space under it and a woodburning stove and windows around so that we would then have the room that we could entertain. I'm also now in very serious discussions on a job in New Haven, Connecticut, as news director for WTNH, as you know they serve 398,000 households in Suffolk County, and if I get or accept that job, I will then live here permanently. I any event I intend to within the next six or Southold Town Board of Appeals -15- February 26, 1982 (Appeal No. 2950 - Mr. and Mrs. James Mullins, continued:) MR. MULLINS continued: seven years to make this my permanent, yearround residence. Although my wife does live here now eight or nine months of the year. In the area we are talking about, on the west of us there are 40 acres plus that used to be owned by Arch Davis and was sold last year to a Mr. Laotus of New Jersey. He has some plans to develop that area, how- ever, part of it is considered to be marshland or it's environmentally, a lot of it can't be developed, so we may be talking 15, 20, 30 homes in that area in the distant future. The land behind us is about 200 acres or less of potato farms, which is owned by the Dickerson Family. In fact my side lot to the east of us I purchased from Mr. Dickerson after I bought the front two. There is a road on our west which is approximately 35 feet from the line. We want to put a 12' addition onto the side of the house. Currently now, about half of that 12 foot is now bushes, and that is, yews, enormous yews that would disappear. So we're only talking about maybe six foot out from the end of the yews. And that's the reason that we applied for it, and we would certainly like to build it, and we intend to do other things with the house. The frontyard we intend to never sell because that's our look on the bay. The sideyards, since Ihave two daughters and a son, I cannot tell you, I may give it to a son. But even if the potato farm behind us did sell in the future, the character of the ten lots that face the bay does not have six homes on it. It would never change. It would be just the same as it is. And that we're asking for the variance for the small addition so that we accommodate our own family. If you have any questions, you can ask me, Mr. Chairman or menfDers of the board. MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much. Is there anybody else that would like to speak in behalf of the application? WHITNEY BOOTH: I'd like to say a word. I'm Whitney Booth, a Southold resident, a new neighbor of these folks, an old acquaintance and friend. All I can say, very brief, they are people who are quite interested in our area, interested in nature and certainly not to spoil any community. That's all I have to say. Thank you very much. MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Is there anybody else that would like to say anything in behalf of the application? Mrs. Mullins? MRS. MULLINS: I just want to add, it's going to have a flat roof, so it will be even less obstructive. MR. CHAIRMAN: Would anybody like to say anything against this application? Any questions from the board? (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 close the hearinq and reserve decision until a Southold Town Board of Appeals -16- February 26, 1982 (Appeal No. 2950 - Mr. and Mrs. James Mullins, continued:) later date in the matter of Mr. and Mrs. James Mullins, Appeal No. 2950. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen, Doug- lass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted. The Chairman called a~five-minutes recess, and the meeting reconvened at approximately 8:40 p.m. REHEARING: Appeal No. 2886. Application of Nicholas D. Yuelys, 56005 County Road 48, Greenport, NY for a rehearing of Appeal No. 2886, for a variance to the zoning ordinance, Article III, Section 100-32 for permission to construct accessory building in the front- yard area at 56005 C.R. 48, Greenport, NY; bounded north by L.I. Sound; west by Chudan; south by C.R. 48; east by Atwan. County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-44-1-19. The Chairman opened the rehearing at approximately 8:40 p.m., and read the legal notice of hearing in its entirety and letters from Francis J. Yakaboski, defense counsel for the Town in this matter, dated January 29, 1982 and from Nicholas D. Yuelys, the applicant, dated January 26, 1982, both concerning the reasons for this rehearing request. The Chairman asked all persons present whether anyone objected to the waiving of the reading of the entire original application. There was no objection. MR. CHAIRMAN: Is there anybody that would like to speak for the application? NICHOLAS D. YUELYS: Most of my arguments are in the papers and I won't repeat them because we've gone over them twice. The only point that I would like to bring up that has never been discussed is the fact that at the present time I have to use the front porch of my house for a storage area. Now the only time we can use this house is when we empty the front porch, because if you can't use the front porch or to empty it to be able to see the beach or to be able to do anything would be to take the boats out, the picnic tables out, to take everything that's on the beach, the chairs, as you go on, to see the front porch you will see it is completely blocked. That means that my house, which is seasonal., can only be used when somebody is permanently there for the summer or for any part of the year that they will be able to use it. Now that forces me, I have no, there is no other alternative but the only time that I could use my house is during the months of July and August when my wife is able to be there 24 hours a day, seven days a week, which is less than 16% of the whole year--two months out of a whole year. If I could have this accessory shed right on the side where Southold Town Board of Appeals -17- (Appeal No. 2886 - Nicholas D. Yuelys, continued:) February 26, 1982 MR. YUELYS continued: I want to put it, I could put my boats in there. I can put all my cellar equipment in there, and my house could be used at the end of May all the way through till the end of October. As it stands now, the only time I could use this house is two months out of the year. And the rest of the arguments are in the papers. We've gone over them. I won't repeat them. Thank you. MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much. Is there anybody else that would like to speak in behalf of the application? (None) Anybody like to speak against the application? STANLEY CORWIN, ESQ.: Mr. Chairman and members of the board, my name is Stanley Corwin and I represent Mr. and Mrs. Atwan as their attorney. I realize full well that the purpose of a public hearing is for the board to listen to people who want to talk for or against any given proposition, but I would like to ask you a question because of some peculiar circumstances that exist here tonight. Mr. Chairman, may I ask if the board will take for the purpose of this hearing tonight "administrative notice" that between the hearing in which this is a rehearing and the present rehearing another application was made on behalf of Mr. Nicholas Yuelys? I am asking if you will take administrative notice of it? MR. CHAIRMAN: Sure. MR. CORWIN: Can we consider the second application to be incorporated in this proceeding? MR. CHAIRMAN: I am not sure, sir, since I attributed this from my predecessor, Mr. Grigonis, if this either the second or the third. Ok. But in any case-- MR. CORWIN: The reason I ask you to do that is because I want to save time, and I don't want to be repetitious. I think Mr. Yuelys very gratitiously said he did not want to repeat the same arguments, and I didn't want to do it either. But on the first occasion, on the first hearing, the one of which this is a rehearing, neither Mr. and Mrs. Atwan were able to be here. They had been away, out of the state, and as I recall and there was a snow storm and they were delayed. I remember saying that on that occasion, that I thought they might still be able to make it, but they did not. However, certain things came out on that original hearing, allegations were made by Mr. Yuelys about certain changes and improvements that were made on the adjoining property which he alleged were made without the proper permits. On the second occasion when Mr. Atwan was able to be here, he corrected that. And since, as I now understand is the case, this is really the subject of a lawsuit to which Mr. Atwan is not a part of, I would like to have his remarks on the second application incorporated Southold Town Board of __ppeals -18- F (Appeal No. 2886 - Nicholas D. Yuelys, continued:) ruary 26, 1982 MR. CORWIN continued: so that there isn't any question about that. to be done? Can we consider that MR. CHAIRMAN: Certainly. MR. CORWIN: Very well, thank you. Now. The notice in the mail an applicant is obliged to send out, he indicated to Mr. and Mrs. Atwan and to Mr. Candon on the other side of the property who I don't think is here, that this was a rehearing of the original application, and I would assume that that would refer to the original maps, the original sketches that were made. Just to refresh my own recollection, I came up and looked at the file about 20 minutes before 4 this afternoon, and I find that that's not exactly what we're doing here tonight. I find that Mr. Yuelys is suing this board in an Article 78 proceeding, that the board's counsel and Mr. Yuelys, who is evidently acting as his own attorney, talked about a possible compromise of the litigation, that it was suggested that it was done at a rehearing. He has indicated that "well, now I don't want it just the way I had it originally. I'm talking about putting it somewhere else and a different size." And I don't think that's fair to Mr. and Mrs. Atwan or anybody else, I don't think it's fair to the public if they are entitled to say something about what goes on here tonight. And so, if the board is really taking into consideration the lawsuit in which Mr. and Mrs. Atwan are not a part, and they change -- then I think you ought to say to Mr. Yuelys, if you want to change what you're applying for, make a new application-- a third one. The first time we were here, the second time we were here. We should guess it that he said he would have no application -- that he would put this building that he wants in the southwesterly orti of his property. And we still feel the same way. We would have no objection to it. But we certainly do have an objection to it being located in the southeasterly portion of the property and we renew that objection. Thank you. MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, sir. Is there anybody that would like to speak against the application? Any rebuttal by Mr. Yuelys? MR. YUELYS: I don't know if we quite understand what Mr. Cor- win has said to the board, but I wish to point out that the original application made is the exact same thing which was sub- mitted with this for a rehearing. In my later application, I also said that I would accept the prior application if the board so considered it and would withdraw the last application. There has been no change. It is exactly the way it was originally, and it was repeated in the second application that I would accept the first application. So I don't see why he says that we actually changed anything or we tried to do anything different. They were very familiar with what I wanted to do in the beginning. I told my neighbors three months before I made the application that I intended to make the application so they could know what I was doing. This has all been, to their knowledge, from way back 1980, so I don't know why he says this is something we are trying to change. The papers explain that. The original application was Southold Town Board of Appeals -19- February 26, 1982 (Appeal No. 2886 - Nicholas D. Yuelys, continued:) MR. YUELYS continued: made for the 8' by 16' building which is enough to house the boats and is as small as possible, is 5½ feet high which is less than the height of a fence, that could be put up on that place, and I did everything possible in order appease them. And then I made the other application because I had to take the application to change the character of the neighborhood, which was the objection, and I made a mirrow image of his particular shed and accessory building that he has. Now he can utilize his building 12 months a year because he's got everything in his main building and he's got this little building on the side, which is just an accessory building. What we just heard in Parianos' application here, he had a little building that he had to take out -- to take out a stove and not to use it for living quarters. Now Mr. Atwan has gone a built his building next door and is using it for living quarters. This was done within five years from then, five or six years, I don't recall exactly. It's not the construction in accordance with the C/O, the C/O falls within the basement and it's self-evident that it has not been constructed to-- And this particular building has been built illegally and is the one that is causing all the trouble. So that's all Ihave to say. MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Any other comments, Mr. Corwin? None, ok. Any comments from the board, questions? (None) Hearing no further comments, I'll make a motion closing the hearing and reserving decision until a later date. MEMBER SAWICKI: Second. On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Sawicki, it was RESOLVED, to close the hearing and reserve decision in the matter of Appeal No. 2886, application of Nicholas D. Yuelys. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen, Doug- lass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted. Southold Town Board of Appeals -20- February 26, 1982 RECESSED HEARING: Appeal No. 2944. Application of Barbara Kujawski, 125 Sound Avenue, Mattituck, NY for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-30A for permission to conduct real estate branch office at premises zoned A-Residential and Agricultural, more particularly known as 125 Sound Avenue, Mattituck, NY; bounded northwest, northeast and east by J. Kujaw- ski and ano.; south by Sound Avenue; east by LILCO. County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-120-1-2.2. The Chairman reconvened the hearing at approximately 8:55 p.m. This hearing was recessed from the last regular meeting of the board, to wit, February 4, 1982. Member Sawicki excused himself from this hearing for personal reasons. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mrs. Kujawski, would you like to say something in behalf of your application? BARBARA KUJAWSKI: Do I have to speak first? MR. CHAIRMAN: Well, usually the -- MRS. KUJAWSKI: Ok. We have not been able to resolve this. I went to see my lawyer, and he said that this whole brouhub does not belong in here. In the original divorce agreement, page two, paragraph two, it says the plaintiff shall have the right to conduct a real estate office on the premises, and for which I have a copy. But that has nothing to do with the zoning board. If he says there isn't adequate parking or the house is too small, or you know, something to do with zoning matters, I could understand it. If he wants to renig on the agreement, he should not be doing it here. He should go to Supreme Court or wherever to do that. The reason I'm asking this is what every working mother would rather do, is work out of her house, so that she's home, the child- ren are home, to keep the house, keep the yard, do all of these. I'm the one asking for it. Ed wanted to open a branch office, and I said, "Well, we had enough room, maybe I could run a real estate office from the house. Certainly it would be more convenient for me to do that. Would it be all right if we put the real estate office in the house?" I have certainly no objection to do that. The house is a good advertisement. People stop in just to see the house, which would only go to help my business, and if, you know, if worse comes to worse, we could always rent a store, but that's not why I want to see an office in the house. The reason I wanted the office in the house would be to be home with my daughter, and (my son) and it would be a lot easier on me. I've offered to pay the expenses for the portion of the house that we would use as an office, and evidentally that wasn't satisfactory. I don't know Southold Town Board of Appeals -21- FeDruary 26, 1982 (Appeal No. 2944 - Barbara Kujawski, continued:) what more to do. MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much. Does anybody else want to speak in behalf of the application? (None) Does anybody wish to speak against the application? Mr. Kujawski. JOHN KUJAWSKI: I don't want to get involved in this a lot. All I will say is, I own half of the property and I'm opposed to it. I own half of the property to the east of it and to the north of it, in partnership with my brother, and here is a letter from him opposing it and I would just like to say that if the office was for her, I would have no objections, but seeing it's for an outside party having an office in there, that's why I object. MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much. (Mr. Kujawski gave the following letter for the record in opposition to this application: February 25, 1982 .... I Raymond Kujawski as part owner of the driveway leading to the residence of John and Barbara Kujawski oppose the establishing of an outside organization opening a real estate office... /s/ Raymond Kujawski .... ) MR. CHAIRMAN: Is there anybody else that would like to object to this application? (None) Anything in rebuttal, Mrs. Kujawski. Mrs. Kujawski nodded "no." Any questions from the board? (None) Hearing no further questions, I will offer a motion to close the hearing and reserve decision until a later date. MEMBER GRIGONIS: Second. On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Grigonis, it was RESOLVED, to close the hearing and reserve decision until a later date in the matter of the application of Barbara Kujawski, Appeal No. 2944. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen and Douglass. (Member Sawicki was absent from the room during the hearing and the adoption of this resolution.) Member Sawicki returned to ~he h~aring room. APPEAL NO. 2932. JAY P. and M. JOANNE-DAVIS SLOTKIN. Re: Request of Abigail A. Wickham, Esq. to postpone the hearing until March 19, 1982 because she will be on vacation and not available to attend on February 26th. On motion by Mr. Grigonis, seconded by Mr. Doyen, it was Southold Town Board of Appeals -22- February 26, 1982 RESOLVED, that Appeal No. 2932, application of JAY P. and M. JOANNE-DAVIS SLOTKIN rehearing be postponed until the next regular meeting of this board, to wit, March 19, 1982. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen, Doug- lass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted. The board members reviewed and discussed the application of Harvey Bagshaw, Inc., Appeal No. 2953 and it was the consen- sus of the board not to schedule this matter for public hearing until such time as the Chairman has had an opportunity to meet with the Town Attorney. On motion by Mr. Douglass, seconded by Mr. Sawicki, it was RESOLVED, to table the matter of Appeal No. 2951, application of Charles P. Ziegler, pending approvals from the N.Y.S. Depart- ment of Environmental Conservation and the Southold Town Planning Board. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen, Doug- lass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted. On motion by Mr. Douglass, seconded by Messrs. Goehringer and Grigonis, it was RESOLVED, to table the matter of Appeal No. 2956, application of Parkside Heights Co. by David E. Kapell as agent, (Emanuel M. Kontokosta), pending approvals from the N.Y.S. Department of Environmental Conservation, Southold Town Planning Board and if necessary Army Corps of Engineers. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen, Doug- lass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted. On motion by Mr. Douglass, seconded by Mr. Sawicki, it was RESOLVED, that the following appeals be scheduled and adver- tised, pursuant to law, for public hearings to be held at the next Regular Meeting of this board, to wit, March 19, 1982 at the Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, NY: 7:30 p.m. 7:55 p.m. 7:35 p.m. Appeal No. 2952. DANIEL N. & CAROLYN K. BAIRD. Deck addition to dwelling with insufficient rear- yard setback at 11 Greenwood Road, F.I. Appeal No. 2955. ST. PETER'S LUTHERAN CHURCH. Off-premises advertising sign in A-Zone, 8700 Main Road, Laurel, NY. Appeal No. 2943. FISHERS ISLAND DEVELOPMENT CORP. Southold Town Board of Appeals -23- FeDruary 26, 1982 House and lot division. N/S Whistler Avenue, F.I. 8:10 p.m. Appeal No. 2954. THOMAS H. WITSCHI, M.D. (by Swim King Pools) To construct inground pool in an area other than rearyard (frontyard area) at 7670 R-O-W off New Suffolk Ave., Mattituck, NY. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen, Doug- lass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted. The board members reviewed the application of Walter N. Pharr, Jr., but because no filing fee was submitted with the application and the application was not officially filed with the Town, the board did not feel it would be proper to schedule same for a public hearing at this time. APPEAL NO. 2720. JOHN KRAMER. ZBA Decision Rendered 8/27/80. The board members reviewed and discussed the February 10, 1982 letter from Sr. Building Inspector George H. Fisher with reference to this appeal and indicating his interpretation of the board's decision. The board assumes Mr. Fisher is asking for a clarifica- tion, and instructed the Secretary to reply as follows: ... Your Paragraph 2: Inasmuch as this board did not place a restriction in their 8/27/80 decision concerning the carport, it is suggested that an attached enclosed garage (rather than a carport) should be permitted provided it is not closer than 24'9" to Windjammer Drive and complies with all other rules and regulations of the building and zoning codes. Your Paragraph 3: The board is in acquiescence .... Motion was made by Mr. Grigonis, seconded by Mr. Goehringer, resolving the above action. The resolution was unanimously adopted. The board members reviewed and discussed the second request of Peter S. Terranova, concerning Appeal No. 2928 and the board's decision rendered December 17, 1981, in which Mr. Terranova stated his reasons for requesting reconsideration and rehearing of that prior decision. It is the unanimous agreement of the board members not to rehear same, nor change, modify or alter the decision as filed with the Town Clerk on January 22, 1982. (Mr. Terranova's letter was received February 9, 1982, at which time copies were distributed to the board members.) APPEAL NO. 2917. CONSTANCE MESSINA. The board members reviewed and discussed the flooding matter which was brought to Southold Town Board of Appeals -24- FeDruary 26, 1982 the board's attention by Edward F. Hindermann, Building and Housing Inspector, on January 29, 1982. On February 5, 1982 the chairman forwarded correspondence to the applicants, and they have indicated that the section of the road in question has subsequently been raised approximately two feet. After several inspections of the road, it is the opinion of the board members that the area in question is adequate. Motion was made by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Messrs. Sawicki and Douglass, that a reply be sent to Mr. Hin- dermann indicating the above. This resolution was unanimously adopted. RESERVED DECISION: Appeal ~o. 2950. Application of Mr. and Mrs. James Mullins, Box 882, Southold, NY for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-31 for permission to construct addition to dwelling with reduced frontyard area off Sunset Lane. Location of Property: Corner of Sunset Lane and West Lane, Southold, NY; bounded north by Dickerson; west by Sunset Lane; south by West Lane; east by Mullins; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-88-6-6. The public hearing on this matter was held earlier this evening, at which time decision was reserved, pending deliberations. The board made the following findings and determination: By this appeal, applicants seek permission to construct a 12' by 15' addition to the existing dwelling, leaving an insufficient setback off Sunset Lane at 23½' The premises in question is a corner lot as defined by Section 100-13 of the code, with 150' road frontage along Sunset Lane and approximately 116' road front- age along West Lane. The survey submitted with this application indicates that the existing dwelling is set back approximately 54' from West Lane and 35½' off Sunset Lane. It is the board's under- standing that applicants intend to extend the dining area, and to locate the addition at any other portion of the house would not be feasible or practical under the circumstances. The board is in agreement with applicants' reasonings. In considering this appeal, the board determines that the variance request is not substantial in relation to the code require- ments; that the circumstances herein are unique; 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 applied for. On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Grigonis, it was RESOLVED, that the application of Mr. and Mrs. James Mullins, Southold Town Board of Appeals -25- February 26, 1982 (Appeal No. 2950 - James and Eve Mullins, continued:) Appeal No. 2950, be granted a variance to the zoning ordinance for permission to construct an addition to dwelling as applied for and SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION: That the addition not be closer than 23½ feet to the westerly property line. Location of Property: Corner of Sunset Lane and West Lane, Southold, NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-88-6-6. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen, Doug- lass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted. RESERVED DECISION: Appeal No. 2886. Application of Nicholas D. Yuelys, 56005 County Road 48, Greenport, NY for a rehearing of Appeal No. 2886 for a variance to the zoning ordinance, Article III, Section 100-32 for permission to construct accessory building in the frontyard area at 56005 C.R. 48, Greenport, NY; bounded north by L.I. Sound; west by Chudan; south by C.R. 48; east by Atwan. County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-44-1-19. The public hearing on this matter was held earlier this evening, at which time decision was reserved, pending deliberations. The board made the following findings and determination: This matter is a rehearing for an area variance to permit a storage accessory building in the frontyard area of the premises in question. The premises in question is located at the north side of County Road 48, Greenport (Suffolk County Tax Map District 1000, Section 44 Block 1 Lot 19). The property has a frontage along the County Road of approximately 50 feet, and an average depth of 133 feet. There is erected on the property a one-family private wood frame dwelling. Applicant has previously applied to this board for a storage and garage accessory building in the frontyard area, for which public hearings were held on December 29, 1980 (Appeal No. 2769) and on October 15, 1981 (Appeal No. 2886), at which times the relief requested were denied without prejudice. Upon inspection of the property and the neighboring parcels, the board has found that the parcel immediately adjacent on the east side has constructed thereon a dwelling with an accessory structure set back less than 10 feet from the southerly property line (C.R. 48) in the frontyard. The board has also been advised that the N.Y.S. Department of Environmental Conservation has permitted the location chosen for an accessory building in the Southold Town Board of A~peals -26- February 26, 1982 (Appeal No. 2886 - Nicholas D. Yuelys, continued:) frontyard area, under TW #15273-0114. The existing dwelling is very near tidal wetlands area, the rear yard, and it is the feeling of the board that the only other available yard area, the most practical and feasible under the circumstances, is the front yard. In considering this appeal, the board determines that the variance request is not substantial; that the circumstances herein are unique; that strict compliance with the zoning ordinance will result in practical difficulties; 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 public health, safety and welfare will be secured and justice done; and that the relief requested will be in harmony with and promote the general purposes of zoning. On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Douglass, it was RESOLVED, that Nicho~.a.s' D. Yuelys be granted a variance to the zoning ordinance, Article III, Section 100-32 for permission to construct accessory storage building in the frontyard area as applied for and SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. That the size of the accessory storage building shall not exceed the size 8' by 16'; 2. That the accessory storage building not be located closer than 14' from the front property line (along C.R. 48); 3. That nothing may protrude closer than three feet to the easterly property line; 4. That the accessory storage building may not exceed 10' in height (including any ridges). 5. That the accessory building may not be used for living quarters, (strictly storage purposes). Location of Property: 56006 C.R. 48, Greenport, NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-44-1-19. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen, Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted. Southold Town Board of Appeals -27- February 26, 1982 RESERVED DECISION: Appeal No. 2949.Application of Barney Monticello, Basin Road, Southold, NY (by William B. Smith) for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Sections 100-30 and 100-35 for permission to construct tennis court on a corner lot, described as Lot 6 on Map of Paradise Point, Map No. 3761; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-81-1-12. The public hearing was held earlier this evening concerning this appeal, at which time decision was reserved, pending deliber- ations. The board made the following findings and determination: By this appeal, applicant seeks permission to construct a 60' by 120' tennis with fence around the perimeter of same, but recessed underground four feet with four feet of fencing above ground. The structure will be set back 15 feet off Robinson Road, 15 feet off Paradise Point Subdivision Lot 7, and approximately 37 feet off Basin Road at its closest point. Applicant also proposes to construct a two-story structure for guest cottage or dwelling use with a minimum living area of 850 square feet, for which the building inspector will permit without a variance. Applicant owns Lot 5 of Paradise Point, for which is constructed thereon a private one-family dwelling. The lot in question is trapezoidal and is tr, uly unique. It is the feeling of the board that this parcel has very minimal practical building area for a tennis court, and the relief requested is not unreasonable under the circumstances. ~n considering this appeal, the board determines that the variance request is not substantial in relation to the code re- quirements; that the circumstances herein are unique; that by allowing the variance no substantial detriment to adjoining properties would be created, and that the health, safety and welfare of the public will be secured; 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 same or similar relief requested in this application. On motion by Mr. Sawicki, seconded by Mr. Grigonis, it was RESOLVED, that Barney Monticello be granted a variance to the zoning ordinance, Article III, Sections 100-30 and 100-35 for permission to construct tennis court as applied for and SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION: That the fence shall not exceed four feet above ground level. Location of Property: Subdivision Lot No. 6, Map of Paradise Point, Map No. 3761; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-81-1-12; Basin and Robinson Roads, Southold, NY. Southold Town Board of Appeals -28- ~ebruary 26, 1982 Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis,~Doyen, Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted. ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION: Appeal No. 2952. DANIEL N. and CAROLYN K. BAIRD. Deck addition to dwelling with insufficient rearyard at 11 Greenwood Road, Fishers Island, NY. On motion by Mr. Douglass, seconded by Mr. Goehringer, it was RESOLVED, to declare the folloWing Negative Environmental Declaration concerning the matter of DANIEL N. and CAROLYN K. BAIRD: ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION: Pursuant to Section 617.13 of the N.Y.S. Department of Environmental Conservation Act, Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law, and Section 44-4 of the Southold Town Code, notice is hereby given that the Southold Town Board'of Appeals has determined that the subject project as proposed in this appeal application is hereby classified as a ~p.e .II Action, not having a significant adverse effect upon the environment for the following reason(s): An Environmental Assessment in the Short Form has been submitted which indicates that no significant adverse effects were likely to occur should this project be implemented as planned. This declaration should not be considered a determination made for any other department or agency which may also be in- volved, nor for any other project not covered by the subject appeal application. Location of Property: 11 Greenwood Road, Fishers Island, NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-12-1-13.1. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Doyen, Grigonis and Sawicki. M~ssrs. Douglass, Goehringer, Southold Town Board of Appeals -29- ~-ebruary 26, 1982 ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION: Appeal No. 2955. sT. PETER'S LUTHERAN CHURCH. Off-premises advertising sign in A, Zone, at 8700 Main Road, Laurel, NY. On motion by Mr. Douglass, seconded by Mr. Goehringer, it was RESOLVED, to declare the following Negative Environmental Declaration concerning the matter of St. Peter's Lutheran Church: ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION: Pursuant to Section 617.13 of the N.Y.S. Department of Environmental Conservation Act, Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law, and Section 44-4 of the Southold Town Code, notice is hereby given that the Southold Town Board of Appeals has determined that the subject project as proposed in this appeal application is hereby classified as a ~Ty~pe II Action, not having a significant adverse effect upon the environment for the following reason(s): An Environmental Assessment in the short Form has been submitted which indicates that no significant adverse effects were likely to occur should this project be implemented as planned. The premises in question is not located Within 300 feet of tidal wetlands area. This declaration should not be considered a determination made for any other department or agency which may also be in- volved, nor for any other project not covered by the subject appeal application. Location of Property: 8700 Main Road, Laurel, NY (property of F.J. Murphy); County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-122-7-6.2. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Doyen, Grigonis and Sawicki. M~ssrs. Douglass, Goehringer, Southold Town Board of Appeals -30- February 26, 1982' ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION: Appeal No. 2943 FISHERS ISLAND DEVELOPMENT CORP. House and parcel diyision into two. North side of Whistler Avenue, Fishers Island, NY. On motion by Mr. Douglass, seconded by Mr. Goehringer, it was RESOLVED, to declare the following Negative Environmental Declaration concerning the matter of Fishers Island Development Corp.: ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION: Pursuant to Section 617.13 of the N.Y.S. Department of Environmental Conservation Act, Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law, and Section 44-4 of the Southold Town Code, notice is hereby given that the Southold Town Board of Appeals has determined that the subject project as proposed in this appeal application is hereby classified as a Type II.Action, not having a significant adverse effect upon the environment for the following reason(s): An Environmental Assessment in the Short Form has been submitted which indicates that no significant adverse effects were likely to occur should this project be implemented as planned. This declaration should not be considered a determination made for any other department or agency which may also be in- volved, nor for any other project not covered by the subject appeal application. Location of Property: North side of Whistler Avenue, Fishers Island, NY; CTMP #1000-9-10-part of 11. Vote of the Board: Ayes: M~ssrs. Douglass Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonis and Sawicki. ' Southold Town Board of Appeals -31- February 26, 1982 ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION: Appeal No. 2954. THOMAS H. WITSCHI, M.D. by swim King Pools, Inc. To construct inground swimmingpool in an area (frontyard) other than rearyard as required by the zoning ordinance. On motion by Mr. Douglass, seconded by Mr. Goehringer, it was RESOLVED, to declare the folloWing Negative Environmental Declaration concerning the matter of Thomas H. Witschi, M.D.: ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION: Pursuant to Section 617.13 of the N.Y.S. Department of Environmental Conservation Act, Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law, and Section 44-4 of the Southold Town Code, notice is hereby given that the Southold Town Board of Appeals has determined that the subject project as proposed in this appeal application is hereby classified as a ~pe II Action, not having a significant adverse effect upon the environment for the following reason(s): An Environmental Assessment in the Short Form has been submitted which indicates that no significant adverse effects were likely to occur should this project be implemented as planned. The project in question is not located within 300 feet of tidal wetlands area. This declaration should not be considered a determination made for any other department or agency which may also be in- volved, nor for any other project not covered by the subject appeal application. Location of Property: 7670 R-O-W off New suffolk Avenue, Mattituck, NY; CTMP #1000-116-4-31. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Doyen, Grigonis and Sawic~i. M~ssrs. Douglass, Goehringer, Southold Town Board o3 Appeals -32- ~ebruary 26, 1982 On motion by Mr. Douglass, seconded by Mr. Goehringer, it was RESOLVED, that the next regular meeting of this board is to be held on Friday, March 19, 1982 at 7:30 o'clock p.m., to be held at the Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, New York. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen, Douglass and Sawicki. Being there was no further business to come before the board at this time, the Chairman declared the meeting closed at approximately 10:30 o'clock p.m. RECEIVED AND FILED BY TITLE SOUTiiOLD TOWN CLERK DATR3/~3/~.~ HOUR Il:/~ Respectfully submitted, Linda F. Kowalski, Secretary Southold Town Board of Appeals APPROVED Chairman Board of Appeals