HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-02/25/1983Southold Town Board of Appeals
MAIN I~OAD- STATE I~OAD 25 SOLJTHOLD. L.I., N.Y. '119'7'1
TELEPHONE (516~ 765-1809
APPEALS BOARD
MEMBERS
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER. CHAIRMAN
CHARLES GRIGONIS. JR,
SERGE DOYEI~. JR,
ROBERT J. DOUGLASS
JOSEPH H. SAWlCKI
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING
FEBRUARY 25, 1983
A Regular Meeting of the Southold Town Board of Appeals was
held on Friday, February 25, 1983 at 7:30 o'clock p.m. at the
Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Sou~hold, New York.
Present were: Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman; Charles Grig-
onis, Jr.; Serge Doyen, Jr.; Robert J. Douglass and Joseph H.
Sawicki. Also present were: Mr. Victor Lessard~ Administrator
(Building Department) and persons concerning tonight's public
hearings.
The Chairman called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
RECESSED PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 3071. Upon application
of GEORGE AND NATALIE WEISER, Harbor Lane, Cutchogue, NY for a
Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-32 for
permission to construct accessory garage in the frontyard area at
1415 Harbor Lane, Cutchogue, NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-
97- 06-010.
This is a recessed hearing from February 4, 1983. The
Chairman reconvened the public hearing at 7:30 p.m.
MR. CHAIRMAN (GOEHRINGER): Is Mr. Weiser present? (No one
appeared in behalf of the application.) Would anybody else like
to speak in behalf of this application? Anybody wish to speak
against the application? (None) Hearing. no comments, Itll make
a motion closing the hearing and reserving decision.
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. 3071, application for GEORGE AND NATALIE WEISER.
Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen,
Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was u~animously adopted.
~outhold Town Board of _~peals
-2- February.s25, 1983 Regular Meeting
PUBLIC HEARING (RE-HEARING): Appeal No. 3080. EAST END SUPPLY CO.
Upon application for EAST END SUPPLY CO., INC., by Irving L. Price,
Jr., Esq., 828 Front Street, Greenport, NY for a Special Exception to
the Zoning Ordinance, Article VIII, Section 100-80B for permission to
construct warehouse building with office in this "C-Light Industrial"
Zone. Location of Property: South Side of Corwin Street, Greenport,
NY; County Tax Map Parcel ID No. 1000-48-02-002 and 003.
The Chairman opened the hearing at 7:32 p.m. and read the legal
notice of hearing in its entirety and appeal application.
MR. CHAIRMAN (GOEHRINGER): We have several copies of the original
plan which includes a copy of the survey, and we have a copy of the
Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this property and surrounding
properties in the area. Mr. Price, would you like to be heard in
behalf of this application?
IRVING L. PRICE, JR., ESQ: Thank you, Mr. Ch&irman, members of
the board for th~ opportunity of a rehearing. I believe that this is
fully stated in the application. The minor difference between 13' to
12' wouId be hardly noticeable. We would strictly comply to that
requirement.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much. Is there anybody else that
would like to be heard in behalf of the application? Anybody like to
be heard against the application? Sir? Would you use the mike and
clearly state your name.
THOMAS WATKINS: Which application are you proposing?
MR. CHAIR~N: This is East End Supply.
THOMAS WATKINS: Thomas Watkins, President of the Greenport Hous-
ing Alliance and I have a letter here from the St. Agnes Rectory:
...Dear Members:
Your consideration 6f this critical problem of housing in the
Greenport area will be appreciated at your meeting this evening.
There is a need for residential zones to remain in tact due to
the high incident of the placement of familie§ in our community. We
are in desparate need of housing of these families. "One instance
for example is the property on Corwin Street in Greenport." The
property designated for three families and ( ) housing units. This
property must be maintained for the purpose of providing housing for
low-income families. Thank you for your attention in this matter of
urgency.
In peace, Reverend Father Reid. Greenport Housing Alliancel
MR. WATKINS continued: And to the Southold Zoning Board of Appeals
regarding Appeal No. 3013, Proposed Rezoning Lot #1000-48-02-002 & 003:
~outhold Town Board of ~peals -3- Februar~.~25, 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3080 - EKST END SUPPLY CO., INC., continued:)
MR. WATKINS continued:
Date: February 25, 1983:
Dear Sir:
We the citizens of the Gresnport Housing Alliance Inc. are opposed
to any plan or action which would include the dislocation of low-income
families and reduce further the present shortage of affordable homes
within the community.
We are witness to~.the hardship that low-ihCome families experience
in finding a new home.
We have wiHnessed mass evictions of low-income families and know
their ordeal; overcrowded emergency housing, living in automobiles, or
double-up with relatives with equally large families.
The health, safety, welfare, and even the rights of our low-income
citizens should and must be our first consideration.
It is for these reasons that we must oppose this plan to rezone
the Corwin Street property from residential to light industry. Thank
you for your consideration in this matter.
Very truly yours,
/s/ Thomas Watkins, President
Greenport Housing Alliance...
MR. WATKINS:
MR. CHAIRMAN:
questions?
And I have a copy of this letter for you.
Fine, thank you. Mr. Watkins, may I ask you a couple of
MR. WATKINS: Sure.
MR. CHAIRMAN: It is my understanding that your group is upset with the
removal of the two houses on the present site, is that what the purpose
of these letters are?
MR. WATKINS: Well, it would be for three houses, there are a total of
four houses, three of them are being lived in now~
MR. CHAIRMAN: We were approached today by Mr. McMahon and he informed
us that you might be discussing the possibility of buying these houses
or the possibility of relocating them. Is there anything that you
can shed a~y light on?
MR. WATKINS: It would help to keep the houses there, but just to
remodel them, for the people that are there now.
MR. CHAIRMAN: You are aware of the fact that this property is already
zoned for what these people are proposing, is that correct?
$outhold Town Board of .~peals -4- Februar- 25, 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3080 - EAST END SUPPLY CO., INC., continued:)
MR. WATKINS: It is' zoned for Light Industry?
MR. CHAIRMAN: That's correct.
MR. WATKINS: Well, would there possibly be a way that they could build
around it?
MR. CHAIRMAN: We'll ask the attorney who is representing them in one
second, ok? Is there anything else that you wanted to say? Thank you
very much. Mr. Price, can you shed any light' upon that for us?
IRV PRICE: No, the answer is that it couldn't be built around .but as
far as the residences and-- (inaudible)
MR. CHAIRMAN: Could you use the mike please?
MR. PRICE: The answer is that it couldn't be built around, but as
far as the residences themselves I believe the pictures which were
submitted speak for themselves, and I can testify from my own knowledge
that those residences were in that condition when the applicant pur-
chased them for this purpose, and he has maintained them or attempted
to maintain them ~n as good a condition as they were when he bought
them; and these pictures are true representation of the housing as it
is now. And it is for the record Zoned "Light Industry."
MR. CHAIRMAN: Can I ask you one question while you're there? Would
Mr. Burden or the clients that you~-re representing have any objection
to a relocation, of these houses if there were suitable land in the area?
I mean, in lieu of bulldozing them?
MR. BURDEN: When you say relocation, do you mean that ~meone other
than the Supply Co. would relocate it?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes. You know, somebody coming in and said, "I'd like
To purchase the buildings and remove it from the site?"
MR. BURDEN: We could discuss it.
MR. CHAIRMAN: This is what was proposed to me by Mr. McMahon today.
MR. BURDEN: It's the first we've heard of it.
MR. PRICE: The answer is that they would be glad to discuss it.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you.
MR. PRICE: Thank you.
MR. CHAIRMAN: ts there anybody else that would like to speak against
the application? Any questions from anybody in the audience? (None)
Any questions from any board members? (None) Hearing no further
comments from anyone, I'll make a motion closing the hearing and
reserving decision u~til later.
~Southold Town Board of ~peals -5- February ~ . 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3080 - EAST END SUPPLY CO., INC., continued:)
MEMBER DOUGLASS: Seconded.
On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr.
RESOLVED, to close the hearinq and reserve decision until later
in the matter of the application of EAST END SUPPLY CO.,.__IN.~.C_.
Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonis,
Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted.
RECESSED PUBLIC, HEARING: Appeal No. 3070 - LAST ASSOCIATES.
Upon application of LAST ASSOCIATES, Box 796, Cutchogue, NY for
a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-31 for
permission to construct one-family dwelling with reduced front and
rear yard setbacks upon parcel located on the north side of Birch
Avenue, Southold, NY; County Tax Map Parcel ID No. 1000-77-01-021.
This hearing was recessed from the February 4, 1983 Regular
Meeting. The Chairman reconvened the public hearing at 7:45 p.m.
MR. CHAIRMAN: This hearing was recessed from the last meeting.
Mr. Murdock?
MR. MURDOCK: I think I will wait. I didn't ask for the recess.
would prefer to wait and see what comments the people have.
MR. CHAIRMAN: ts Mr. Dalton in the audience?
GEORGE DALTON: Mr. Chairman, members of the board. A couple of
things. I spoke with the Suffolk County Department of Health
recently and they told me that a revision to the septic system-which
I had very strenuous objections to will be issued probably by today.
I haven't seen the revision; I don't know if Mr. Murdock has or not.
But I understand from Mr. Reynolds from the Health Department that
the septic system will now be located in the frontyard of Mr. Murdock's
house. That's totally acceptable to me. The second point that Mr.
Reynolds raised and I think Mr. Murdock, I would like to ask that he
confirm this, was that Mr. Murdock is now talking about a 25' front-
yard setback as opposed to current plan of 35'. At the last hearing,
I had asked for a 20' frOntyard setback...if Mr. Murdock is agreeable
to a 25' frontyard setback and assuming that the design of the house
does not change, in lite of the change of the septic system, I would
have no problem with a 25' frontyard setback...just as a means of
compromising the various objections I raised before. The third point,
which I hope to have some information on for you was the problem with
removal of the trees and the underbrush from Mr. Murdock's property
and the affect that that might have on the drainage to my property
because of the extremely steep slope between the two houses. Once I
looked into the type of analysis that would have to be done for this
and particularly the cost of that analysi~s...I did not go through
with that. It would have been very expensive, but I would ask that
board to do tonight in their consideration is simply to view it on
Southold Town Board of Appeals -6- February zS, 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3070 - LAST ASSOCIATES, continued:)
MR. DALTON continued:
a common-sense approach, and the slope at Birch Avenue, the height of
the elevation at Birch Avenue is 36 feet while at Oak it is 20 feet...
so that's a 16-foot decline of the various two yards basically. It's
a very steep slope, and what I wouId ask is that the Board simply look
at it from a common-sense view that if these trees are removed, I'm
going to have a whole lot of water in my cellar...I'm going to have a
lot of mud in my backyard; and I wouId suggest that you would view
nom just as far as my property goes, hut also as far as the precedent
setting nature of Mr. Murdock's house...the first house on Birch, I
would assume that there will be other houses being put up on Birch and
in view of that I think we should definitely consider the slope and
the effect it will have on the other houses on Birch once a subsequent
house starts appearing.
The other point I suppose are possibly more of an aesthetic point
than anything else. The area around Goose Creek is filled with t~ees...
there are numerous animals and birdlife there. If those trees are
removed, they provide right now, natural boundaries and a lot of
privacy between neighbors that are I think of value. I think that's
important in maintaining the quality of a community here. The Goose
Creek community is fairly closely knit from what I can see in the
three years that I have been there; and I certainly wouldn't want to
see a lot of trees being taken down and turning into a ~Hampton Bays
or Westhampton or something like that.
And I would think...I believe Mr. Murdock last time mentioned
that he would have no objection ...in fact, he Valued those trees as
well. Well, that's all find and dandy, but if Mr. Murdock should go
and sell that house within the next year, or two years or what have
you, someone else might not want it and those trees could come down ...
so my question and hope for you would be that you would require that
a reasonable amounm of trees be kept. I'm not suggesting that all
of them have to be kept ...that would be nice, but that a reasonable
amount of them be maintained for both the quality of the community
there ~nd for the privacy from us.
The other thing that, and this might possibly be a warning more
than anything else, and it comes from my own personal experience.
The N.Y.S. Department of Environmental Conservation are becoming more
and more interested i~what goes on around the creek-type areas, and
I think that if a sign£ficant amount of these trees and underbrush
start coming away, it is within the 300' from the creek which is
within D.E.C. boundaries, and I would hate to see the N.Y.S.D.E.C.
start getting involved in the community development of Goose Creek
there. They're not an organization I particularly enjoy dealing with.
That's all I have to say.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Mr. Murdock?
MR. MURDOCK: I have in fact heard from the Department of Health
with an amended plan. The reference I made to Mr. Reynolds was in the
$outhold Town Board of Appeals -7-
February 25, 1983 Regular
Meeting
(Appeal No. 3070 L~ST ~SSOCIAT~S, continued:)
MR. MURDOCK continued:
interests of what Mr. Dalton suggested to the board about the setback
being changed, and I felt as long as Public Health was involved, I
would bring them up-to-date of the possibility of the house being
moved forward. They are in complete agreement. They say as long as
we, if we were to put a driveway over part of the septic system that
a cap be arranged for service which is only practical. The trees
we already talked about...it's our intent to leave the property
natural. Since this is an official record, I would note that the
property is more than 300 feet from the wetlands. I believe it's
a total of about 306'or 308 feet between Mr. Dalton's yard, the
street, Oak Street that his house 'abuts on, the property across the
street from him, and along the waterfront is an unbuilt road, and
in all it comes to about 306 feet from the borderline of the property
so it's not concerned in the D.E.C., and I say since this is an
official record, I would like to correct Mr. Dalton's statement.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you.
MR. DALTON: May I?
MR. CHAIRMAN: I just want to mention to you, we did get a
little carried away at the last hearing in reference to testimony
and this board does only grant one recess so I hope you won't be
asking for another one.
MR. DALTON: No.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Ok.
MR. DALTON: But the point is on the D.E.C. with the road that
Mr. Murdock is referring to is no longer there, and that's an old,
I believe a survey was taken in .1969...there is no road along Goose
Creek. On the front of the property there that survey from 1969...
the road is gone. It's underwater, and the D.E.C. is most definitely
involved in that because we've got a dredging project that's going
on right now, and which I've been involved with for several years.
It is within the 300 feet boundaries of D~E.C. That's just a old
survey.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Would anybody else like to-be heard
in favor of this application? Anybody else against the application?
Questions from any board members? (None) Hearing no further comments,
I'll make a motion closing the hearing and reserving decision until
later.
MEMBER GRIGONIS: Second.
On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Grigonis, it was
RESOLVED, to close the hearing and reserve decision until later
in the matter of Appeal No. 3070, LAST ASSOCIATES.
Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonis,
Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted.
Southold Town Board o~'Appeals
-8- FebrUary 25, 1983 Regular
Meeting
PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 3076. Application of HAROLD P.
SCHWERDT, 2720 Cedar Avenue, Sou~hold, NY for a Variance to the
Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-32 for permission to
construct accessory building in the northwesterly section of premises
located at 2720 Cedar Avenue, Southold, NY; Goose Bay Estates Map
No. 1176, Lots 192 to 195 inclusive; County Tax Map Parcel No.
1000-.077-002-001.
The Cha~rmaD opened the hearing at 7:53 o'clock p.m. and read
the legal notice of hearing in its entirety and appeal application.
MR. CHAIRMAN: We have a copy of a survey indicating the
property and the proposed 8' by 8' shed's placement on the property.
I also have a copy of the County Tax Map showing this parcel and the
parcel in the surrounding area. Is there somebody that would like
to be heard .in behalf of this application? Anyone wishing to speak
against the application? (None) Hearing no comments, I'll make a
motion closing the hearing and reserving decision until later.
On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Sawicki, it was
RESOLVED, to close the hearing and reserve decision until later
in the matter of the application of HAROLD P. SCHWERDT in Appeal
No. 3076.
Vo~e of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen,
Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted.
PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 3077. Application of JANET A. DAVIS,
Box 885, Cutchogue, NY for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article
×I, Section 100-118D for permission to reinstate nonconforming use as
an antique shop and residential use (apartment) in this A-Residential
Zone. Location of Property: 45395 Main Road, Sou~hold, NY; County Tax
Map Parcel No. 1000-075-02'011.
The Chairman opened the hearing at 7:55 o'clock p.m. and read
the legal notice of hearing in its entirety and appeal application.
MR. CHAIRMAN: We have a copy of a sketch of a survey indicating
the parcel in question with improvements thereon and I have a ~copy of
the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this property and the properties
in the surrounding area. Is there anyone wishing to be heard in behalf
of this application? Mr. Hall?
MICHAEL J. HALL, ESQ.: At this time, I have two sets of photos.
They're nearly identical so that you could share them amongst the five
of you. Should I stand at the mike?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes.
Southold Town Board or Appeals -9- February. s25, 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3077 - JANET A DAVIS, continued:)
MICHAEL J. HALL, ESQ.: My name is Michael Hall. I'm the attorney
for Janet Davis in her appeal. Janet Davis is the contract vendee of
the property. As you know it's located on the Main Road between
Sou~hold and Peconic, west of this part of town by about two miles.
As I understand, and I have given to the board this afternoon, I
called it "Exhibit B," there is a historic article. The building is
a historic site and there has been a store there for over a hundred
years--the old Nellie Williams Store, before my time. The store closed
within the past ten years, and I haven't been able to find out when it
closed, when in fact it closed as a retail store.
Mrs. Davis' plan, if the board approves, is to use the front 357
square feet of the building--that's 17' by 21' The part of the
building that is presently and was a store is a store. She would like
to use that as an antique shop and leave the remainder of the main
building as an apartment as it is today. It is still resided in by
Mrs. Davis, I'm sorry, by Mrs. Williams although I understand she has
been in a nursing home for almost for a year. So the use as an
apartment has not really been discontinued. It's still a viable
apartment for the record. And she would, as was stated in the appli-
cation, like to use.the barn to store antiques. I think the variance
sought is in line with the zoning ordinance of the town, and I'd like
to at this time go through the various factors that the board shall
consider under the zoning ordinance.
.The first factor is that the use will not prevent the orderly and
reasonable use of adjacent properties, or properties mn adjacent-use
districts. As you probably know, both adjacent properties on the east
are antique shops now and one is the old Gems and Junk and the other
is the Peconic Clock Shop. So there will be no interruption of course
with these uses. The property immediately behind the property build-
ing we're talking abou~ is a residence and it's visually blocked from
any retail use by that gray barn, so there should be no affect with that.
Immediately to the west across that little private street, Maple Avenue,
is a residence and immediately across the street is a residence. I
think in my opinion that they're far enough away so they shouldn't be
adversely affected by a small antique shop.
The second factor for the board is the safety, health, welfare,
comfort, convenience and order of the town. I think the restoration
of the old Williams' Store as an antique shop should have no adverse
effect on the towm. Mrs. Davis has informed me that her business ms
a light retail buSiness as most of the antique shops are. The fact
further that the store is outside Of heart of the business section
adds further to the lack of adverse affect in terms of more crowding
in the heart of town. In my photos No. 1 and 2, depending on which
set of photos you're looking at, photos No. 1 and 2 show ~he Main
Road looking west toward the property.~ The red building that stands
out better in the photo'is the Peconic Clock Shop. Mrs. Davis'
building is just west of that. Photos 3 and 4 are taken from about
the same distance from the store, this time looking east. And the
pictures show the closeness of the other two antique shops to Mrs.
Davis' building and the relative distance of the residences that are
nearby.
Southold Town Board o_ Appeals -10- Februa]
(Appeal No. 3077 JANET A. DAVIS, continued:)
MR. HALL continued:
25, 1983 Regular Meeting
The third factor is that the use will be in harmony with and
promote the general intent of the chapter which is, as you know
better than I do, promotion of.the public health, safety and welfare
and doing substantial justice.
The restoration of the antique shop next to the two other antique
shops should not have any adverse effect on public health, safety and
welfare. There's not a high traffic or density in the area. The sub-
stantial justice, I think, is for the whole town because it's not just
an aid for that property owner...it's a restoration of a potentially
very attractive building.
Other factors are that the character in existing and probable
development of uses in the district and the particular suitability
of such district for the location of such permitted uses. The exist-
ing uses are as I've stated already, the two stores and the residence
behind and they should not be affected. The potential charm of the
restored buildings should do nothing but enhance the residential
character of the neighborhood. I don't think it will give it any
more of a commercial tone.
Another factor is the conservation of property values. Right
now the building is sort of in a rundown condition. It hasn't been
occupied in terms of retail use in quite a while and it kind of, as
you're driving through Southold it gives it a negative oppression
like it's a dieing sort of community...that's a strong thing to say.
To restore that building and to make it attractive a.s I'm sure is
a purpose for her own benefit and for the town's, should enhance
property values in the area. Both residential and commercial.
The last factor that's most important here is the effect it
would have on traffic congestion in the area. There seems to be
ample parking--I parked today myself immediately in front of the
building---for a few cars in addition to that garage area on the
right. There's also room to drive around down that little Maple
Avenue and park behind the building. And as I stated earlier, it's
a low-volume use and it's out of the congested part of town so it
shouldn't be necessarily a problem.
I would just like to conclude by saying that strict compliance
with the code would probably create a hardship for any owner of the
premises, not only just Mrs. Davis, in that the building is perfectly
suited as an apartment in rear and small retail .use in the front,
specifically an antique shop. To convert that building into a
residence would probably be very expensive and would probably not
bring a fair return on the property and her purpose I think will
enhance the entire area.
Did the board have any questions?
MR. CHAIRMAN: So you're proposing pretty much off-site parking,
is that correct?
Southold Town Board of Appeals -11- February 25, 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3077 - JANET A. DAVIS, continued:)
MR. HALL: I think as the off-site parking exists already, there
should be enough, but yeah--there shouldn't be any need for people to
park on the shoulder. Realistically we know they might--antique shop
parkers.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Ok. The next question is about the barn -- now you
mentioned that Mrs. Davis is only going to use the barn specifically
for storage. There will be no retail selling from that barn?
MR. HALL: Mrs. Davis?
(Mrs. Davis nodded no.)
MR. CHAIRMAN: Ail the retail selling will be done from that front
357 square footage. Also, the nature of these use variances, this
board is extremely cognizant of the fact that we not only have to
worry about the present applicant but the possible sale of property
and in dealing with this, we have to talk abou~ restrictions of
placing antiques on the front lawn, ok? Does Mrs. Davis have any
objection or any feelings toward the restrictions of over-making use
of the overabundance of the front lawn? I've seen antique places
just absolutely inundated with antiques, all the way out to the street,
to the point that it really means total saturation of the frontyard
area.
MR. HALL: Would the board like to suggest a specific limitation
as to distance, or any kind of specific condition?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Well, we really haven't talked about bu~ I'm just
telling you that if this application were granted, there may be some
restriction in that area. Do you have any objection to that?
MRS. DAVIS: No. There is very little area in the front let
alone to use.
MR. HALL: Anything else at all?
MEMBER SAWICKI: About the living quarters you mentioned--is that
to be used only while Mrs. Davis is there or is someone going to live
there permanently?
MR. HALL: It will be a rental apartment --
MEMBER SAWICKI: Yearround rental?
MR. HALL: I believe so, yes. And Mrs. Williams, the present
owner of the property still resides there, although as I said she
is in a nursing home. Yes.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The other question, Mr. Hall, is there was evidently
some farmstand there or something which existed prior to this? They
sold vegetables or something out in front--to your knowledge?
Southold Town Board of Appeals -12- February 25, 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3077 - JANET A. DAVIS, continued:)
MRS. DAVIS: The neighbor behind the building was permitted to
sell vegetables in front of Mrs. Williams' store.
MR. CHAIRMAN: That situation will cease though with your owning
the property?
MRS. DAVIS: It would have to, yes.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Is there anybody else wishing to be heard in
behalf of this application? Anybody like to speak against the
application? Any further questions from any board members? (None)
Hearing no further questions, I'll make a motion closing the hear-
ing reserving decision until later.
On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr.
RESOLVED, to close the hearinq and reserve decision until later
in the matter of the application of JANET A. DAVIS, Appeal No. 3077.
Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen,
Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was u~animously adopted.
PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 3079. Application of WALTER GAIPA,
36D Lakeview Terrace, East Marion, NY for Variances to: (a) the
Zoning Ordinance, Article XIV, Section 100-141B, and Article III,
Section 100-32 for permission to construct accessory building in the
frontyard area, and (b) New York Town Law, Section 280-a for
approval of access. Location of Property: 360 Lake View Terrace,
East Marion, NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-31-09-012.
The Chairman opened the hearing at 8:08 o'clock p.m. and read
the legal notice of hearing in its entirety and appeal application.
MR. CHAIRMAN: We have a copy of a sketch of a survey indicating
the proposed positioning of the 12' by 30' building, and I have a
copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this property and
s~milar properties in the area. Is there anybody that would like
to be heard in behalf of the application?
WALTER GAIPA: Yes, Walter Gaipa. The only thing I would like
to add to that is on the survey which you have, it shows a setback
of I think 14½ feet from the road and I would like to increase that
another four feet to the east, east on my property, and that's just
to eliminate the removal of that large Oak Tree...I wouldn't have
to remove it. So it would be 18½ feet from my property line there.
Other than that, everything is the same. Thank you.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Would anybody else like to be heard in behalf
of this application? Anybody like to be heard against the appli-
~cation? (None) Mr. Gaipa, the sideyard will be the present one
foot that you're requesting?
Southold Town Board ¢ _tAppeals -13- Februa. 25, 1983 ReguIar Meeting
(Appeal No. 3077 - JANET A. DAVIS, continued:)
MR. GAIPA: Right. It would be the same as what's there now, it
would be one foot.
is?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Do you have any idea what your neighbor's sideyard
MR. GAIPLA: As far as--
MR. CHAIRMAN: Distance from that building next door. Do you know
how much his building ms off?
MR. GAIPA: Probably, I think, 42", between the two buildings
about 28½ feet.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Hearing no further comments, I'll make a motion
closing the hearing and reserving decision until later.
MEMBER GRIGONIS: Second.
On .motion ~ Mr~ ~Qehringer, seconded by Mr. Grigonis, it was
RESOLVED, to close the hearing and reserve decision until later
mn the matter of the application of Appeal No. 3077, JANET A. DAVIS.
Vcte of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen,
Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted.
PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 3082. Application of BURKE E. LIBURT,
King Street, Orient, NY for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Arti-
cle III, Section 100-30A(2) [c] and C(5) for permission to construct
corral and alter use of existing barn to stable a pony on premises
having an area of 39,048 square feet and more particularly identified
as 1420 King Street, Orient, NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-026-
02-040.
The Chairman opened the hearing at 8:11 o'clock p.m. and read
the legal notice of hearing in its entirety and appeal application.
MEMBER DOUGLASS was absent during this hearing and left the room
at 8:10 p.m.
MR. CHAIRMAN (GOEHRINGER): We have a copy of a sketch of a
survey dated June 18, 1979 indicating the proposed ba~n._aRd fenced
area, and a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this
property and the surrounding properties in the area. Is there any-
body that would like to be heard in behalf of this application?
MRS. FRANCES LIBURT: Thank you. I just wanted to clear up
that this is not a proposed barn. This is a preexisting barn. It
has probably been there for about 100 years.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I meant the proposed placement of the barn.
MRS. LIBURT: Oh, ok. Otherwise I think the application stands.
Southold Town Board of-Appeals -14- February 25, 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3082 BURKE E. LIBURT, continued:)
MR. CHAIRMAN: Can you tell us, Mrs. Liburt, how far the barn is
from the neighbor's property line in the rear?
MRS. LIBURT: It's on the line.
MR. CHAIRMAN: It's right on the line?
MRS. LIBURT: Yes. I have a -- this porch area is not on it any
more bu~ this is the barn right here. This is the Kanz'. So it is
right on the line.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Can we-- We have a copy. Ok. I was going by
the other survey here. Is there anything else you would like to say?
MRS. LIBURT: I guess the only thing is that the property to the
rear is farmland at this time. There's no structure on it.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I just want to ask you a question while you're
there. While the reading the application, it mentioned electricity
and water. Was that always in the barn, or did you recently put that
in the barn?
MRS. LIBURT: Yes. It was about the last year and a half. It's
underground.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Is there anybody else that would like
to be heard in behalf of this application?
MR. KANZ: My name is Kanz...I'm on the west of the Liburts and
I submitted a letter, I'm wondering if you have it there?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes, I do.
MR. KANZ: I think it's self-explanatory.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Would you like me to read that letter, Sir?
MR. KANZ: Yes.
(The Chairman read the following letter from the Kanz's:
...Dear Sirs:
We have received a notice, 2/1/83 of an application for a
variance on the property adjoining ours. The owner of the property
involved is Mr. Burke E. Liburt, 1420 King Street, Orient, New York.
The variance requests permission to keep a pony and to use an
existing building for stabling the pony.
Inasmuch as the building that would be used as a stable is
within a few feet of our lo~, we have some concern as to possible
odors, flies, and rodents in such close proximity to our house.
However, we would not object to Mr. Liburt's request if any variance
Southold Town Board of Appeals -15- February 25, 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3082 - BURKE E. LIBUR~, continued:)
MR. CHAIRMAN continued reading letter from the Kanz's:
...~hat you may grant would be for only the duration of the Liburt's
ownership, and that the variance would terminate if and when the
property is sold. We note that the request is for only one pony.
Yours truly,
/s/ William J. Kanz
/s/ Isabelle Kanz...
MR. CHAIRMAN: I just want you to know that unless you specifically
ask us to read it, we usually don't. It's a part of the record and
the board has read the letter, and it is a part of the file. I'm
happy you asked me.
MR. KANZ: Well, can that be done--that a variance be made for the
life of the ownership, that it would have to be reapplied for if a
new owner comes in?
MR. CHAIRMAN: There are several thoughts on this particular area.
For all intensive purposes the variance goes along with the land,
and it's very difficult to divorce that for the ownership of only
one person. The board learned this not from the horsemanship or
the use of horses on property. We learned it from the area of
granting multiple uses or two families on one piece of property,
and that goes along with the property and it's very difficulty as
I said change that or restrict it to any one person. Ok? So to
be perfectly honest with you, I don't think we can do it.
Is there anybody else that would like to be heard? Yes, I'll call
on you next.
MRS. KANZ: Couldn't the Liburts sign something saying that they
would use it just for themselves and not sell it with the property?
Couldn't they sign some sort of paper?
MR. CHAIRMAN: I guess they could, Mrs. Kanz, bug let me honest with
you. We have seen evidence of these things and what happens is when
property is usually transferred, these papers may get lost in the
shuffle over the years, and for all intensive purposes I don't think
legally that it can be done. But if you would like, I will definitely
consult the Town Attorney prior to making a decision on this applica-
tion--
MRS. KANZ: Why would it be lost--couldn't we have a copy? Then it
wouldn't be lost.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I'm not saying lost in the area of just being lost.
I'm saying it would be difficult once a person changes the name on
a piece of property, unless you go back immediately to that file
and you say that this was the person that owned the property in the
chain of ownership, only then would we know what the actual restric-
tions were that were placed' upon the property. Do you understand
what I mean?
Southold Town Board o~'Appeals -16- February z5, 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3082 - BURKE E. LIBURT, continued:)
MR. LIBURT: May I address what Mrs. Kanz' has addressed?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Certainly, Mr. Liburt.
MR. LIBURT: We spent quite a bit of money to restoring a house which
we believe is 250 years old, or our historical people tell us that,
and Mr. Kanz was quite helpful with his lines of communications. It
is our intention to stay in that house for the rest of our lives;
well, certainly for the rest of our working lives which is certainly
another 20 years. I have no objection myself to what the Kanz's
propose...it's just that we don't intend to sell the house in a year
or two or five years, and my situation as such and I believe we will
be living there for certainly 20 or hopefully 30 years if I make it
that long. The only thing I wanted -- I hope that would set the
Kanz's minds at rest. We're not intending to turn the property over.
The only thing that I would note in the Kanz's letter is that while
they note it is for one pony only, certainly it would be for one
animal that is conceivable for my daughter who is 7½ who might
graduate in two years to one horse, and I think we discussed that
prior to the meeting if they have no objection to that. Thank you.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Liburt. Would anybody else like to be
heard in behalf of the application? Anybody like to speak against
the application? (None) Any questions from any board members?
(None) Hearing no further questions, I'll make a motion closing
the hearing and reserving decision until later.
MEMBER SAWICKI: Second.
On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Sawicki, it was
RESOLVED, to close the hearing and reserve decision until later
in the matter of the application of BURKE E. LIBURT, Appeal No. 3082.
Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen,
and Sawicki. (Member Douglass was absent.) This resolution was
unanimously adopted.
TEMPORARY RECESS: At approximately 8:27 p.m., motion was made
by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Sawicki, to recess temporarily
for five minutes° This resolution was unanimously adopted. (Member
Douglass was absent.)
RECONVENE REGULAR MEETING: At 8:32 p.m., motion was made by
Mr. Grigonis, seconded by Mr. Sawicki, to Reconvene the Regular
Meeting. This resolution was unanimously adopted: Ayes: Messrs.
Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonis, Douglass and Sawicki. (Member
Douglass returned at this time.)
Southold Town Board ~_~JAppeals -17- February~, 1983 Regular Meeting
PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 3083~ Application of J. ROYAL and
VIRGINIA GIFFORD, 1515 Minnehaha Boulevard, Southold, NY for a
Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-32 for
permission to build accessory building in the sideyard area at
premises known as 1515 Minnehaha Boulevard (a/k/a 60 Opechee
Avenue), Southold, NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-087-03-050.
The Chairman opened the hearing at 8:33 o'clock p.m. and read
the legal notice of hearing in its entirety and. appeal application.
MR. CHAIRMAN: We have a copy of a survey prepared by Roderick
VanTuyl, P.C. on September 8, 1980 and indicating the proposed
location of this particular garage. We also have a copy of the
Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this parcel and the surrounding
parcels in the area. Would somebody like to be heard in behalf of
this application? Sir?
J. ROYAL GIFFORD: I'm new at this. What's there, I did to~ ~
the~.best of my ability. I don't know if it's good enough.
here to answer any questions that you might have~
MR. CHAIRMAN: Could I have your name?
MR. GIFFORD: I'm sorry. Roy Gifford.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Would you at any time attaching this to the
present house that exists?
MR. GIFFORD: No.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Would you at any time be using this building for
other than a storage building?
MR. GIFFORD: No, sir. In fact we have not even added to the
driveway or as I would call it curb cut. The house we have now is
a weekend house and a vacation house, a retiring house~ We're
becoming permanent residsnts of Southold and we just don't have
any storage space and that was the reason for this. The rason for
location I thought was real good until I found out I was violating
all kinds of rules. I thought it was good because it hides it and
it makes the building almost invisible from the street and the last
thing the structure would conform to sizer siding and roof to
conform to the existing building, again to make it all symmetrical.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I see six feet to property line and it mentioned
five feet in the application. Is it five or six?
MR. GIFFORD:
MR. CHAIRMAN:
MR. GIFFORD:
MR. CHAIRMAN:
No. It's actually six feet to the property line.
And where would the garage doors be, facing the--
There will be one garage door facing Opechee Avenue.
Very good. Thank you very much. Would anybody else
Southold Town Board o~Appeals -18- February-25, 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3083 - J. ROYAL GIFFORD AND VIRGINIA GIFFORD, continued:)
MR. CHAIRMAN continued:
like to be heard in behalf of this application? Anybody like to speak
against the application? Questions from any board members? (None)
Hearing no further comments, I'll make a motion closing the hearing
and reserving decision until later.
MEMBER GRIGONIS: Second.
On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr.
RESOLVED, to close the hearing and reserve decision until later
in the matter of the application of J. ROYAL AND VIRGINIA GIFFORD, in
Appeal No. 3083.
Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen,
Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted.
PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 3084. Application of PATNICK REAL-
TY CORP., by Gary Flanner Olsen, Esq., Main Road, Box 38, Mattituck,
NY for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article VI, Section 109-60
permitted two residential dwellings in this B-Zoned District. Loca-
tion of Property: 69430 Main Road, Greenport, NY; County Tax Map
Parcel No. 1000-45-05-001.
The Chairman opened the hearing at 8:37 o'clock p.m. and read
the legal notice of hearing in its entirety and appeal application.
MR. CHAIRMAN: We have a copy of a survey dated October 31,
1973 by Roderick VanTuYt indicating these two proposed one-family
dwellings, and I have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating
this property and the surrounding properties in the area. Mr. Olsen.
GARY OLSEN, ESQ.: My name is Gary Olsen. I'm the attorney for
the applicant, Patnick Realty Corporation. Pa~nick Realty Corporation
is a corporation owned by Patricia Drossos now Patricia Zeller, who
also is the owner of Drossos Restaurant across the street. This
property is zoned B-Business. There are two structures on the
property as I'm sure you're aware. The property is over two acres.
The easterly most structure is a house and preexists zoning. The
westerly most structure had been a garage,i-'and many years ago was
converted into a residence for, as I understand it, and historically
for the help that was working at Drossos Restaurant and has been
used b~th by family members and help over the years. Right now the
westerly most structure is being used by Mrs. Zeller who is the
mother-in-law of Pat~icia Drossos. Mrs. Zeller also is actively
employed in Drossos Restaurant, so it's very handy and convsnient
for her. What has brought this matter before the board at this
point is that Patnick Realty Corporation has applied for a mort-
gage with Southold Savings Bank. The mortgage application has
besn granted, and it's part of the bank-processing procedure--it's
Southold Town Board o~/Appeals -19- February ~5, 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3084 - PATNICK REALTY CORP., continued:)
MR. OLSEN continued:
necessary to have Certificates of Occupancy for the bank; otherwise
they won't give the mortgage. That's the reason we made an applica-
tion to the town building department for Certificates, and it was
denied on the basis that there are structures on one piece of property.
I don't that the character of the neighborhood would be changed...as
a matter of fact if anything it's upgrading what the permitted uses
would be and there's certainly a real need in the community for
residential use. They have been there for a long, long time and
the town has been well aware of it. As a matter of fact, I have
contacted the Town assessors' office and it was advised by Henry
Moisa that both buildings on the property, both House One and House
Two, House One is the larger house which is the easterly one and
is being presently assessed as a residence for $3500 and the westerly
most structure is also being assessed as a house for $2000. So the
town IS aware that it has been there.
Not to grant the variance would mean that we would not get our
Certificates of Occupancy and we could no~ close our mortgage with
the bank. I also point out in my application that there was an
addition put on the westerly most home...the building permit was
issued, and at the time the application was made...it was very clear
on the application that the use of the building at the time the
application was made was for residsntial purposes and the addition
was for a laundry room and a Certificate. of Occupancy was issued by
the Building Department for a laundry room, and I will read you how
the Certificate reads and I'll also give you a copy of it:
..."The Occupancy for which this certificate is issued is a
laundry-room addition to an existing dwelling .... "
MR. OLSEN: And that certificate number is Z10894 and at the bottom
of the application for the certificate it states that it's a
certificate for a laundry-room ~addition to an existing dwelling.
I'll give you a copy of the application for that certificate. The
application was dated January 1, 1982, and the Certificate of
Occupancy was dated February 26, 1982. I'll give you copies of
both of those for your records.
(Mr. Olsen gave a copy of the application for a certificate of
occupancy dated January 1, 1982 and the certificate of occupancy
da%ed February 26, 1982 for the laundry-room addition~)
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Olsen, could you furnish for us the approximate
square footage of the west building some time in the near future?
MR. OLSEN: You have a survey by VanTuyl which does show the area.
MR. CHAIR~LAN: It doesn't show the size of the pantry though that
you mention.
MR. OLSEN: The pantry, if you look at the building permit that was
issued when the pantry was constructed, shows that it's 12' by 10'
Southold Town Board of'Appeals -20- February 25, 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3084 PATNICK REALTY CORP., continued:)
MR. OLSEN: I would also like to point out as I've stated in the
application that there is public water. If this property we~
zoned residential, over two acres, 'each house would need 40,000
square feet. I just can't see any purpose in not granting the
variance. It's over two acres in size and has been there for many
many years and nothing is going to change. We just need some
documentation from the Building Department for the bank. Did you
have any questions?
MR. CHAIRMAN: I don't have any other questions, except that the
property is going to remain as a residential use at this particular
time? Is that correct?
MR. OLSEN: At this particular time. Of course it is zoned for
business, but the easterly most house is preexisting zoning; there-
fore a variance isn't even necessary for that one. We're basically
concerned with the westerly most dwelling. If you want to call it
a dwelling. It's only used by one person and most of the time
that person is not even in that particular building because she's
working all the time.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Any questions from any board members?
MEMBER DOUGLASS: I have a small thought-- you're request for the
mortgage; is the mortgage to make some changes?
MR. OLSEN: No, it's strictly to get financing, and as part of the
bank's standard requirements, they won't give mortgage money without
a Certificate of Occupancy.
MEMBER DOUGLASS: Yes, I know that. I mean, it is not for any chang-
ing on that piece of property?
MR. OLSEN: Absolutely not.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Is there anybody else that would like to be heard in
behalf of the application?
MR. OLSEN: There's an existing private mortgage of record that we
want to satisfy; therefore, we're going to the bank to satisfy it.
That's the purpose of it. And we'd like to close the mortgage next
week.
JAMES ZELLER: I do have one thing I might add. I'm James Zeller...
I'm Patricia's husband. We've gotten a letter of commitment from
Southold Savings, and now these different things came up, so the
extent of the letter of commitment to the best of my knowledge, you
get one extension. I don't know. Well, for this reasoning, we're
anxious to get this thing straightened out. Once this letter of
commitment expires--
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Hearing no further comments, I'll make a
motion closing the hearing and reserving decision.
On motion by Mr. Goehringer, .seconded by Mr~ ~'S'aw~cki
RESOLVED, to close the hearing aqd res~9 decision in the
matter of PATNICK REALTY CORF., Appeal NO.
Southold Town Board os Appeals -21- Februarl'25, 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3084 - PATNICK REALTY CORP., continued:)
Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonls, Doyen,
Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted.
APPEAL NO. 3084 - PATNICK REALTY CORP. The board asked the
secretary to research the history of this parcel thoroughly with
the building department and assessors records.
SET-UPS FOR NEXT REGULAR MEETING:
seconded by Mr. Goehringer, it was
On motion by Mr. Douglass,
RESOLVED, that the following applications BE AND HEREBY ARE
SCHEDULED for public hearings to be held at the next Regular Meet-
ing of this board, to wit, WEDNESDAY, MARCH 23, 1983 commancing
at 7:30 p.m., and that the same shall be advertised in the local
and official newspapers, pursuant to law:
Appeal No.
Applicant
FL-13
J~ES AND DORIS IDLER. To utilize area below the
eight-foot minimum-required elevation above mean
sea level for placement of electrical utilities
and equipmsnt in this A-7 Flood Zone. 1010 Maple
Lane, East Marion, NY.
3088
JOHN AND FRANCES DiVELLO. To construct one-family
dwelling in this "C-Light Industrial" Zone at 605
Mary"s Road, Mattituck, NY.
3089
ANN WYDEN and PEGGY HELLER. Screen-porch addition
with reduced rearyard setback. 2015 Bay Avenue,
East Marion, NY.
3C90
CHESTER M. MAYER. Fence exceeding maximum height
required in frontyard. 2265 King Street, Orient, NY.
3085
ANN O'SULLIVAN. Rehearing of ~3028. Approval of
access. 5692 Main Bayview Road, Southold.
3086
PORT OF EGYPT ENTERPRISES, INC. Addition with
insufficient frontyard setback and to use proposed
addition and existing building for retail use in
this "C-Light Industrial" Zone. 62500 Main Road,
Southold, NY.
Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen,
Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted.
Southold Town Board of-~peals -22- February<~5, 1983 Regular Meeting
ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATIONS ON SET-UPS:
On motion by Mr. Douglass, seconded by Mr. Goehringer, it was
RESOLVED, to declare the following Environmental Declarations in
the Negative pursuant to the rules and regulations of the N.Y.S.
Environmental Quality Review Act:
APPEAL NO.: 3088
PROJECT N~ME: JOHN AND FRANCES DiVELLO
Thls notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 (and Local Law ~44-4)
of the mmp!ementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the State
Environmental Quality Review Act of the Environmental Conservation Law.
This board determines the within project not to have a significant
adverse effect on the environment. Also, please take notice thmt this
declaration should not be considered a determination made for any other
dapartment or agency which may also have an application pending for the
same or similar project.
TYPE OF ACTION: IX] Type Ii [ ] Unlisted [ ]
DESCRIPTION OF ACTION: To construct one-family dwelling in this
"C-Light Industrial" Zone.
LOCATION OF PROJECT:
particularly known as:
Map NoJ 1000--~4~0-02-032.
Town of Southold, County of Suffolk, more
605 Mary's Road, Mattituck, NY; County Tax
REASON (S) SUPPORTING THIS DETERMINATION:
(1) An ' ~
Env!~onmental Assessment in the Short Form has been sub-
mitted which indicates that no significant adverse effects to the
environment are likely to occur should this project be implemented as
planned.
(2) The premises in question is not located near tidal wetlands
or other critical environmental area.
~Southold Town Board o %ppeals -23-
(ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATIONSL continued:)
APPEAL NO.: 3089
PROJECT NAME: ANN WYDEN and PEGGY HELLER
Februal
25, 1983 Regular Meeting
This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 (and Local Law ~44-4)
of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the State
Environmental Quality Review Act of the Environmental Conservation Law.
This board determines the within project not to have a significant
adverse effect on the environment. Also, pleas-~--take notice that this
declaration should not be considered a determination made for any other
department or agency which may also have an application pending for the
same or similar project.
TYPE OF ACTION: IX] Type ii [ ] Unlisted [ ]
DESCRIPTION OF ACTION: To construct screen-porch addition with
reduced rearyard setback.
LOCATION OF PROJECT: Town of Southold, County of Suffolk, more
particularly known as: 2015 Bay Avenue, East Marion; 1000-31-17-002.
REASON(~)~SUPPORT!NG THIS DETERMINATION:
(1) An Environmental Assessment in the Short Forum has been sub-
mitted which indicates that no significant adverse effects to the
environment are likely to occur should this project be implemented as
planned.
APPEAL NO.: 3090
PROJECT NAME: CHESTER M. MAYER by Rudolph H. Bruer, Esq.
This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 (and Local Law #44-4)
of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the State
Environmental Quality Review Act of the Environmental Conservation Law.
This board determines the within project not to have a significant
adverse effect on the environment. Also, please take notice that this
declaration should not be considered a determination made for any other
department or agency which may also have an application pending for the
same or similar project2
TYPE OF ACTION: IX] Type II [ ] Unlisted [ ]
DESCRIPTION OF ACTION: Fence exceeding maximum height permftted
required in frontyard area.
LOCATION OF PROJECT: Town of Southold, County of Suffolk, more
particularly known as: 2265 King Street, Orient, NY; 1000-026-02-043.2.
REASON[S) SUPPORTING THIS DETErmINATION:
(I) An Environmental Assessment in the Short Form has been sub-
mitted which indicates that no significant adverse effects to the
environment are likely to occur should this projec~ be implemented as
planned.
~outhold Town Board of ~ppeals -24-
(ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATIONS, continued:)
APPEAL NO.: (3028) 3085
PROJECT N~: ANN O'SULLIVAN
Pebruary ~5, 1983 Regular Meeting
This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 (and Local Law ~44-4)
of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the State
Environmental Quality Review Act of the Environmental Conservation Law.
This board determines the within project not to have a significant
adverse effect on the environment. Also, please take notice that this
declaration should not be considered a determination made for any other
department or agency which may also have an application pending for the
same or similar project.
TYPE OF ACTION: [X] Type II [ ] Unlisted [ ]
DESCRIPTION OF ACTION: Approval of access over a private right-
of-way.
LOCATION OF PROJECT: Town of Southold, County of Suffolk, more
particularly known as: 5692 Main Bayview Road, Southold; 1000-78.-4-41.2.
REASON(.S)_~SUPPORTING THIS DETEP~INATION:
(1) An Environmental Assessment in the Short Form has been sub-
mitted which indicates that no significant adverse effects to the
environment are likely to occur should this project be implemented as
planned.
APPEAL NO.: 3086
PROJECT NAME: PORT OF EGYPT ENTERPRISES INC.
This notice is~issued pursuant to Part 617 (and Local Law #44-4)
of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the State
Environmental Quality Review Act of the EnvirOnmental Conservation Law.
This board determines the within project not to have a significant
adverse effect on the environment. Also, please take notice that this
declaration should not be considered a determination made for any other
department or agency which may also have an application pending for the
same or similar project2
TYPE OF ACTION: IX] Type II [ ] Unlisted [ ]
DESCRIPTION OF ACTION: (1) Construct addition with insufficient
frontyard setback and (2) to use existing building~with addition f~r
retail sales in this "C-Light Industrial Zone." ~
LOCATION OF PROJECT: Town of Southold, County of Suffolk, more
particularly known as: 62500 Main Road, Southold, NY; 1000-056-06-006.
REASON(S) SUPPORTING THiS DETERMINATION:
(i) An Environmental Assessment in the Short Form has been sub-
mitted which indicates that no significant adverse effects to the
environment are likely to occur should this project be implemented as
planned.
Southold ToWn Board of Appeals -25- February 25, 1983 Regular Meeting
(ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATIONS, continued: )
Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen,
Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted.
DATE FOR NEXT REGULAR MEETING:
On motion by Mr. Douglass, seconded by Mr. Goehringer, it was
RESOLVED, that the date for the next Regular Meeting of this
board BE AND HEREBY IS SCHEDULED FOR WEDNESDAY, MARCH 23, 1983 at
7:30 p.m. to be held at the Sou~hold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold,
New York.
Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen,
Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted.
REHEARING REQUEST IN THE MATTER OF ANN O'SULLIVAN FOR APPROVAL
OF ACCESS: Appeal No. 3085 (rehearing of ~3028):
WHEREAS, on September 9, 1982, this board rendered a conditional
approval of Appeal No. 3028 for Ann O'Sullivan upon her request for
approval of access; and
WHEREAS, on February 7, 1983, a request was filed with the
office of the Town Clerk for a rehearing in the matter of the
approval of access in Appeal No. 3028 (see Appeal No. 3085) stat-
ing her reasons for this request; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that Appeal No. 3085, application
for. ANN O'SULLIVAN be granted a rehearing, and that the public hearing
concerning this matter is Scheduled and shall be advertised pursuant
to law, to be held at the board's next Regular Meeting of March 23,
1983 at the Southo!d Town Hall, Southold, NY.
Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen,
Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted.
CLOSED SESSION FOR DELIBERATIONS: On motion by Mr. Goehringer,
seconded by Mr. Doyen, it was RESOLVED to recess temporarily for
the purpose of deliberating, and that the Regular Meeting shall
reconvene immediately after such deliberations. This resolution was
unanimously adopted.
RECONVENE REGULAR MEETING: At approximately 11:00 p.m., on
motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Douglass, the board recon-
vened its Regular Meeting. This resolution was unanimously adopted.
So:uthold Town Board of Appeals
-26-
February 25, 1983 Regular Meeting
RESERVED DECISION: Appeal No. 3083 - J. ROYAL & VIRGINIA GIFFORD.
Upon application of J. ROYAL AND VIRGINIA GIFFORD, 1515 Minnehaha
Boulevard, Southold, NY for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article
III, Section 100-32 for permission to build accessory building in the
sideyard area at premises known as 1515 Minnehaha Boulevard (a/k/a 60
Opechee Avenue), Sou~hold, NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-87-03-050.
The public hearing on this matter was held earlier this evening,
at which time the hearing was declared closed pending deliberations.
The board made the following findings and determination:
By this appeal, appellants seek permission to construct a detached
accessory garage structure approximately 21' by 24' to be located east
of the existing one-family dwellinq structure. The setback proposed
from the easterly property line is-five feet, and the setback from Opechee
Avsnue' shall no~ be forward of the existinq dwelling structure. The
premises in question is a corner lot as de{ined by Section 100-34 of
the Zoning Code, with 109.5' along Minnehaha Boulevard and 146.8' along
Opechee Avsnue. This lot contains an area of approximately 16,280 square
feet. It is the opinion of the board that this building area shall be
deemed rear yard due to the unique circumstances of this corner lot.
In considering this appeal, the board determines that the variance
request is not substantial in relat.ion to the requiremsnts of the zoning
code; that the circumstances are unique; that by allowing the variance
no substantial detriment to adjoining properties w~ll be created; that
the difficulty cannot be obviated by a method feasible for appellant
other than a variance; that the relief requested will be ~n harmony
with and promote the general purposes of zoning; and in view of the
manner in which the difficulty arose and in consideration of all the
above factors, the interest of justice will be served by allowing the
variance as indicated below.
On motion by Mr. Sawicki, seconded by Mr. Goehringer, it was
RESOLVED, that Appeal No. 3083, application of J. ROYAL AND
VIRGINIA GIFFORD for permission to construc~ a 2 ' by 24' one-car
accessory garage, to be set ~ack no closer than 5' to the easterly
property ~ne, BE AND HEREBY IS APPROVED SUBJECT TO ~HE FOLLOWINg:
1. This structure shall be used for storage purposes only;
2. This structure shall not exceed the size ~. feet by 24 feet
as applied.
Location of Property: 1515 Minnehaha Boulevard, Sou~hold, NY;
County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000~87-03-050~
Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonis,
Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted.
~outhold Town Board of Appeals -27- February 267 1983 Regular Meeting
RESERVED DECISION: Appeal No. 3070. LAST ASSOCIATES.
Upon application of LAST ASSOCIATES, Box 796, Cutchogue, NY for a
Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-31 for per-
mission to construct one-family dwelling with reduced front and rear
yard setbacks upon parcel located on the north side of Birch Avenue,
Southold, NY; County Tax Map Parcel ID No. 1000-77-01-021.
The public hearings on this matter were held on February 4, 1983
and February 25, 1983, at which time the hearing was declared closed
pending deliberations.
The board ~ade the following findings and determination:
By this appeal, appellant seeks permission to locate a proposed
one-family dwelling on a parcel of land located at the north side
of Birch Avenue, Southold~ and which is more particularly Known as
Lots 229 and 230 of Goose Bay Estates Subdivision, Map No. 1176. An
area variance is requested to locate the dwelling 35' from Birch
Avenue and 33' from the rear property line. The parcel in question
fronts along Birch Avenue 50~94 feet and has a depth of 120 feet.
The board agrees with the reasoning of applicant in the type of house
chosen and the positioning of the house.
At the hearing, a neighbor, Mr. George Dalton appeared and
informed the board that his water well was situated 32½ feet from
the applicant's rear property line and the County Health Department
had proposed a change in the location of the applicant's well and
cesspool areas, if necessary. Mr. Dalton was also concerned about
water runoff onto his property which he feels may affect his water.
The applicant assures that the vegetation and trees outside the area
of construction will not be disturbed.
In considering this appeal, the board determines that the variance
request is not substantial in relation to the requirements of the zoning
code; that the circumstances are unique; that by allowing the variance
no substantial detriment to adjoining properties will be created; that
the difficulty cannot be obviated by a method feasible for appellant
other than a variance; that the relief requested will be in harmony
with and promote the general purposes of zoning; and in view of the
manner in which' the difficulty arose and in consideration of all the
above factors, the interest of justice will be served by allowing the
variance as indicated below.
On motion by Mr. Grigonis, seconded by Mr. Douglass, it was
RESOLVED, that Appeal No. 3070, application of LAST ASSOCIATES
for permission to locate dwelling with insufficient front and rear
yard setbacks, BE AND HEREBY IS APPROVED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING
CONDITIONS:
1. That the fro~tyard setback be set back no less than 30 feet
from the front property line;
2. That any water runoff shall be retained on site (i.e.,
~outhold Town Board of Appeals -28- February 25, 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3070 - LAST ASSOCIATES, continued:)
proper.ground cover).
3. That this application is subject to review by the Suffolk
County Planning Commission pursuant to Sections 1323, et seq. of the
Suffolk County Charter.
4. County Health Department approvals.
Location of Property: North Side of Birch Avenue, Southold, NY;
Goose Bay Estates Subdivision Lots No. 229 and 230; County Tax Map
Parcel ID No. 1000-77-01-021.
Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen,
Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted.
RESERVED DECISION: Appeal NOB 3076 -- HAROLD P. SCHWERDT.
Upon application of HAROLD P. SCHWERDT, 2720 Cedar Avenue, Southold,
NY for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100~32
for permission to construct accessory building in the northwesterly sec-
tion of premises located at 2720 Cedar Avenue, Sou~hold, NY; Goose Bay
Estates Map No. 1176, Lots 192 to 195 inclusive; County Tax Map Parcel No.
1000~077-002-001.
The public hearing'concerning this application was held earlier
this evening, at which time the hearing was declared closed pending
deliberations.
The board made-the following findings and determination:
By this appeal, appellant seeks permission to locate an 8' by 8'
accessory storage building in the northwesterly section of the subject
premises abutting the existing hedges and approximately eight feet from
the northerly property line. The premises in question is a corner lot
as defined by Section 100-34 of the zoning code, with frontage along
Cedar Avenue of approximately 140' and along Oak Avenue of approximately
80 feet. The premises is improved with a one-family, one-and one-half
story frame dwelling which is set back 25' from Cedar Avenue. The
board agrees that the area chosen is the most practical under the cir-
cumstances. For the record, it ms noted that applicant has received
a letter dated February 3, 1983 from the N.Y.S. Department of Environ-
mental Conservation indicating that no permit under Article 25 of the
Tidal Wetlands Law is required. The premises is bounded on the north
by a seawall built prior to September 20, 1977.
In considering this appeal, the board determines that the variance
request is not substantial in relation to the requirements of the zoning
code; that the circumstances are unique; that by allowing the variance
no substantial detriment to adjoining properties will be created; that
the difficulty cannot be obviated by a method feasible for appellant
other than a variance; that the relief requested will be in harmony
~outhold Town Board of nppeals -29- February ~, 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3076 - HAROLD P. SCHWERDT, continued:)
with and promote the general purposes of zoning; and in view of the
manner in which the difficulty arose and in consideration of all the
above factors, the interest of justice will be served by allowing the
variance as indicated below.
On motion by Mr. Sawicki, seconded by Mr. Grigonls, i~ was
RESOLVED, that Appeal No. 3076, application of HAROLD P.
SCHWERDT, for permission to locate accessory building in the front-
yard area, BE AND HEREBY IS APPROVED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CON-
DITIONS:
1. The building shall be set back no less than eight feet
from the northerly (rear) property line;
2. The building shall be set back no less than five feet
from the westerly (front) property line;
3. This building shall be used only for storage purposes.
Location of Property: 2720 Cedar Avenue, Southold, NY;
County Tax Map Parcel ID No. 1000-77-002-001.
Vote Of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonls, Doyen,
Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted.
RESERVED DECISION: Appeal No. 3071. GEORGE & NATALIE WEISER.
Upon application of GEORGE AND NATALIE WEISER, Harbor Lane, Cutchogue,
NY for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-32 for
permission to construct accessory garage in the frontyard area at 1415 Har-
bor Lane, Cutchogue, NY; County Tax Map Parcel ID No. 1000-97-06-010.
The public hearings concerning this matter were held on February 4,
1983 and February 25, 1983, at which time the hearing was dec,&red closed
pending deliberations.
The board made the following findings and determination:
By this appeal, appellants seek permission to construct a two-car
garage and storage building 24' by 28' in the frontyard area set back
a minimum of 10t from the northerly side property line and westerly of
the existing one-family dwelling structure. The premises in question
contains 2.00 acres with 170.52 feet (tie line) along Eugene's Creek
and a depth of 590 feet. Access to the parcel in question is over a
private, traveled right-of-way upon premises now or formerly of Klam
Properties, Inc. and which right-of-way has not received approval
pursuant to New York Town Law, Section 280a.
It is the opinion of the board that the location chosen for the
Southold Town Board of kppeals -30- February 25, 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3071 - GEORGE & NATALIE WEISER, continued:)
proposed garage structure is the most feasible under the circumstances;
however, this variance shall be subject to receiving an application
for and approval of access pursuant to law.
In considering this appeal, the board determines that the variance
request is not substantial in relation to the requirements of the zoning
code; that the circumstances are unique; that by allowinq the variance
no substantial detriment to adjoining properties will be-created; that
the difficulty cannot be obviated by a method feasible for appellant
other than a variance; that the relief requested will be in harmony
with and promote the general purposes of zoning; and in view of the
manner in which the difficulty arose and in consideration of all the
above factors, the interest of justice will be served by allowing the
variance as indicated below.
On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Grigonis, it was
RESOLVED, that Appeal No. 3071, application for GEORGE J. and
NATALIE L. WEISER for permission to construct 24' by 28' garage
structure in the frontyard area, BE AND HEREBY IS APPROVED SUBJECT
TO THE FOLLOWING:
1. That this building shall be used only for storage pur-
poses;
2. Application for and approval of access pursuant to New York
Town Law, Section 280a.
Location of Property: 1415 Harbor Lane, Cutchogue, NY; County
Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-97-06-010o
Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonis,
Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted.
RESERVED DECISION: Appeal No. 3082 - BURKE E. LIBURT.
Upon apPlication of BURKE E. LIBURT, King Street, Orient, NY for
a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100'30(A) [2] (c)
and (C) [5] for permission to construct corral and alter use of existing
barn to stable a pony on premises having an area of 39,048 square feet
and more particularly identified as 1420 King Street, Orient, NY; County
Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-026-02-040.
The public hearing on this matter was held earlier this evening,
at which time the hearing was declared closed pending deliberations.
The board made the following findings .and determination:
By this appeal, appellant seeks permission to keep a pony on
this 39,048 square-foot parcel and stable same in the existing acces-
sory building which is located at the northwesterly section of
the premises on the westerly (rear) property line. The premises in
$outhold Town Board of ~peals -31- February k-~ 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3082 - BURKE E. LIBURT, continued:)
question is improved with the 1½-story accessory structure in
question, a one-family two-story dwelling structure and garage
building.
It is noted for the record that objections have been raised from
residents in the immediate area concerning applicant's request. One of
the main concerns is odors, flies, rodents, etc. To permit the
housing of a pony (or horse) in a building which is situated on a
property line abutting neighboring property would not in the board's
opinion be feasible under the circumstances. The board has no objection
to the keeping of the pony (or horse) on this 39,048 square-foot parcel;
however, the relief requested from Section 100-30(C) [5] which requires
a 40' setback from all property lines for a building in which a horse is
to be housed is substantial in relation to the zoning code requirements,
in the board's opinion, that by allowing such relief detriment to
adjoining properties may be created; that the difficulty can be obviated
by a method other than a variance; that the relief as requested will not
be in harmony with or promote the general purposes of zoning; and in
view of the manner in which the difficulty arose and in consideration of
all the above factors, the interest of justice will be served by not
allowing the use of the existing accessory building in its present loca-
tion for a horse or pony stable.
On motion by Mr. Doyen, seconded by Mr. Sawicki, it was
RESOLVED, that Appeal No. 3082~ application of BURKE E. LIBURT
for permission to keep pony (or horse) on this 39,048 parcel, BE AND
HEREBY IS APPROVED, PROVIDED THAT A MINIMUM SETBACK OF 40' PROM ALL
PROPERTY LINES IS PROVIDED FOR THE STABLE TO HOUSE THE PONY (OR HORSE).
Location of Property: 1420 King Street, Orient, NY; County Tax
Map Parcel ID No. 1000-026-02-040.
Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonis,
and Sawicki. (Member Douglass was absent.) This resolution was
unanim6usly adopted.
~Southold Town Board of _~peals -32~
February ~_~, 1983 Regular Meeting
RESERVED DECISION: Appeal No. 3079 - WALTER GAIPA.
Upon application of WALTER GAIPA, 360 Lakeview Terrace, East Marion,
NY, for variances to: (a) the Zoning Ordinance, Article XIV, Section
100=141B and Article III, Section 100~32 for permission to construct
accessory building mn the frontyard area, and (b) New York Town Law,
Section 280-a for approval of access. Location of Property: 360 Lake-
view Terrace, East Marion, NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000~31-09-012.
The public hearing concerning this matter was held earlier this
evening, at which time the hearing was declared closed pending delibera-
tions. The board made the following findings and determination:
By this appeal, appellant seeks permission to replace the existing
12' by 29' accessory storage building located approximately one foot from
the front property line abutting the private right-of-way with a new
12' by 30' accessory storage building, to be located 18½ feet from the
front property line as depicted on survey submitted with the subject
application. The parcel in question contains an area of approximately
11,120 square feet and borders Marion Lake. Existing on the premises
is a one-family 1½-story frame dwetlinq and the accessory building
which is the subject of this applicati6n. Access to this parcel is
over a private right-of-way extending from Bay Avenue in an easterly
direction 210 feet in length and 24 feet in width, and runs thence in
a northerly direction a width of 20 feet 58.0 feet to the premises in
question. Applicant is also seeking approval of access over this
right-of-way, and the board finds after personal inspection that the
right-of-way is in fine, satisfactory condition.
For the record it is noted that a prior appeal has been made
concerning this property under Appeal No. 2156 in which the appli-
cant was granted permission to construct the existing accessory build-
ing in the front yard on July 1, 1976.
In considering this appeal, the board determmnes that the variance
request ms not substantial mn relation to the requirements of the zoning
code; that the circumstances are unique; that by allowing the variance
no substantial detriment to adjoining properties will be created; that
the difficulty cannot be obviated by a method feasible for appellant
other than a variance; that the relief requested will be in harmony
with and promote the general purposes of zoning; and in view of the
manner in which the difficulty arose and in consideration of all the
above factors, the interest of 3ustice will be served by allowing the
variance as indicated below.
On motion by Mr. Douglass, seconded by Mr. Grigonis, it was
RESOLVED, that Appeal No. 3079, application of WALTER GAIPA for:
(a) permission to replace existing accessory building in the frontyard
area, and (b) approval of access over a private right-of-way, BE AND
HEREBY IS APPROVED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. That the building shall be set back no closer than 20 feet
from the westerly (front) line and no less than three feet from the
southerly (side) line;
~Southold Town Board of ~ppeals -324
February 25, 1983 .Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3079 - Walter Gaipa, continued:)
2. That this building shall be used for storage purposes only.
Location of Property: 360 Lakeview Terrace, East Marion, NY;
County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000~31-09-12.
Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonis,
Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was nnanimously adopted.
RESERVED DECISION: Appeal No. 3080 - EAST END SUPPLY CO., INC.
Upon application of EAST END SUPPLY CO., INC., 203 Front Street,
Greenport, NY for a Rehearing (of Appeal No. 3013) for a Variance to the
Zoning Ordinance, Article VIII, Section 100~81, Bulk Schedule, for per-
mission to construct warehouse building in this "C-Light Industrial
Zone" with insufficient front, rear and side yard setbacks. Location
of Property: South Side of Corwln Street, Gresnport, NY; County Tax
Map Parcel Nos. 1000-48-02-02 and 03.
The public hearing concerning this application was held earlier
this evening, at which time the hearing was declared closed pending
deliberations.
This isa rehearing in the ma~er of Appeal No. 3013 for East
End Supply Co., Inc. pursuant to its request dated February 1, 1983.
This board unanimously agreed to rehear this application for the
reasons stated in the subject rehearing application, and a public
hearing was held on Pebruary 25, 1983.
The premises in question is located at the. northerly side of
Corwin Street, Greenport, and is more particularly identified on
the County Tax Map as District 1000, Section 48, Block 02, Lots 2
and 3. The subject parcel is zoned "C-Light Industrial" and contains
an area of approximately 51,000 square feet with 875 feet along Corwin
Street, inclusive of a 25' strip from Seventh Street and a 50' strip
from Eighth Street, which road strips have been officially abandoned
by the Town. Existing on the premises are two dwelling structures
in disrepair, accessory building, and a 32' by 156' one-story stor-
age building located on the easterly portion.
By this appeal, appellant seeks a Variance to the Zoning Ordi-
nance, Article VIII, Section 100~81, Bulk Schedule to construct a
warehouse building with an office of approximately 21,000 square
feet first-floor area on the westerly portion of this property,
eliminating existing dwe!ling structures and accessory building
thereto. The existing building on the easterly portion of the
premises will be exterior-modernized and is to remain a one-story
structure. The proposed new construction at the westerly portion
of the premises will be approximately one-half at two-story height
and the other half one-story height.
~outhold Town Board of Appeals -33- February 25, 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3080 - EAST END SUPPLY CO., INC.., continued:)
Facts were submitted at this hearing which were not originally
presented in the prior hearing. The type of construction proposed
is a prefabricated structure and is available only in multiples of
ten feet. Applicant asserts that compliance with this board's prior
decision would result in u~derutilization of 208 of the lot area.
If the board reconsidered the depth of the building to permit one
additional foot, a prefabricated building 90" in depth could be
utilized, verses an 80' building.
In considering this appeal, the board determines that the
variance request is not substantial in relation to the requirements
of the zoning code; that the circumstances are unique; that by allowing
the variance no substantial detriment to adjoining properties will be
created; that the relief requested will be in harmony with and promote
the general purposes of zoning; and the interest of justice will be
served by allowing the variance, as indicated below.
On motion by Mr. Douglass, seconded by Mr. Sawicki, it was
RESOLVED, that Appeal No. 3080, application of EAST END SUPPLY
CO. INC. for permission to construct warehouse with insufficient
front, ~ear and side yard setbacks in this "C-Light Industrial" Zoned
District, be and hereby IS APPROVED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. Ail construction from the rear property line shall be no
closer than 12 feet;
2. There shall be a m~n~mum of twenty [201 parking stalls on
the premises;
3. Ail loading and unloading must be done on the premises only
[with no protrusion of vehicles onto the streets~;
4. Screening shall be provided as submitted on applicant's
10/16/81 plan;
5. Ail storage must be contained within the buildings;
6. Acquiescence by the Planning Board of the above conditions;
7. Suffolk County Planning Commission review pursuant to
Sections 1323, et seq. of the Suffolk County Charter.
Location of Property: South Side of Corwin Street, Greenport, NY;
County Tax Map Parcel ID Nos. 1000-48-2-2 and 3.
Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen, Gr±gonis,
Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted.
Southold Town Board of kppeals -34- February 25, 1983 Regular Meeting
RESERVED DECISION: Appeal No. 3077. JANET A. DAVIS.
Upon application of JANET A. DAVIS, Box 885, Cutchogue, NY for a
Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XI, Section 100-118D for per-
mission to reinstate nonconforming use as an antique shop and residential
use (apartment) in this A-Residential Zone. Location of Property:
45395 Main Road, Sou~hold, NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-075-02-
011. (Owner of Property: Nellie M. Williams)
The public hearing on this application was held earlier this
evening, at which time the hearing was declared closed, pending
deliberations.
The board made the following findings and determination:
By this appeal, appellant seeks relief from Article Xt, Section
100-118D of the Zoning Code for permission to reinstate use as a busi-
ness and residence, which has been discontinued for more than two years.
The premises in question is a corner lot as defined by Section 100-34
of the code and is zoned "A-Residential and Agricultural." Existing
on the premises is a principal two-story building containing a total
area of 1527 square feet (and within which the antique-shop use and
apartment use are requested) and an accessory storage building located
in the rear yard area which contains an area of 440 square feet. The
lot in question contains an area of 15,500 square feet, as shown on
survey marked "Exhibit A."
Appellant's request is for a dual use of the premises, to wit,
antique shop and apartment, which is not permitted by the code. It
is the opinion of the board that the land in question can yield a
reasonable return if only used for a purpose allowed in that zone;
however the reinstatement of the use as existed for many years prior
to its discontinuance for more than two years would not alter the
essential character of the locality. Furthermore, the board does
not feel that the granting of the antique shop in the 357-square-foot
area and dwelling unit use for the owner in the area depicted on
"Exhibit A," both in the principal building, would be a detriment
to adjoining properties.
On motion by Mr. Doyen, seconded by Mr. Grigonis, it was
RESOLVED, that Appeal No. 3077, application of JANET A. DAVIS
for permission to reinstate antique-shop and apartment use within
the principal building, BE AND HEREBY IS APPROVED SUBJECT TO THE
CONDITIONS:
1. The same must be owner-occupied;
2. The apartment must have a minimum of 650 square feet of
living area;
Southold Town Board of-Appeals -35- February 25, 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3077 - JANET A. DAVIS, continued:)
3. There shall be no outside display or storage;
4. All parking must be on the premises;
'5. Any future construction shall require an application to
and approval by the Board of Appeals;
6. The structure depicted "barn" on Exhibit A shall be used
only for storage (no retail sales or living area);
7. Only one building sign shall be permitted on the premises
and same shall not exceed the size two feet by three fset;
8. No off-premises-advertising signs;
9. The use permitted for these premises shall be only as
stipulated herein and must be owner-occupied;
10. Suffolk County Planning Commission review pursuant to
Sections 1323, et seq. of the Suffolk County Charter.
Location of Property: 45395 Main Road, Sou~hold, NY; County Tax
Map Parcel No. 1000~75-02-011.
Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonis,
Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted.
RESERVED DECISION: Appeal No. 3014.
Upon application for EAST END SUPPLY CO., INC., by Irving L. Price,
Jr., Esq., 828 Front Street, Greenport, NY for a Special Exception to
the Zoning Ordinance, Article VIII, Section 100-80B for permission to
construct warehouse building with office in this "C-Light Industrial"
Zone. Location of Property: South Side of Corwin Street, Greenport,
NY; County Tax Map Parcel ID No. 1000-48-02-002 and 003.
The public hearing on this Special Exception was held on February 4,
1983 at Which time the hearing was declared closed pending the outcome
of Appeal No. 3080 and deliberations.
The board made the following findings and determination:
This is an application for a Special Exception pursuant to Article
VIII, Section 100-80B of the Southo~d Town Zoning Code to construct a
warehouse building with office westerly of the existing warehouse
building. The new warehouse building will contain a first-floor area
of approximately 21,000 square feet and applicant proposes to eliminate
existing dwelling structures and accessory building thereto on the
westerly portion of this property. The existing warehouse building on
the easterly portion of the premises will be exterior-modernized and
is to remain a one-story structure. The new warehouse will be approxi-
mately one-half at two-story height and the other half one-story height.
~outhold Town Board of Appeals -36- February 25~, 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3014 - EAST END SUPPLY CO., INC., continued:)
The parcel in question is zoned "C-Light Industrial" and contains an
area of approximately 51,000 square feet with 875 feet along Corwin
Street, inclusive of a 25' strip from Sevsnth Street and a 50' strip
from Eighth Street, which have been officially abandoned by the Town.
It is noted for the record that a decision concerning the setbacks
of the proposed new construction herein was conditionally granted by
this board same date hereof in Appeal No. 3080 for East End Supply Co.,
Inc. It is also noted for the record that any construction other than
as approved by this application shall be subject to review and approval
by the Building Department, Planning Board, Board of Appeals, and any
other agency which may be involved.
In considering this application, the board determines: (a) that
the use will not prevent the orderly and reasonable use of adjacsnt
properties or of properties in adjacent use districts; (b) that the use
will not prevent the orderly and reasonable use of permitted or legally
established uses in the district wherein the proposed use is to be lo-
cated, or of permitted or legally established uses in adjacent use
districts; (c) that the safety, health, welfare, comfort, convenience
or order of the town will not be adversely affected by the proposed use
and its location; (d) that the use will be in harmony with and
promote the general purposes and intent of this chapter; (e) that
the character of the existing and probable development of uses in the
district and the peculiar suitability of such district for the loca-
tion of any of such permitted uses will not be altered; (f) that
no adverse effects will be caused to create an undue increase of
vehicular traffic congestion on public streets or highways; (g)
that the use will not adversely effect the availability of adequate
and proper public or private water supplies and facilities for the
treatment, removal or discharge of sewage, refuse or other effluent
(h) that the use and materials incidental thereto or produced
thereby will not give off obnoxious gasss, odors, smoke or soot;
(i) that the use will not cause disturbing emissions of electrical
discharges, dust, light, vibration or noise; (j) that the operation
in pursuance of this use will not cause undue interference with the
orderly enjoyment by the public of parking or of recreational facili-
ties; (k) that hazards to life, limb or property because of fire,
flood, erosion, or panic will not be created by reason of or as a
result of this use, or by the structures to be used therefor, or by
the inaccessibility of the properties or structures thereon for the
convenient entry and operation of fire and other emergsncy apparatus,
or by the undue concentration or assemblage of persons upon such plot;
(1) that the use or structures will not cause an overcrowding of land
or undue concsntration of population; (m) that the plot area is
sufficient, appropriate and adequate for the use and the reasonably
anticipated operation thereof; and (n) that the use to be operated
is not unreasonably near to a church, school, theater, recreational
area or other place of public assembly.
On motion by Mr. Douglass, seconded by Mr. Goehringer, it was
Southold Town Board of Appeals -37- February 25, 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3014 - EAST END SUPPLY CO., INC., continued:)
RESOLVED, that Appeal No. 3014, application for EAST END SUPPLY
CO., INC. for permission to construct warehouse with insufficient
front, rear and side yard setbacks, in this "C-Light Industrial" Zone,
BE AND HEREBY IS APPROVED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. Ail construction from the rear property line shall be
no closer than 12 feet;
2. There shall be a minimum of twenty [20] parking stalls on
the premises;
3. All loading and unloading must be done on the premises only
[with no protrusion of vehicles onto the streets];
4. Screening shall be provided as submitted on applicant's
10/16/81 plan;
5. All storage must be contained within the buildings;
6. Acquiescence by the Planning Board of the above conditions;
7. Suffolk County Planning Commission review pursuant to
Sections 1323, et seq. of the Suffolk County Charter.
Location of Property: South Side of Corwin Street, Greenport, NY;
County Tax Map Parcel ID Nos. 1000-48-2-2 and 3.
Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonis,
Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted.
Being there was no further business properly coming before the
board at this time, the Chairman declared the meeting adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,
Southold Town Board of Appeals
Chai;man Board of hp~als