HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-06/04/1970SOUTHOLD, L. !., N.Y. 119~71
Telephone 765-26'60
APPEAL BOARD
MEMBER
Robert ~/. Gillispie, Jr., Chairman
Robert Bergen
Charles Grigoni% Jr.
Serge Doyen, Jr.
Fred Hulse, Jr.
MINUTES
SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS
June 4,: 197Q
A regular meeting of the Southold Town Board of Appeals was
held at 7:30 P.~M.'~. Thursday, June 4~, 1970, at the Town Office,
Main Road,_ Southold, New
There were present: Messrs: Robert W. Gillispie~ Jro~ Chairman;
Robert Bergen$ Fred Hulse~, Jr.; Charles Grigonis, Jr.
Absent: Mr. Serge Doyen~ Jr.
Also present: Howard Terr~, Build/rig Inspector
PUBLIC P~ARING: Appeal No, 1336 -- 7:30 Pj~f.- ~i'D.$.'T~)~ upon
application of Katheryn Ko Mullena Oaklawn Avenue, Southold, New
York for approval of access over private right-of~way in accordance
with the State of New York Town Law, Section 280Ao Location of
property: private right-of-way off west side of Oaklawn Avenue,
Southold~ New York~ bounded north by land of the applicant~ east
by Oaklawn Avenue., south-by land of the applicant~ west. by land
of the applicant. Fee paid $5.00.
The Chairman opened the hearing by reading the application
~ Southold Town Boarder Appeals -2---~ June 4, 1970
for approval of access, legal notice of hearing, affidavit attesting
to its publication in the official newspaper~ and notice to the
applicant.
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone present who wishes to speak for
this application? ~
EATHERYN Ko M~.?.EN: Yes~ I am the applicant. I think every-
thing has been covered in the application.
THE CHAIRMAN: What is the total area of the tract of land
which you own?
E~THERYN K. MULLEN: Well over 3 acres~ close to 4 acres.
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone present who wishes to speak
against this application?
(There was no response°)
After investigation and inspection the Board finds that the
applicant requests pezi%%ission for approval of access over private
right-of~way in accordance with the State of New York Town Law
Section 28bAo The applicant is the owner of a tract of land
about 3½ to 4 acres which she proposes~ to subdivide sometime
in the future. Approval of access must be secured~ when
required~ before a subdivision application can be filed. This
approval of access is granted for private right-of-way as set
forth on survey dated April 29~ 1970. Approval is granted sub-
ject to the approval of the Building Inspector in regard to the
actual construction and surfacing of the right-of-way.
The Board finds that strict application of the Ordinance
would produce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship;
the hardship created is unique and would not be shared by all
properties alike in the immediate vicinity of this property
and in the same use district; and the variance will not change
the character of the neighborhood and will observe the spirit
of the Ordinance.
On motion by Mro Gillispie, seconded by Mr° Bergen~ it was
RESOLVED Katheryn K° Mullen~ Oaklawn Avenue~ Southold~ New
York, be GRANTED approval of access over private right-ofMway
in accordance with the State of New York Tow~ Law, Section 280A
as applied for on private right-of-way located off west side of
Oaklawn Avenue, Southold~ New York~ subject to the following
conditions:
1..This approval of access is granted for private right-
of-way as set forth on survey dated April 29~ 1970.
' $outhold Town Boar~-?f Appeals -3- ~ June 4, 1970
2~ This approval of access is granted subject to the approval
of the Building Inspector in regard to the actual construction and
surfacing of the right~of-way.
Vote of the Board: Ayes:-- Messrs: Gillispie, Bergen, Hulseo
PUBLIC P~ARING: Appeal No. 1338 - 7:40 P2Mo' (E2D.~S~T~), upon
application of FranCes Seewald~ Nassau Point, Road~ Cutchogue~ New
York, for approval of access over private right-of-way in accordance
with the State of'New York Town Law,. Section ~DA. Location of
property: private right-of-way off east side of Nassau Point Road,
Map of Nassau Point Club Properties, Inco ~ 156 Amended Map A,
Lot ~ 53~ Cutchogue~ New York~ Fee paid $5.00e
The Chairman opened the hearing by reading the application
for approval of access, legal notice of hearing, affidavit attesting
to its publication in the official newspaper, and noticeto the
applicant.
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone present who Wishes .to speak
for this application?
MRS.' FRANCES SEEWALD: Yes, I am MrSo Frances Seewald, the
applicant. I would just like to divide the property as shown.
My deed states that I can have two (2) houses.
THE CHAIRMAN: Then~ your statement is that your deed to the
property permits you to put 2 houses on the property?
MRS.' FRANCES SEEWALD: Yes~ that's right.
THE CHAIRMAN: This right--of--way or private road which is
labeled reserved
MRS.' FRANCES SEEWALD: That has nothing to do with the
application~ that applies to Lot $ 54 next door. What I want
to do is divide the property in half. I would like to sell
the house on the water someday and build myself a new house~
not right now but in the future.
THE CHAIRMAN: How does 'the ~uestion of access enter into
it~ Do you propose to have a new access?~ other than the one
that now exists?
MR. HULSE: If this property is split sh~ won't have
any access.
THE CHAIRMAN: Well, how would you get i~to this back lot~
by a new access? There is a line drawn here on the N/S of the
property, what is this?
Southold Town Board~f Appeals -4- June 4, 1970
MRS. FRANCES SEEWALD: I have my own driveway coming up to
the house. ~
THE CHAIRMAN: You propose to continue to use this driveway?
You propose to sella deed, or whatever, this house and retain a
right-of-way over this driveway?
MRS.' FRANCES SEEWAT~: Yes,~ that's right.
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone else present who wishes to
speak for this application?
MR° HULSE: How many feet does she have there?, about 330?
MRS. FRANCES SEEWALD: I have 335 ft. on one side and 350 ft.
on the other side, and 100 ft. frontage,
THE CHAIRMAN: We are not questioning the area° You do have
enough area for 2 houses, but you need access for the back loto
First you will have to decide where you want to divide the property.
We can't just go by the lines you have sketched in here.
MR. BERGEN: Just how do you propose to divide the property?
MRS.' FRANCES SRRWA?~: I want to divide the property in half
as shown on the application?
MR° BERGEN: But then how~ill you obtain access to the other
half?
MRS. FRANCES SEEWA?~: There is a driveway in there now°
MR. BERGEN: Well, this is what we wanted to know, you are not
going to use that. You could put a new drivewDy in here. (referring
to sketch.)
MRS° FRANCES SEEWALD: No, I am not going to put any new
driveway in. I will use the smme one that I am Using now° The
only thing I want ~to do is divide the property in case I want to
build another~house.
THE CHAIRMAN: Well, if you are going to sell this, you will
have to obtain access over this driveway, is that what you want
to do?
MRS% FRANCES SEEWALD: Yes,, that's right° I want to retain access
over the present driveway and divide the lot in half.
THE CHAIRMAN: Well, the buyers might not like that.
MRS. FRANCES SEEWALD: Well, it might go in the family.
Southold Town Boar~?'~f Appeals ~- June 4~ 1970
THE CHAIRMAN: Yes, but w~e have to worry about the future
owners.
MRS. FRANCES SEE~RT.D: Yesa but the Zoning Ordinance requires
12,500 sq. feet of area per lot. Even if I took 10 feet off the lot
frontage, I would still have plenty of area.
MR~ HULSE: Yes, but then you would need a variance for less
than 100 ft. frontage.
THE CHAIRMAN: I don't think she necessarily would, Nassau
Point Prop. Map is part of the Ordinance. But I think before you
finish you are going to have to decide where you want to divide
the property. ~
MRS.' SEE~AT~: Well, I w~ant to diVide it in half, half
of 337 ft. which is about 168~ feet.
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone else present who wishes to speak
for this application?
(There was no response.)
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone present who wishes to speak
against this application?
MRj FRAISER: I am representing the Nassau Point Properties
Owners Association. I have talked with a number of directors and
they feel that this division will create lots with sub-standard
width. It is our understanding that you need 100 fto frontage,
this division as presented will leave 90 ft. frontage. There are
very few lots in the area which have 2 houses on them. I think
the idea of 2 houses was originally set up for a guest house to
be part of the main house, not to be divided into two seperate
parcels.
THE CHAIRMAN: Nassau Point is part of the Zoning Ordinance
as it exists. The minimum requirement is 12~500 sq. ft. of area
per lot.
MR.' FRAISER:
THE CHAIRMAN:
Yes, but it also requires 100ft. frontage.
Yes, however, it has always been interpreted
that when you have a front lot and a back lot such as this, the
back lot can obtain access over the front lot as an easement.
So this really presents no zoning problem, I don~t know if it
will present a problem for the Nassau Point Properties Owners
Association. ~n other words this no~y would be granted.
MR. FRAISER: Well, as a member of the property owners
association, I know of a number of people who had a lot 500 fro
Southold Town Boar~I'Df Appeals -6- ,June 4~ 1970
tong with a limit of one house. When they asked for 2 houses
they were always refused by the association. We feel that
there are too many lots on Nassau Points if all of them get
built on we will run out of water.
THE CHAIRMAN: Well, we have a tough enough time just under-
standing the Zoning Ordinance and its application to all the~various
situations in the Town, without attempting to absorb all of the
property owners associations deed restrictions.
MR. FRAISER: Well~ I was not aware that you had exceptions
or variances to the rules.
THE CHAIRMAn: This would not vary the rules we go byo
MR. FRAISER: Except for the front footage.
THE CHAIRMAN: No, it would not vary that either, it would
not vary anything. It has enough area and enough frontage. We
would like to help you,. we are certainly aware of the water
shortage on Nassau Point, but I do~:'t see h6w we could deny this,
this map is part of the Ordinance.
A discussion was held by all on the proposed use of the
driveway for access to the back lot.
MR.' PFI~L: I don~t see how they can do this~ they will be
establishing a precedent for everyone on the E/S of Nassau Point
Road.
MR,~ FRAISER: I was not aware of the fact that any of the
houses on the E/S ha~ permission~ for 2 houses. I know on the W/S
they do~ but I didn't think the E/S did. The permission states
that you can build 2 houses, but it must be kept all as one parcel,
MR. PFIEL: Wello it would seem to me that if the person
buying the front lot is going to grant the back an easement to
use their drivewaya by the same token the waterfront lot would
have to grant an easement to the front lot to use the beach~
THE CHAIRMAN: Not necessarily, we are not concerned with
that here. ~
MR.' MEINKE: But if the property changes hands, the easement
would have to go into the deed, right?
THE CHAIRMAN: Yes, that's right.
MR. PFIEL: Do you feel that you would have the same thought
regardless of what the deed restrictions say?
Southold Town Boar~-~f Appeals -7- June 4, 1970
THE CHAIRMAN: Yes, we don't get into deed restrictions~.
they are a matter for the property owners association~
MR~ H.Wo PROOM: Then any of the lots can make an appeal for
a variance?
THE CHAIRMAN: Yes, thatgs right. It is being done all the time.
MR. FRAISER: It was my understanding that the Building Dept.
would not give a permit if a deed restricted against it.
THE CHAIRMAN: Nos that's not sos as long.as it meets all
of the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance a permit can be issued°
MR. PFT~L: Well, I am very much against the principle of
establishing 2 lots on the east side of the road.
THE CHAIRMAN: Well, this is why the property owners association
existss it is up to you to enforce the deed restrictions.
THE CHAIRMAN: The members of the Board wish to talk this over
a little more, so we will reserve decision at this time°
PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 1339 - 7:50 P~M* CE~'DoS,'To')s upon
application of Annemarie Hydell, 4 Goldin Lane, Southold, New York~
for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance~ Article III~
Section 305s for permission to ~onstruct addition to existing
dwelling~ith reduced front yard setback. Location of property:
east side of Goldin Lane~ Map of Nathan Goldin $ 1106, part of
Lot ~ 11 & part of Lot $ 12~ Southold, New York. Fee paid $5°00°
The Chairman opened the hearing by reading the application
for a variance, legal notice of hearing, affidavit attesting to
its publication in the official newspaper, and notice to the
applicant.
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone present who wishes to speak
for this application?
(There was no response.)
THE CHAIRMAN: What are the dimension'S'of this?
HOWARD TERRY: I think it comes out 6 f~et to the west, it will
line up with the porch on the first cottage on the north°
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone present who wishes to speak
against this application?
$outhold Town Boar¢~-' tf Appeals -~" June 4, a1970
(Therewas no response.)
After investigation and inspection the Board finds that the
applicant requests permission to construct addition to existing
dwelling with reduced front yard setback. The Board finds that
this cottage w$~ built prior to the Zoning Ordinance on a small
lot in a recorded subdivision. The Board is of the opinion that
this variance should be granted subject to the condition that
the proposed new porch shall not exceed the front yard setback
established by the first cottage to the north.
The Board finds that strict application of the Ordinance
would produce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship;
the hardship created is unique and would not be shared by all
properties alike in the immediate vicinity-of this property
and in the same use district; and the variance will not change
the character of the neighborhood and will observe the spirit
of the Ordinance.
On motion by Mro Hulse~ seconded by Mro Bergen~ it was
RESOLVED Annemarie Hydell~ 4 Goldin Lane, Southold~ New
York~ be GRAN~ permission to construct addition to existing
dwelling with reduced front yard setback as applied for on
property located at east side of Goldin Lane,. $outhold~ New
York~ subject to the following condition:
1o The proposed new porch shall not exceed the front yard
setback established by t/~ first cottage to the north.
Vote of the Board: Ayes:- Messrs: Gillis!/e~ Bergen~ Hulse,
PUBLIC ~F~RING: Appeal No. 1337 - 8:20 PjMo (E%'D~$,T~)~ upon
application of Katy Mitchell~ 103 TottenhamRoad,. Lynbrook~ New
York a/c Cornelia Mitchell, 103 Tottenham Road, Lynbrook~ New York,
for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article
Section 303~ and Article X~ Section 1000A, for permission to ~ivide
lot and build new ond family dellling with insufficient frontage
and area. Location of property: south side of Aquaview Avenue~
Extension, East Marion~ New York, bounded north by Aqauview
Avenue Extension~ east by Harry Mitchell, south by LoV20~Donnell~
west by Jo Trikoukas., Fee paid $5.00°
The Chairman opened the hearing by reading the appliCation
for a variance, legal notice of hearing, affidavit attesting to
its publication in the official newspaper~, and notice to the
applicant.
Southold Town Bo~r~iiof Appeals -9-- June 4, 1970
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone present who wishes to speak
for this application? ~
MRS. KATY MITCHELL: I am the applicant, Mrs. Katy Mitchell.
THE CHAIRMAN: Where was the original lot?
MRS. KATYMITCHELL: The original lot was a corner lot on
which we got a variance.
THE CHAIRMAN: You were granted a variance for the setback
because of'the shape of the lot. The problem here is that the
area is not large mnough to divide.
MRS~ KATY MITCH~7~: No, there is a misubderstanding here~
We bought the first lot and built our house on it. Then four or
five years later this lot next door changed hands. First it was
owned by Mro Stars, then Mr. Stars sold it to M_ro Stamos and Mro
Stamos sold it back to Mr. Stars and Mrs Stars had the lot for
sale. So we thought we would buy it for our daughter, after I
came here and inquired if we could built on it,. and they told
me I could build on it as long as I got permission from the
Dept. of Health for a well point and cesspools which I have.
So after inquiring and receiving permission from the health
Dept., we went ahead and bought the property~ Just recently,
after 2 years~ I just found out that the property was put under
.the same name,~ but up until the time I bought it, it was a
seperate lot. Our la~yer was not aware that it shoul~ be put
under two different names. We were not aware of this until
just recently when the people behind this lot started building
and we noticed their cesspools were too close to our well. So
I came to Mr. Terry and he told me the whole story about the
property being under one name. This whole area is set up on
small lots. this lot is the largest of them all.
THE CHAIRMAN: When was this originally set up?
HOWARD TERRY: It was originally sst up on Stars map~ as two
seperate lots.
THE CHAIRMAN: Then this was two seperate lots, if it had not
been put under one name it could have been built
HOWARD TERRY: Yes, that's right.
THE CHAIRMAN: When was this open development area originally
set up?
Southold Town Boar~ ~of Appeals -10~- June 4, 1970
H(YWARD TERRY: Back in 1958.
THE CHAIRMAN: Just shortly after the. enactment of the Ordinance.
Is there anyone who would like to add anything to this application?
(There was no response.)
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone present who wishes to speak
against this applic ation?
(There was no response.)
THE CHAIRMAN: Hearing none, the Board would like to reserve
decision on this appeal so that we can take it down to the Town
Counsel for advice.
PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 1340 - 8:10
upon application of Cedars Golf Club, Case's Lane Extension,
Cutchogue, New York, for a special exception in accordance
with the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 300, Subsection
~0, for permission to erect an off-premises directional sign on
the property of Hallock'E. Tuthill. Location of property: south
west corner of Middle Road ~R27) and Alvah~s Lane, Cutchogue~
N~w York, bounded north by Middle Road,~ east by Alvah~s Lane,
south by Wm. Maston, west by J. To Ford. Fee paid $5.00.
The Chairman opened the hearing by reading the application
for a special exception, legal notice of hearing~ affidavit
attesting to its publication in the official newspaper~ and
notice to the applicant.
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone present who wishes to
speak for this application?
Mr. Robert Bergen excused himself from this hearing because
of a conflict of interest.
MR.; RUSSELL CASE: Yes, I request this special exception for
the reasons stated in the application. The golf course has been
there for 5 years and we still don~t have a sign at this location°
THE CHAIRMAN: How many signs do you have now ?
MR. RUSSELL CASE: There is one on the Main Road and one
on New Suffolk Lane & Cedars Road. ~hat we plan on doing is
moving the one on New Suffolk Lane to this location.
THE CHAIRMAN: 4~ x 6~ woul~ the maximum size. What is the
size of the sign you plan to move?
Southold Town Boar~of Appeals -"~- June 4, 1970
MR. RUSSELL CASE: 3' x 5'°
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone else present who wishes to
speak for this application?
(There was no response.)
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone present who wishes to speak
against this application?
(There was no response.)
After investigation and inspection the Board finds that the
applicant requests permission to erect an off premises directional
sign. The Board finds that this sign is consistent with the
Board of Appeals policy of granting directional signs for public
places of amusement and this sign will be in the interest of the
travelling public.
On motion by M_ro Gillispie~ seconded by Mr. Hulse~ it was
RESOLVED Cedars Golf Club~ Case's Lane Extension, Cutchogue~
New York~ be GRANTED permission to erect an off premises directional
si~n on the property of Hallock E. Tuthill, located at southwest
corner of Middle Road (CR27) and Alvah's Lane, Cutchogue, New York~
as applied for, subject to the following conditions:
1. The sign shall be located at least 20 feet from any
property line.
2. The sign shall be located at least 3 feet above
ground level.
3. This sign shall be granted for a period of one year~
renewable annually upon written application to the Board of Appeals.
4. This s~gn shall be subject to all subsequent changes
in the Southold Town Building Zone Ordinance as it concerns signs.
Vote of the Board: Ayes:- Messrs: Gillispie, Bergen~ Hulse~
Grigoniso
PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 1342 - 8:35 PoMo (E2DoS~T.),
upon application of Harrontine Realty Corpo~ 855 Sunrise HighwaY~
Lynbrook, New York, for approval of access over private right-of-
way in accordance with the' State of New York Town Law, Section
280A. Location of property: private right-of-way off south west
side of Hickory Avenue (private road)~ Map of Goose Bay Estates,
Southold~ New York° Fee paid $5.00.
Southold Town Board~ f Appeals --12~ June 4, 1970
The Chairman opened the hearing by reading ~the application
for approval of access, legal notice of hearing, affidavit
attesting to its publication in the official newspaper, and
notice to the applicant°
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone present who Wishes to speak
for this application?
MR.' HAROLD REESE: Yes, I am Fir. Reese~ President of Harrontine
Realty Corp., I have a copy of the survey which may indicate a little
better than the one you have there. This is the area here (referring
to survey) it is 315 ® on Goose Bay and 326~ on this side. This is
the access here over a private road.
THE CHAIRMAN$ Owned by the applicant?
MR, R~.SE: No~ it is owned by someone else~ but we have the
legal might to use it.
MR. HULSE: How w~ide is it?
MRo~ R~ESE: About 20 feet.
THE CHAIRMAN: Do you h~ve an easement?
MRS- RRR. SE: Yes~ it is guaranteed by the title company.
THE CHAIRMAN: Where does this road take you?
(Fir. Reese gave particulars as to the location of the road.)
THE CHA~: Is there anyone else present who wishes to
speak for this application?
(There was no response.)
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone present who wishes to speak
against this application?
RICHARD LARK~ ESQ'o: My name is Richard Lark,. Attorney from
the Law Office of Wm. Wickham, Mattituck, I am representing the
Goose Bay Civic Association. The application as I read it assumes
that the appellant has the r~ght to use Oak & Hickory Avenue on
the map of Goose Bay Estates. As I understand it, this is not so,
there is no legal right-of-way over these roads, Oak & Hickory
Avenues from where the public road (Cedar Road) ends.
THE CHAIRMAN: How did the previous owner get into this
property?
Southold Town Boarg-of Appeals --13- June 4, 1970
RICHARD LARK, ESQ,: The previous owner, Renard, had a deeded
right of way over lot $ 270 on the filed map of Goose Bay Estates.
THE CHAIRMAN: Is lot $ 270 that little 20' strip of property?
RICHARD LARK~ ESQ2: Yes, that's right.
THE CHAIRMAN: Who owns that lot?
RICHARD LARK, ES~%': J. Leo Saxtein~ who purchased it ata
tax sale, I believe. Now,~ as I understand it,~ Renard became a
member of the Goose Bay Civic Association and ha~ a permissive
license to use Oak Street and Hickory Avenue and had paid his
fair share for the maintainance of ~the roads, The Goose Bay
Civic Association maintains the roads and derives its revenue
from the property owners. The ownership of the roads when it
was conveyed out by the developer, conveyed the fee title to
these private roads to the center to everyone who owned the
lot immediately in. front of it, subject-to the right of way
for other lot owners to pass over it.
THE CHAIRMAN: Mr. Renard~s lot was not part of this parcel
or subdivision so he had no right to use it until he obtained
this permissive license from the association?
RICHARD LARK~ ESQ.': Yes, that°s right°
THE CHAIRMAN: So~ this is your argument against the appeal?
RICHARD LARK, ESQ.': No it is not. I, on behalf of the
Goose Bay Civic Association~ request the Board to adjourn this
hearing or to deny this petit.ion pending the establishment of
a legal right-of-way over both Oak Street and Hickory Avenue.
As I understand it, under Section 280A~ under which this
application is being applied for, it first has to be determined
whether there is a legal right-of-waya then whether or not the
Board of Appeals will approve the access. It has not been
determined whether or not this road is a legal right-of-way.
There is a deed right going into Renards and going out of
Renards to the present owner, which is the appellant here~for
a right-of-way over lot $ 270 and this presents some interesting
legal questions~ which either have to be resolved by a court of
law or by an agreement from the Goose Bay Civic Association and
the property owner as to the permission to use this. The legal
question is really quite precise~ whether or not an adjoining
property owner may burden private roads on a filed map, when
this adjoining prpperty is not part of the filed map. Now the
other question is whether or not a lot on a filed map can be
used as a conduit for adjoining property to burden.
$outhold Town BoarF ~f Appeals --14- June 4, 1970
THE CHAIRMAN: There was one other point that was brought
out to us when we were investigating it, and that is that there
is an old road 6alled Hickory Lane that apparently was used by
the early settlers to get down to Goose Bay Creek, and I believe
'~hat this old Hickory Lane intercepts this lot ~ 270. This
Hickory Lane is now overgrown, it is not visible. Does that
enter into your thinking about it?
RICHARD LARK, ESQ,: Before that~ back in the old title
when it came out of the Peese Estate there was a right-of-way,
it's a little confusing. Now I am talking about the applicant's
property which grew out of the Peese Estate. He gave a right-
of-way which dates back into the 1800~s, which reads as follows:
Reserving, however, a right-of-way across southerly side of
premises here conveyed and adjoining land of Henry Beaney from
the north road to said land of Grover Peese and his w~fe for
use by owners of said land supposed to belong to said Peese
and his wife for the use and purpose of a cartway and ~riftwayo
Now, from what I can determine from what early maps are avail-
able~ that road in essence goes somewhat where you say~ it came
down over the hill and then ran down to the creek. Now after
the developer, Oliver BD~s.~ filed this map on Goose Bay~ you
can't match up where that right-of-way goes with the way Oak &
Hickory Avenue goes. I respectfully submit that Oak & Hickory
Avenue are not one and the same right-of~wayo Now this is a
question that can only be solved either by an agreement or by
a court of law.~
THE CHAIRMAN: I would like to hear from the rest of the
people here, now.
MR. HERBERT HEINS: (resident of Goose Bay Estates) M_ro'Renard
used that road, but he was a good neighbor. Whenever the road need-
ed any repairs and maintainance he always contributed to the costs.
There was only one house there then~ but now i Understand that they
are going to put up 2 houses plus the one there, that will be 3,
and possibly more because that is a big piece of land in there° So
something is going to have to be done to straighten this thing out
because everybody can't be running in and out of this road and
ruining it.
THE CHAIRMAN: There is about 90,000 sq. fto of area in the
parcel~ under the proposed zoning I don't think he could get more
than 3 houses on ito
GOTTLTR. B Nichols: My name is Gottlieb Nichols from Dickinson
Real Estate~ we are the agency who brought about this problem. I
telephoned Mrs. Bredmeyer in Orient yesterday (sheLls Mr. Renard's
daughter) she said that her father had purchased approximately
Southold Town Board ~f Appeals -15- ' June 4~ 1970
200~ in 1940 from Mro Oliver and contracted M_ro Oliver to build
a summer home on the parcel. Mr. Oliver built a summer home on
the parcel in 1940. Firs. Bredmeyer went onto say that her father
purchased from Mr. Dorchel a strip o~property between the subject
property and Goose Bay Estates. It is assumed that Oliver sold to
Dorchel before he sold to Renard. From 1940 to date the right-of-
way now~ being used has been the right of access to the property
and travelled over by the Renards and their friends and the present
owner Mr. Reese. M_rs. Bredmeyer went on to say that in 1964 Mr.
Renard went to Otto Van Tuyl, land surveyor, and asked him to
survey a part of his prpperty with the thought in mind that his
daughter and son-in-law might build a house in there° But that
~ell through, it didn't materialize. Then Mrs. Bredmeyer said
that Mr° Renard was a member or'the Goose Bay Civic Association
in good standing, and she thinks he was well thought of by everyone
and enjoyed the priveliges afforded by the association.
MR. REESE: I would like to say that if this is split into
3 more parcels there will be three more contributions for the
roads also.
HAROLD Lo SMITH:
deeds with the lots?
Would that be a condition put into the
MR.' REESE: Yes~ whatever would be satisfactory to you.
THE CHAIRMAN: I understand that in some places they
actually make an assessment for it and you have to pay it
or it actually becomes a lien against yourproperty, that's
one way of enforcing it°
HARO?~ L. SMITH: I would assume that if the Board grants
the application, they could impose a condition such as this.
THE CHAIRMAN: I would like to say something at this point~
I doric think we are even going to attempt to approve this access.
As Mro Lark pointed out it is beyond us.
ROBERT SCPTWANN: I don~t see any hardship here° Mr. Reese
should have known what was going on before he bought the property.
I am not concerned with 3 more contributions for the road, I don~t
want any more traffic going over it. There isn't a~ house there
that doesn't have children and they play in the street all day
long. We have enough trouble with common carriers coming in here,
the milkman, garbageman, and the like. These are private roads,
we own the roads and I don~t think anyone has the right to come
over them, the same as they don't have the right to tresspass on
my property, I think this is a matter for the court.
Southold Town Boar~ ~f Appeals -16- ~ June 4, 1970
THE CHAIRMAN: Would anyone else like to add anything to the
record.
~o' REESE: As F~r. Smith brought up, we would like a require-
ment in the deed as to the road maintanance~ We are certainly not
trying to get anyone else to contribute any expense on ou~ part.
As aar as the legal access, when we purchased the property~ I
stressed very strongly to the attorney involved and to the Title
Company about this legal accessD We do have a guaranteed policy
for it.
HOWARD TERRY: Do you have a deed with the access described
on it~
MR° RRRSE: Yes, I have it here°
RICHARD LARK., ESQo: You see the problem here is that there
are so many years between 1940 and the present. The only reason
Renard used it is because he had a permissive license~ but that
doesn't make it an easement.
MRj REESE: I am not too familiar with the background of this~
but I found out this evening that this property was purchased'from
Oliver B~$s.~ who was the original developer.
MR. LARK: Oliver Bros. was the one who gave the original
right-of-way over Lot ~ 270, they acquired~the Peese parcel after
they filed the map of Goose Bay Estates.
THE CHAIRMAN: I think a decision on this appeal is beyond
this Board.
RICHARD LARK~ ESQo': Speaking on behalf of the Civic Association
I would hope that they can come to an agreement between themselves
If it can't be settled by an agreement then it will have to be
settled in a court of law.
on motion by Mr. Gillispie, seoonded by Mr. Hulse, it was
RESOLVED that t~ Shot~old Town Board of ~ppeals is incompetent
to decide the question of right-of-way for the application under
question. This moation hereby denies our authority to make any
decision.
Vote of the Board: Ayes:- Messrs: Gillispie, Bergen~ Hulse,
Grigonis.
Southold Town Boarg'"~f Appeals -17- June 4, 1970
PUBLIC MF~RING: Appeal No. 1343 -- 8:50 P.M.' (E~DoS.T~)a
upon application of Daniel & Ruth Archer, Greenway East, Orient,
New York, for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance~
Article III, Section 300, Subsection 6, and Article III, Section
309~ for permission to locate swimming pool (accessory use) in
front yard area. Location of property: east side of Greenway
East and north side of Parkview Lane, Subdivision Map of Green
Acres,. Lot ~ 31, Orient,. New York.. Fee ~id $5.00°
The Chairman opened the hearing by reading the application
for a variance~ ~legal notice of hearing, affidavit attesting to
its publication in the official newspaper, and notice to the
applicant.
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone present who wishes to steak
for this application?
MRS,' RUTH ARCHER: Yes, I am the applicant.
THE CHAIRMAN: The applkmtion doesn't show the proposed location
of the swimming pool~ where will it be located?
MRS. RUTH ARCHER: In the southeast corner of the property.
MR. HULSE: How far back from the lines?
MRS° ARCHER: 15 feet from the hedge~ and 25 feet from the
east line.
THE CHAIRMAN: Part of the hardship here is that legally
speaking on a corner lot there is only one sideyard area, which
in this particular case is occupied by a well and unables you
to place your Pool in the northerly sideyard or backyard. In
the new zoning ordinance we have a requirement that there be a
fence not less than a 2 inch mesh and at least 4 feet in height.
MRSj RU~ARCHER: I have already made arrangements for a fence
for my own protection.
THE CHAIRMAN: How large of a pool is it?
MRS.' RUTH ARCHER: 16 feet by 32 feet
THE CHAIRMAN: The main thing we are concerned with here
is the side yards. I think there should be a minimum of 10 ltd
from any property line.
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone present who wishes to speak
for this application?
(There was no response.)
Southold Town Boar~ of Appeals -1~ June 4, 1970
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone present who wishes to speak
~gainst this application?
(There was no response.)
After investigation a~d inspection the Board finds that the
applicantrequests permission to locate swimming pool (accessory
use) in front yard area° The applicant is the owner 'of a corner
lot. His Well is located in his northerlyback yard area~ thereby
making it impossible to loqatethe swimming pool in his northerly
side yard area. The Board/is of the opinion that the applicant
has a legal hardship due t~ the fact that he has a corner lot.
The Board feels that this ~ariance should be granted subject to
the conditions listed beloW.
The Board finds that ~trict application of the Ordinance
would produce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardshiP;
the hardship created is un~que~ and would notbe shared by all
properties alike in the immediate vicinityof this property
and in the same use district; and the variance will not change
the character of the neighborhood and will observe the spirit
of the Ordinance.
On motion by Mr. Gillispie~ seconded by Mr. Hulse, it was
RESOLVED Daniel & Ruth Archer~ Greenway East, Orientw New York
be GRANTED permission to locate swimming pool (accessory 6se) in
front yard area as applied for on property located at east side of
GreenwaYEast and north side of Parkview Lane~ Subdivision Map of
Green Acres, Lot ~ 31, Orient~ New York,. subject to the following
conditions:
1. The pool structure shall be located at least 10 feet
from any property line.
2. The pool structure shall be surrounded by a fence of
at least 4 feet in height with a minimum of 2 inch mesh and a
self locking gate.
Vote of the Board: Ayes:-- Messrs: Gillispie, Bergen, Hulse,
Grigoniso
PUBLIC P~%RING: Appeal No. 1344 - 9:00
upon application of Nina Stevens~ 241 East 78th Street~ New
York City~ New York 10021, for approval of access over private
right-of-way in accOrdance with the State of New York Town Law~
Section 280A. Location of property: private right-of-way located
off north side of Oregon Road~ Cutchogue, New York~ property
Southold Town Board f Appeals --lf June 49 1970
bounded north by L.I. Sound, east by J. Swiatocha, south by Oregon
Road, west by Jo Hannabury. Fee paid $5.00o
The Chairman opened the hearing by reading the application
for approval of access, legal notice of hearing, affidavit
attesting to its publication in the official neswpaper, and
notice to the applicant.
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone present who wishes to speak
for this application?
EDWARD STEVENS: Yes, I am appearing for the applicant, Nina
Stevens. I presume the Board has surveyed the situation.
MR~ BERGEN: Yes, the Board was down to look at it, there are
a few places that will have to be fixed°
THE CHAIRMAN: First of all, the entire right-of-way must be
widened to 15 feet, there are a couple of places there now that are
under 10 feet° It must be improved so that emergency vehicles can
enter. Actually the whole right-of-way should be improved with
bank run to the approval of the Building Inspector.
H~WARD TERRY, BUILDING INSPECTOR: Yes, that®s right and on the
S turn, at the northerly end, the trees should be taken out and the
curve eased.
EDWARD STEVENS: I wish to comply with all of your specifications
but I am going to have to wait untiltthe ~armer gets his potatoes out
of the ground.
THE CHAIRMAN: Well~ we are going to have to set a condition
that no Certificate of Occupancy shall be issued until the right-of-
way is improved to the approval of the Building Inspector.
EDWARD STEVENS: That will be satisfactory with me. If the
potatoes are not out by the time I am ready to move in, I will have
to make some sort of deal with the farmer.
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone else present who wishes to speak
for this application?
(There was no response.)
THE CHAIRMAn,: Is there anyone present who .wishes to speak
against this application?
(There was no response.)
Southold Town Board ~f Appeals -20- June 4, 1970
After ~investigation and inspection the Board finds that the
applicant requests permission for approval of access over private
right-of-way in accordance with the State of New York Town Law~,
Section 280A. The applicant proposes to construct new one family
dwelling and must have the approval of access over this private
right-of-way. The Board is agreeable to granting this approval
of access subject to the following donditions: This right-of-
way must be improved to the width of at least 15 feet, curve on
northerly end must be straightened out where the road bends
sharply to the east. The entire right-of-way must be improved
to the satisfaction of the Building Inspector before obtaining
a Certificate of Occupancy.
The Board finds that strict application of the Ordinance
would produce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship;
the hardship created is unique and would not be shared by all
properties alike in the immediate vicinity of this property
and in the same use district; and the variance will not change
the character of the neighborhood and will observe~the spirit
of the Ordinance°
On motion by Mr. Bergen, seconded by Mro Grigonis~ it was
RESOLVR~Nina Stevens, 241 East 78th Street, New York City,
New York 10021, be GRASITED approval of access over private right-
of-way in accordance with the State of New York Town Law~ Section
280A, as aPPlied for Dn private right-of-way located off north
side of Oregon Road, Cutchogue~ New York, subject to the following
conditions:
1o This right-of-way must be improved to the width of at
least 15 feet.
2o The curve on the northerly end of the right-of-way must
be straightened out where the road bends sharply to the east.
3. The entire right-of-way must be improved to the satisfaction
of .the Building Inspector before obtaining a Certificate of Occupancy°
Vote of the Board: Ayes:- Messrs: Gillispie~ Bergen,. Hulse~
Grigonis.
On motion by bLt. Gillsipie, seconded by'Mr. Hulse, it was
RESOLVED that the minutes of the Southold Town Board of
Appeals dated May 14~ 1970, be approved as submitted°
Vote of the Board: Ayes:- Messrs: Gillispie~ Bergen~ Hulse~
Grigonis.
Southold Town Boar )f Appeals -21 June 4~ 1970
On motion by Fir. Grigonis~ seconded by Fir. Bergen, it was
RESOLVED that the next ~9ular meeting of the Southold Town
Board of Appeals will be held at 7:30 P.'M., Thursday, July
at the Town Office, Main Road, $outhold~, New York.
Vote of the Board: Ayes:--Messrs: Gillispie.~ Bergen~ Hulse~
Grigonis.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:30
AP ' UvED
Respectfully submitted~
Southold Town Board of Appeals
Robert Wo Gillispie, Jr., Chairman