Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-11/14/2002 HEAR e SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS TRANSCRIPT OF HEARINGS HELD NOVEMBER 14, 2002 (Prepared by Jessica Boger) Present were: Chairman Gerard Goehringer Member Lydia Tortora Member George Horning Member Ruth Olivia (arrived 6:44 p.m.) Member Vincent Orlando Secretary Paula Quinrieri PUBLIC HEARINGS: 6:39 pm AppL No. 5223- DANIEL WEST. This is a request for a Variance under Section l00-244B,basedonthe Building Department's July 27, 2002 Notice of Disapproval, for permission to construct additions/alterations to an existing dwelling, part of which is located at less than l5' from the front property I ine facing a private right-of-way. 120 Private Road, 665 Goose Creek Lane, Southold; ParceJ 77-3-24. CHAIRMAN: Is there someone here for this meeting" Can you please come up, sir and slate)OlU name, use the mike. DAN WEST: I am Dan West. CHAIRMAN: How do you do? We are taking this down with a brand new system tonight, and we ask everybody to speak as c1early as possible. What would you like to tell us'! MR. \'lEST: I'm looking for a variance on a push-out addition. I'm surrounded byright-of-ways. I think you have a sUlVey. I'm looking to add on for a little room on a first floor for future use for my mother who's just had a hip replacement and also a knee replacement, and also I'm looking in the future for putting her on the first floor, and I have a bathroom adjacent to that future room, and my right-of-ways if I can make m~lf clear here. The one right- of-way is Goose Creek Lane. Everyone on that road, that's what they use for their front y.lI"d, but since I have another right-of-way on the side, I'm encroaching. I sent pictures. That right-of-way is being used bymy next door neighbors. They have a driveway on it and grass and lawn, which is fine, and they are all nice trees in between us, so I'm hoping that it's not going to be a deterrent at all. it's a one-storyaddit ion, and that's that. I have p]ans in case you want to see it. CHAIRMAN: 111 take a look at them for a second. Well go round about before the board. You don~ have an extra set that we can keep,do)Ou? I have no objection to your application. We1] go over to Mrs. Tortora. MEMBER TORTORA: I just want to get a few things on the record. You actual]yhave 3 right-of-ways, excuse me, 3 front }afds. The one in the rear}afd which is kind of porous back there, I was very hard pressed to find a road, and Goose Creek Lane, and then the side}afd which is also a right-of-way - what we call a paper right-of-way because there's no road there. MR. WEST: Right, exactly. MEMBER TORTORA: Also here we have a. I just want to put in the record that this construction is in what we would typically refer to as a side}afd, and that you would nOl be encroaching into the Goose Creek Lane, and in fact, from Goose Creek Lane, with the proposed addition, you still exceed the code required setback and have a setbackof41'. MR. WEST: Right. Thank you. e Page 2 - Public Hearing November 14, 2002 - Regular Meeting Southold Town Board of Appeals e CHAIRMAN: Thank you Mrs. Tortora. Mr. Orlando. MEMBER ORLANDO: Your neighbor uses thai as a driveway just because it's kind of on his property and nOI on yourproperty,becauseIsawilalsoandlwaskindofconfused. I drove up there, and I was like-this is not a road- this isa driveway. MR. WEST: II's always been a right-Of-way, obviously, supposedly. MEMBER ORLANDO: He just took the initiative because it's on his property, and ii's not on yours. Squatters rights on the right-of-way. And the Kennedyproperty's not vacant an}more obviously? MR. WEST: No. I have neighbors there. I don't have a right-of-way there though. MEMBER ORLANDO: No. I think the right-of-way is gone. No questions. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Homing. MEMBER HORNING: Do you know what percent)Cur lot coverage is righl now? MR. WEST: No, Idont but I could figure itup for you. MEMBER HORNING: There's no change in the lot coverage, correct? CHAIRMAN: The Notice of Disapproval say.; ] 5. Anything else George? MEMBER HORNING: No. CHAIRMAN: While you're standing, is there anyone in the audience who would like to speak for or against this application? Seeing no hands, I'll make a motion closing the hearing, reserving decision unti] later. PLEASE SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION 6:45 pm AppL No. 5213 ~ THOMAS VLAHOS. This is a request for a Variance under Section 1()(}..244B, based on the Building Department's August 20, 2002 NOlice of Disapproval, for pennission to construct a sewnd-floor addition to an existing dwelling over the rear portion which has a nonconforming location at less than 35' from the rear property line. 250 Sununit Drive, Cpt. Kidd Estates, Mattituck; Parcel ]06-2-9. CHAIRMAN: Good evening, sir, how are )Cu? Please state your name for the record. TQMVLAHOS: Hello. MynameisTomVlahos. CHAIRMAN: It is my understanding you want to do some renovations to yoW" house. MR. VLAHOS: Yes, sir. And the reason I want to do this iswe have two old ladies, one 9<l, one 96, they have nobody else but us. When they come out, they need a bedroom for themselves. We have 10 look out for them. I also have three grandchildren that like 10 visit me when they come around. If! have the space, they will come and visit me, otherwise it won~ be easy. But mostly it's for the old ladies because right now we split the time. My wife stay.; behind to look after them, and I come here. Thenlgothereandshecomeshere. it's very difficult. CHAIRMAN: So, they're aclually going to move in with you? MR. VLAHOS: Yes. Page - Hearing Nove_2002. Regular Meeting Southold Town Board of Appeals CHAIRMAN: Now, looking at the survey, your house is only I]' from the rear property line. MR. VLAHOS: from the rear property line, yes. CHAIRMAN: Well we'l start with Mr. Homing. Mr. Homing, any questions for Mr. Vlahos? MEMBER HORNING; Actually, this is the fellow I want to ask about the lot coverage. CHAIRMAN: Let's see what his Notice ofDiSllpproval says. No change. Well, really, I think, based upon thaI, I think it's a second s!oryaddition, and that's basically, I think a full second story . MEMBER ORLANDO: Sir, does your 200 story addition go beyond the original footprint afthe house. MR. VLAHOS: No. It just goes straight up. Right now the attic I have is 8' high the ceiling of the attic. Actually it will go like this instead of the way it is. It won' be 100 high. From the back it's a walk-in. That's the way the old ladies will come in. MEMBER ORLANDO: Those are young, 90, 96. MR. VLAHOS: They are young in heart really. CHAIRMAN: Anything else, Vince? MEMBER ORLANDO: That's it, I just wanted to see that there was zero change. CHAIRMAN: Mrs. Tortora? MEMBER TORTORA: No, actually when I went out on inspection, Mr. Vlahos and his wife were Vet)' kind and imited me in and I carne in and was able to see exactly what they propose. What it appears is they have a second story now that doesn't meet code because the roof comes down in a way that they don't have the required height. It also appears that the stairway doesn't meet code. They are really very limited on the upstairs space at this time. Mr. Vlahos and his wife indicated that they were going to go upstairs and put their young relatives downstairs. I'd also like to say that the encroachment in the rear yard, Mr. Vlahos indicated to me that it does not have a CO. He was nOI informed that he needed one. You correct me anytime I'm wrong, but I would like to note that the property meets the code as far as the setbacks on the side }al"ds, and it also far exceeds the code on the front yard setback and the addition would be in kind right over the existing foundation. That was my observations. CHAIRMAN: Mrs. Olivia. MEMBER OUVIA: I also went to see it, and I understand that you just want to really push those door windows up and make a second story there. I see that you would have no infringement on your neighbors, even with the I I' setback. MR. VLAHOS: I have good neighbors. MEMBER OLIVIA: It's nice to have young people with you. MR. VLAHOS: They look at me like I'm god sometimes, to go and get medication and drive them around, take them to church in the morning. It's fun, really, because they have nobody else, I'm the only one. I'm going to get the blessing, that's for sure. MEMBER OLIVIA: That's right. And hope that your children will be as good to you. MR VLAHOS: I hope so, it will be an example. e Page 4 - Public Hearing November 14, 2002 - Regular Meeting Southold Town Board of Appeals e CHAIRMAN: While you're standing there, m ask the question, is there anybody else in the audience who would like to speak for or against the application? Yes, ma'am, could you use the mike over here? Good evening. MS. PAULA GABLEMAN: I'm the house right behind the Vlahos's and I have no objection. Actually, we are all here, the neighbors to tell you we have no objection. CHAIRMAN: Anybody else like to speak? We thank you for corning in and sharing that with us. Ifthere's no other questions. I make a motion closing the hearing reserving dedsion until later. PLEASE SEE l'rUNUTES FOR RESOLUTION 6:50 pm AppL No. 5195- DIANEDIJNBAR. This is a request fora Variance under Section lQO-244B,basedon the Building Department's July 9, 2002 Notice of Disapproval, regarding proposed additions/alterations to an existing dwelling in a nonconfonning location at less than 35' from the front property line. 615 Dogwood Lane, East Marion; Parcel 37.1-1 I. DIANE DUNBAR: Hello. CHAIRMAN: What would you like to tell us? MS. DUNBAR: What we would like to do is convert a small two bedroom summer home into an all-year-round home because we are planning on moving out here permanently. We are proposing an extension 10 enlarge the kitchen and add a dining room. The setback problem 0CCUf8 because we wanl to change the breezeway into a den, enclose it permanently to a denfTV room, and convert the garage to a master bedroom. When the house was originally buill, dogwood Lane to the south here was a dead end. There were no other houses. Dogwood lane did not curve around, there were no other houses here. Nothing was ever supposed to be built here. When the two women that died owned that property whoever inherited it changed that. Then they put Dogwood Lane in. So, now I'm on a corner. That's the problem, I have two fronts. That's what they explained to me. CHAIRMAN: That's correct. MS. DUNBAR: That's why I need a variance. The garage and breezeway were already there. We just want to convert them. CHAIRMAN: The garage is already 18' 7". I don't have any objections to this application. Mrs. Olivia, any questions? MEMBER OLIVIA: No, we went out there and looked at it. Theydo have a problem with the two front yards that way, and everybody is so different down there. I see your neighbor has no objection either. I don't see any problem with it. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mrs. Tortora? MEMBER TORTORA: I have no objection. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Orlando'! MEMBER ORLANDO: I don't have any questions. But I'm glad)Ou cleared up what happened next door to you because I was looking at this when I was there, and I couldn't understand why the 18.7 was disapproved when it was already pre-existing. MS. DUNBAR: It was a dead.end. page" Hearing Nove_2002. Regular Meeting Southold Town Board of Appeals MEMBER ORLANDO: That's why. You just answered my question. MS. DUNBAR: There was a little path through the woods. That was it. MEMBER ORLANDO: No questions. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Homing. MEMBER HORNING: No questions. CHARIMAN: Anything else )'Ou'd like \0 add'! MS. DUNBAR: No, but I can give you letters from my neighbor. CHAIRMAN: Oh great, surely. ] know we have one. Is there an}'body who would like to speak fOf or against this application? Seeing no hands 1'1 make a motion closing the hearing reserving decision until later. PLEASE SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION 6:55 pm Appl No. 5201 - RORY KLINGE and CAROL RAND. This is a Variance under Sections IOD-242A and 100-244, based on the Building Department's July 24, 2002 Notice of Disapproval, for pennis:;ion to construct additions and alterations to an existing dwelling in a nonconforming setback,and less than 35' from the front lot line,lessthan 10'on a single side,and less than 25'forboth sidey.rrds. Location of Property. 420 Sterling Place, Greenport;ParceI34-3-17. RORY KLINGE: My name is Rory Klinge, my wife Carol could not be here tonight. CHAIRMAN: Who is this yoWlg lady'! MR. KLINGE: This is Meryl Kramer, ow- archite<:1. CHAIRMAN: She looks very familiar. I think the last time we saw her was on a Bay Shore Road issue. \\!hat would you like to tell us'! MR. KLINGE: We are looking to expand and renovate our home in Greenport. Our lot is a pre-existing non- contorrning lot - on one side there's less than a foot setback from our neighbors property. We are looking to add, put some additions to the house, and to renovate. My wife is due with her first baby and my 4'" child in January. One of the rooms we are looking to add on is a nursery onto the north side of the property, which would not have the required setbacks. We are looking for a variance on that. We are putting a second swrybathroom over an existing addition, which is also non-conforming. It would not increase the tootprint, or expand past the footprint of the lower first floor existing addition. We are also looking to add a second story over our kitchen which would become the master bedroom, that would also not increase the footprint of the house. Finally we are looking to put a screen porch in the back. Which would just be a screen porch, not enclosed. Also a mudroom that would be on the south side of the house by the driveway. I think that's Ihe one thai would have the proper setbacks. CHAIRMAN: I just have to tell you lhat this board has never granted a 9" variance. MR. KLINGE: That exists, we're looking for a foot and a Y,. Or 1.5'. MEMBER TORTORA: Your survey shows 7". MR. KLINGE: That's existing. e Page 6 . Public Hearing November 14, 2002 - Regular Meeting Southold To'Ml Board of Appeals e MEMBER TORTORA: You wanlto add 10 thai, right? MR. KLINGE: A second story above that. We want to add a bathroom. CHAIRMAN: For the whole distance of that? MR. KLINGE: A bathroom and a laundry room. MEMBER OUVIA: Do you have a survey, without a survey, it's very difficult to when you're talking about north, south-we have nothing thai indicates lhat. MERYL KRAMER: I have a survey that shows the existing 7" projection to which we want 10 add. MEMBER OUVIA: Do you have extra copies? MS. KRAMER: I know that some of you visited the site, I wanted to just bring some photographs for evel)body e1sejustlosee. CHAIRMAN: 111 look at it again. I just want to see that side )'3.rd. MS. KRAMER: The side yard is right here. The existing one story that we wanlto put on top of it. I just want to show you thai across the street, there is a similar construction. It was hard to get a photograph, but I just wanted to show the streetscapethat every house is very dose together, and Ihat tltis neighborhood is very smail lots. MEMBER ORLANDO: But you need another variance to build a second story with the setbacks. MEMBER TORTORA: Can we take - Paula, is there any shots because this really shows us what we need to know. This shows what is there and what's not there. CHAIRMAN: Because of the new system, I don't know if we should take Paula out of here. We can at least turn it onatabreakandcopyit. If that's alright with you. MEMBER TORTORA: \\!hen you amended this application, I saw the dimensions you originally put. When you amended the application, did you update those from the dimensions that you originally submitted with this application? MS. KRAMER: Yes. MEMBER TORTORA: \\!hat we have here, the 15xllx6, everything is identical, nothing has changed'! MS. KRAMER: Actually, the addilions that we amended from was not the 7" submitted. It was less. It was 1.5. CHAIRMAN: So the 7" is now 1.5? MS. KRAMER: No the 7" is this, and there's another one that's 1.5. MEMBER ORLANDO: A nev-' constnlction at ground level. MEMBER TORTORA: The porch Ihat sa~ 0.7 on the new site plan that you gave us. You want to put a 20;1 story addition over that. MR. KLINGE: That right now is not a porch, that's an addition. It's livable space. A bathroom and a part of a bedroom. MS. KRAMER: Frollllbe site plan, the proposed 20;1 floor addition- page" Hearing Nove_2002. Regular Meeting Soulhold Town Board of Appeals MEMBER TORTORA: Right, that's a bath now'! MR. KLINGE: That always was a bath. MEMBER TORTORA: Right in back oftha! you have a little tiny addition. Is that brand new construction? MS. KRAMER: That's a new construction. MEMBER TORTORA: And that new construction would have a 1.5' setback, is that correct'! MS. KRAMER: That's correct. MEMBER TORTORA: And then the :rld flOOT addition at it's closest point is 4.8'. MS. KRAMER: No, 5.1. MEMBER TORTORA: At it's closest point? It's 4.8'1 MS. KRAMER: No. It's4.8from-it's5.\ from the property line, 4.8 is just a projection of the_ MEMBER TORTORA: I took a good look at the neighborhood, and the houses are pretty close together there. didn~ see any houses that were 7" from the property line. It's very tight. The real question you have is it's a 50' wide lot. Even with the extensions that you are proposing, a 16'extension on a 50' lot going back that leaves you, even considering the driveway, you have room on the south side for an expansion with outgoing into that area on the north side. MS. KRAMER: Maybe I could show you the floor plan. In order to do that we would have to change the entire interior ofthe house. CHAIRMAN: Suddenly it's important, that's what we don't have. Why doesn~ everybody come over here, that wants to see it, and we11 pass it down. MS. KRAMER: This is the existing wing, it's 9", and upstairs you are doing the bathroom. This is the new 1.5 story addition. MEMBER OLIVIA: There's room over here, by the driveway, I agree with Mrs. Tortora. We drove around and there just aren~ any other houses that are that close, that it can~ be SV>'I.Il1g slightly to the south'! MS. KRAMER: Weill guess- CHAIRMAN: Let me just start with the nursery. The purpose of the nursery is that location is whar? MR. KLINGE: For our new baby. CHAIRMAN: I understand what the purpose of it is, but why in that location? MR. KLINGE: Because the bedroom's upstairs are pretty small. We looked around and tried to fit it in there. There'sjust nowhere upstairs to put it, and it didn~ really work into the dovvnstairs at all. I have two boys that have been in the same room since I've been in the house, and they're getting into their teens. they are terri torial. We wanted to give them each their separate room, as well as our bedroom upstairs. and then downstairs, there's just no- it just really didn't workout. The layout of the house didn~work out as it exists. There isa bedroom in that spot where the bathroom that's 9" away which was a bedroom, it just made the room between the kitchen and the living room just a big hallway. You just walk back and forth, there's nowhere to put any furniture in it. It's not a usable room. e Page 8 - Public Hearing November 14, 2002. Regular Meeting Southold Town Board of Appeals e MEMBER OLIVIA: May I ask you, do you have any sleeping quarters above your bam in the back? MR. KLINGE: No. Mywife has her office there. MEMBER OLIVIA: She has a home occupation. MR. KLINGE: She works in the city, and I built an office so she could work out there, and telecormnute. MEMBER OLIVIA: I noticed too, yow- line really runs through part of it. MR. KLINGE: My bam is really on my neighbors property, and my neighbors bam is on my property. MEMBER OLIVIA: The other garage on the south side is on your property. MR. KLINGE: Correct. MEMBER ORLANDO: There was a justification there somewhere right"! CHAIRMAN; Massive encroachment. MR. KLINGE: I believe that's all grandfathered in and okayed and all that. MEMBER OLIVIA; Do you have a CO for that bam? MR. KLINGE: There's a CO for the property. I don~ know if there's a specific CO for the bam. MEMBER OLIVIA: Bo::ause you made some additions to that to make an office up there. Are there bathroom facilities up there'! MR. KLINGE: Yes, there's a toilet up there. CHAIRMAN: Where do we go from here? We started with Mrs. Tortora, we can go to Mr. Orlando ifhe has any questions. MEMBER ORLANDO: No further questions. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Homing. MEMBER HORNING: I'd like to ask the applicant if they'd consider coming up with another plan if they oriented the house more centrally located in that 5O'plot ofpropertyoffsetting, instead of encroaching further on the one right-of-way or property line and offsetting it, shifting the construction over towards, closer to their driveway as they Olli. MR. KLINGE: Which part are you specifitallytalking ahout? MEMBER HORNING: The new construction. CHAIRMAN: Which would be the nursery, and any of the 2'" story SlUff. In order to do that you'd have to build a I'" story to support a 210:1 story. MR. KLINGE: Ifwewere to move it to the south side, that would be correct. MS. KRAMER: I'd like to point out the fact that there's some rationale for doing that, I'd like to show you some elevations. I'm looking at the 210:1 page. This is where the 9" encroaclunent is. In order to make a 2'" story addition, Page - Hearing Nove'-2002 - Regular Meeting Southold Town Board of Appeals all we are doing is raising the foofto make a cross gable, It's a very easy way of getting a bathroom upstairs. And the reason too, if you are looking al the rear of the house, this is the secon d story addition which is going to be creating lhemaster bathroom that's coming out the back,and again, it'sjust contin uing the existing roof structure. You're not having to create gables and crickets and all sorts of things. It's just a simple cOlltinuing of the gable out. MEMBER ORLANDO: So the master bedroom is on the ::...J floor. MS. KRAMER: Correct. MEMBER ORLANDO: But the nw-sery is on the 1" floor. MS. KRAMER: Correct, near the living space. They'll use the monitor because the other 2 boys. I guess there wasn~ enough room on the ground floor to pul::! new bedrooms for the 2 boys, it was easier to put the nursery on the 1" floor. MEMBER ORlANDO: Logistically, there'l be a lot of running around. MR. KLINGE: The house really is not that big. It's 1,400 sq. ft. at it exists right now. MS. KRAMER: J just wanted to point that out, for ease of construction, we're just continuing out that gable. Right now, the existing roof comes upto here, we're not even puning a full 2 story- MEMBER HORNING: But when you put that porch on there, you're only 3 feet from that line again. MEMBER ORLANDO: Couldn't you build to the back of the lot, and put the nursery on the 2<<1 floor and then the bathroom. MS. KRAMER: We're only adding one bathroom, it's not even a master, just a hall bath for all bedrooms. This is the existing bathroom, so we're moving the bathroom to there and making this the walkway into the new master bedroom. CHAIRMAN: It wouldn't do you any good to go out back anyway because of the way the house is skewed toward the property line. If the house was built totally perpendicular to- MEMBER TORTORA: The porch could. MEMBER HORNING: The porch could go over. What we are doing is trying to gain some space between the - in the case of the property owner who's going to be looking at this massive 2-story structure that wasn't there before, nght up on the property line. MR. KLINGE: We sent the letter, she sent back the receipt, she hasn't said anything. MEMBER ORLANDO: To build that 2'" stOl)' addition which is 9" off the property line, teclutically, theoretically, you'd be trespassing the building because you can't just fit in between there and there an d build up, even though there is a fence there. When you put in that perspective you see how tight it is. MR. KLINGE: Absolutely. We have good neighbors, all the neighbors. MEMBER ORLANDO: I'm just making a statement, noting how close it is. MR. KLINGE: We're just stuck with the building as it is, we're just trying to make it more livable for us. CHAIRMAN: Mrs. Olivia, I sidestepped you, you had some discussions in the beginning, is there something else you'd like to address? e Page 10 - Public Hearing November 14, 2002. Regular Meeting Southold Town Board of Appeals e MEMBER OLIVIA: No, I think he has addressed absolutely everything. CHAIRMAN: Are we leaving it at this point, or are we asking for any types of changes? MEMBER HORNING: He's spending a lot of money, and it's going to be there a long time, ifthere's any way to move the construction to the other side of the house. I'd like them to entertain thosetypesofideas. MR. KLINGE: What kind of setbacks would you approve? If you're saying to put the porch. MEMBER HORNING: The minimum is- MR. KLINGE: I know that, but if we were to go for a variance- MEMBER HORNING: 6' probably, something like thaI. We like to see as much as you can- MR. KLINGE: I understand that. MEMBER TORTORA: Right now, as it is, youve got a good 25' where you're proposing that screened in porch on the south side. MR. KLINGE: From the property line to the porch. MEMBER TORTORA: Yes. That's why it just doesn't make sense. MR. KLINGE: You still have the driveway there, you're limited. MEMBER TORTORA: It's 50' wide. Even if you figure l5'on the driveway, and you figure you're 10' off the property line. That leaves you enough to build exactly what you want to build. MR. KLINGE: Also without making it look too wacky. We're trying to stay within the lines of the house and make is sort oflook nice, and not have something jut this way and that way also. MEMBER OLIVIA: Just to interrupt, a lot of houses do come in a bit, and then go out this way. Instead of just going this way. And that looks perfectly fine, when other people have cut it back this way and then gone straight. I don't think it looks awkwllJd, and you get a bit more of side yard there because even to get emergency equipment in there you have to go all away around the back and go in your neighbors property, and god forbid, something would happen, a fire or anything like that. I think )'Ou'd have trouble with fire insurance too. CHAIRMAN: So basically we have two people that are asking for change ofwning On the board. Is there anybody else who would like to add to that'! MEMBER TORTORA: I think: I agree with George. I would like to see that. MEMBER HORNING: There's sufficient room to re-arrange things and have the applicant come up with a better plan. CHAIRMAN: Well, Ms. Kramer, that's the magic 3 votes. I guess you should sit down, see if you can do something else, and bring it into us, and we will entertain it, based upon the fact this coup Ie has a need-there's no question about it. There's nothing wrong with the plan, and there's nothing wrong with your drawings. The only problem we have is distance to the property line. MS. KRAMER: We went for the simplest solution, and it was economical. CHAIRMAN: How long is it going to take you to re-think, this is not a sarcastic statement. Page -iC Hearing Nove_2002 - Regular Meeting Southold Town Board of Appeals MS. KRAMER: I don't know, I'm in the middle of a few proje~ts right now. MEMBER TORTORA: We111eave it open, and when you decide let us know, we won't- MS. KRAMER: We'] come up with an alternative plan, and an alternative site plan. I don't know - you meet every 2w~ksright'! CHAIRMAN: Every.2 weeks, there's a special, and then we go every month. Right now, there are hearings only once a month. MS. KRAMER: Do we have to wait, like get on the list again. CHAIRMAN: Ifwe wait, youl! have to re-notice your neighbors. lfwe give you a specific date, }lJU do not have to re-notityyow-neighbors. MS. KRAMER: Why don't we pick a specific date, then. CHAIRMAN: A spedfic dale is January 16'h. MR. KLINGE: Her due date is the 27'h. We were looking to start back in September, so we would like to get it as soon aswe could. MEMBER HORNING: You might need and amended Notice of Disapproval. CHAIRMAN: Just have Damon in the Building Department re- MEMBER TORTORA: Yes. They are really good about that. CHAIRMAN: The only other thing is December 16"', or December l::!'h, rather. And we have a very crowded calendar. If you choose the I::!'", it will be the last hearing. So, bring coffee. Idon~meanthat sarcastically, it will be a late nighl. MR. KLINGE: Otherwise if you want to prepare for this special meeting that you have in 2 weeks. MEMBER TORTORA: We haven~ even made that firm yet. MR. KLINGE: Would that be possible in 2 weeks'! CHAIRMAN: We're not having it in 2 weeks, it would be next week. MR. KLINGE: Next week. CHAIRMAN: Two weeks is Thanksgiving. MEMBER HORNING: Time is going to run out - you're going to have this baby before you have this project. MR. KLINGE: Okay, well, if you could shoot for next week. If we could come up with a TOugh sketch by then. MS. KRAMER: As long as we don~ have to prepare all new elevations and plans and everything. If you would just accept a site plan tTom a sketch. MEMBER TORTORA: Like you did on the PC? MS. KRAMER: Yes. e Page 12 - Public Hearing November 14, 2002 - Regular Meeting Soulhold Town Board of Appeals e MEMBER TORTORA: You could just revise it. That would be acceptable to me. CHAIRMAN: Vince? MEMBER ORLANDO: That would be acceptable to me. CHAIRMAN: George? Okay, we'l throw it over to the special meeting, which we haven~ scheduled yet, but we'l say7:IS pm next Thursday. November 21'". Can we get it from you next Wednesday? MEMBER TORTORA: The problem is, when you hand us stuffup on the dais, We don~ have any opportunity to review it. The sooner you get us something in advance, the quicker it is for you. MEMBER ORLANDO: It's going to rain this weekend anyway, so you have nothing else to do. CHAIRMAN: m make a motion. 7:20 pm AppL No. 5210- DAVID3nd I AIJREI SMITH. This isa request for a Variance under Section 100- 30AJ, based on the Building Department's July26, 2002 Notice of Disapproval, for permission 10 construct additionslalterationsto an existing dwelling in a nonconfonning location a t less than 50' from the fi"ont]ot line. Location of Property: ]010 Bay Avenue, Mattituck; Parcel 143-3-17. CHAIRMAN: Good evening, could you state your name for the record please'! VICKI TOTH: Good evening, Chairman, my name is Vicki Toth. I'm here on behalf of David and Laurel Smith. They are applying fora variance fora front yard setback for their existing home. I have letters tTom the neighbors. I have some house plans, and I also have a few photos of area homes. If I could present those to you. CHAIRMAN: Sure. What would you like to telIus? MS. TOTH: The CUITent home was constructed brand new in 1963 by Mrs. Smith's Wlc1e, and has been in the family ever since. As you can see from the photo, it's a one-story existing home. It's a small house. They are a young family. They have 2 children. They would like to expand and have a 2'" story. As you can see by the elevation fi"om the building plan, the construction tbat they are requesting would not have a negative impact on the neighborhood, in fact it would probably enhance the neighborhood. The majority of the homes in the area are Vet)" c10se to the front. It would be nice ifbackin ]963 they would have thought to put the house back a little fwther because it's such a large lot, but nobody wanted to shovel that much snow. They are hoping that - the front porch is actual area that would be the request for the variance. MEMBER TORTORA: Do you have a copy? CHAIRMAN: Yes, I just sent it down. MS. TOTH: I was able to obtain surveys from the surrOWlding homes on the same side of the street,just so you could see the current setback. You can see that the house 2 doors down ftomthe subjeclS,theyhave added a huge 2 story addition to the rear of their home. CHAIRMAN: That's Mr. Griffin's house. MS. TOTH: Yes, that's correct. CHAIRMAN: 111 start with Mrs. Olivia. MEMBER OLIVIA: Yes. Looking at your setback which is proposed 34'. And looking at the other homes in the area, and looking at what you gave us, they are 40' and better back tTom the road. It is this board's opinion, I think, Page -iC Hearing Nove_~002 - Regular Meeting Southold Town Board of Appeals not to have all these homes set either closer to the road, because then somebody else is going to come in and they're going to get 10 be 34', and then somebody else is going to want to be 25', And you certainly have plenty of eo em on the rear of the property. You can build your 2-storyhouse, and build any kind ofa porch orde<:k on the r ear of the house instead of on the front. MS. lOTH: As you can see from the photo, they wanted 10 be able 10 build cantilever in the front because they would really like to have a tTont porch on their home, and it would be very hard to do the second story addition with a cantilever intbe front without a porch. Itjustwouldn~lookcorrect. MEMBER TORTORA: But yOll could do the 2nd story addition without the cantilever. MS. lOTH: Right. Bullooking at the existing structure that is there, it would not cosmetically be very appealing to the owners of the home to do just a flat straightITont home. And you can see most of the houses In the area, they all have front porches on them. MEMBER TORTORA: Yes, they do. But let's the record really clear here. YOUT existing setback is 4] .7'. And by your own calculations which are pretty much what] came up with when I looked there, a1] ofthe houses on the same side of the street in the neighborhood, have the same setbacks. 41,45,49. But what you're proposing to do, is you're proposing to come into a ITont yard at 34',which would be closer to the road then any Of)oOUT other neighbors. This is a heavily trafficked road. It's a road that has a sidewalk on it, and as Member Olivia said, these are large lots. They are not small lots. You have plenty of room in the back to have additions, with no variances, period, in the back. I have no objections, this is me, I'm not speaking for the board. I personally have no objections to you going up a 2nd story to gain more room over the existing front back - foundation. But I don' see that it's justified to establish a new front yard at 34' on a heavily trafficked road when by}UUT own calculations. everyone else on the road is setback at least 41'. That's my opinion. MS. TOTH: You're right, the c]osest house there is 41.8. It would end up being just less than 5'. Theownersofthe home would really like, ultimate]y in the perfect world, ifit was feasible, theywou]d love to move the house further back, pare dovm what's there and build a new one. But monetarily, that's just impossible for them, financially, that's just not feasible. They real]y like a front porch. We asked for a maximum 01'7', we could cut it back to 6', even 5', if that wou]d be acceptab]eto this board. Iknowmyself,lhaveafrontporch,and I like having a front porch on my house. Cosmetically it looks nice, it will increase propeny values for everybody in the neighborhood including the subjecthome,andyouarecorrect,thereisa sidewalk in that area, and there's a]so grass before}Uu get to the street. They are aware of the traffic on that road. There's not a problem with that. None of their neighbors have any objection whatsoever. ] have submitted to the board 6 letters from all the neighbors, they are all in favor of what they are trying to do. They all ab'Tee it will enhance the area along with their property values also. It's just the only way to do this to make it]ook correct when they put the 2nd story on inst eadofjustendingupwithabox. CHAIRMAN: Mr.Or]ando. MEMBER ORLANDO: Yes I do know all the neighbors do have porches, one is enclosed, but they all have porches. This is one of the closest house, I personally, in my opinion, I would like to see the 5'. I wouldn' have a prob]em with that if you could CUI it back. MS. TOTH: Okay. Thank you. MEMBER HORNING: I have no questions. CHAIRMAN: I have no problems with the 5' either. Thank you, we'l see what happens throughout the hearing. We hope to have a decision for you short]y. Is there anybody else who wou]d like to speak for or against this hearing'? Seeingnohands,lmakeamotionclosingthehearingreservingdecisionunti]later. PLEASE SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION e Page 14. Public Hearing November 14, 2002. Regular Meeting Southold Town Board of Appeals e 7:30 pm AppL No. 5207. GARY & JOANNA CAMPO. This a request for a Variance under Section lOO-30A.4, based on the Bui]ding Department's July 23, 2002 Notice of Disapproval, for pennission to construct an ac~ssory garage in an area other than the required rear )"<lTd. Location of Property; 650 TI1ree Waters Lane, Orient; Parcel 15- 6-24. CHAIRMAN: Good evening please state your name for the record. GARY CAMPO; Good evening, I'm Gary Campo, my wife Joanna. CHAIRMAN: We had a variance with)'Ou before. This is a new house, right? And Larry Liso built this house. And now you want to put a garage on the side )"<lTd. Only because you don't have a rear yard to build a garage. MR. CAMPO: Cesspool and everything is in the way. CHAIRMAN: I was out to see yourpropetty, and I understand)'Our situation, We'll go on to Mr. Homing. MEMBER HORNING: I1I pass for a second. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Or]ando'? MEMBER ORLANDO; It's comp]etely in the side )"<lTd. Could we come up with a compromise, and gel some of it in the backyard'? I know)'Ouhave the c]othesiine right behind it. MR. CAMPO; I could move the clothesline. MEMBER ORLANDO: You also have the shed. MR. CAMPO; The shed's even with the cesspool. MEMBER TORTORA: Right in front of it. MR. CAMPO: ] could do whatever you want. MEMBER ORLANDO: If you could do ]0', that would personally- MR. CAMPO: So you want me to move it back 10"1 CHAIRMAN: It would be 62.S' then right'l Want to make in an even 63'1 MR. CAMPO: The front of the garage be 63' from the street. How do we do that, re-app]y to the Building Department for a building pennit to see if it's approved? CHAIRMAN: We are stiU going down the line. MEMBER ORLANDO: You wouldn' have to re-applybecause it would still be in the side yard. It would just be less in the side )"<ITd, so you wouldn't have to re-app]y. We would just be tweaking it a Iitt]e bit. CHAIRMAN: This is a 2-story garage. What's going on upstairs'? MR. CAMPO; .Nothing right now. But to be honest with )QU, in the future, I might have to have someone come in to help me with my son. He's getting older, and he's confmed to a wheelchair, and he's going to stay with us, and he's getting heavier. Page -iC Hearing Nove_ 2002 - Regular Meeting Southold Town Board of Appeals CHAIRMAN: We don~ actually allow any habitability in an accessory structure. We just want you to be aware of that-anydecisionfromthisboardwouldrestrictlhistobeonlyforstoragepurposes. MR. CAMPO: Okay. That's what well do then. CHAIRMAN: Mrs. Tortora? MEMBER TORTORA: I just kind of wondered why, you know looking at the property, you didn~ think about bringing the garage closer to the house, hecause it's a pretty tall structure. MR. CAMPO: We wanted to have the area in between the house and lhe garage for him to be able to play in, so we could observe him tTom the house, or rrom the garage. MEMBER TORTORA: I saw thaI, and [ saw the ramps, and I thought, well why don~ they- MR. CAMPO: !fwe brought the garage closer, there's not going to be any room for him to play. MEMBER TORTORA: ]fyou had an attached garage, you may really want to think abouttrus, you know if you want to think in the future about room for him, and you incorporated the house and the garage somehow, it would a1] be okay because it would all be part of the principal building. It's really something to think about. In other words, if the house were attached to the garage, and il becomes paTt of the ptincipal building ,you could crealeroom for your son, and you wouldn~ have to have - I mean it would be pennitted. I'mjust, you may want to go back to the Building Department 10 talk about your long-range plans, because we could consider this variance, but it's not going to help out what you're talking about. And if you're going to build there, you're stuck. It's a thought. If you want us to hold off on making a decision on this, we will. If you really, because there's no way we could grant you pennission to- CHAIRMAN: Between now and next Wednesday, think about it, and if there's any change in your mind, we'l discuss it next Thursday. MEMBER TORTORA: Whydon~ wejust leave this hearing open, and if you have some second thoughts about it, as] say, you may want to talk to the Building Department. Say, look in the long run this is what we'd like to do. How can we do this"! MR. CAMPO: There's a neighbor of ours who has a garage who rents it out upstairs. MEMBER TORTORA: You don't tell us that. MEMBER ORLANDO: And that address was'! MEMBER TORTORA: I would think they would take some time with this. I'm only suggesting that because- CHAIRMAN: Even more importantly to lock you in. If you want to move the garage a little closer to the house, MR. CAMPO: How close" MEMBER OLIVIA: How much space do you have"? CHAIRMAN: It's not shoy,T1 on the- MEMBER TORTORA: Here's your garage over here, but say you did this, or you did this as Geny said, and moved them closer together, later on it would still be part of your, you wouldn~ need any variances. MRS, CAMPO: We'l go down and talk to the Building Department. e Page 16 - Public Hearing November 14, 2002 - Regular Meeting Southold Town Board of Appeals e MEMBER OLIVIA: They'll give you some ideas. MR. CAMPO: So, we'l re-schedu]e for the next meeting"? CHAIRMAN: You're not really re-scheduled, we're going to close the hearing next Thursday. Just let us know by letter, by next Wednesday, if you're going with Mr. Orlando's suggestion at 63' - that's fine with us. We're just telling you about planning, that's it. MR, CAMPO: We appreciate it. Thank you. CHAIRMAN: Any questions? Anybody else like to speak for or against this application? Seeing no hands, m make a motion recessing it to next, I'm sony, closing the hearing for verbatim testimony, and closing as a matter of right, next Thursday. MEMBER TORTORA: We could leave the whole thing open in case they- CHAIRMAN: Okay, we111eave it open for next Thursday. MEMBER TORTORA: We11 recess it until November 2]"' at 7 pm. MEMBER ORLANDO: We're going to leave the hearing open in case you want to change your mind. CHAIRMAN: We11 make it 7:20. MR. CAMPO: Thank you. 7:37 pm AppL No. 5198 - SUSAN I.AGIJARDlA. This is a request for a Variance under Section 100-31ft.. based on the Building Department's May ]4,2002 Notice ofDisapprovai, denying "as built" alterations to an e,usting two- story accessory building, for the reason that such alterations are not permitted as designed for a second dwelling use on the property. Location of Property: 2950 Camp Mineola Road, Mattituck; 123-5-5. CHAIRMAN: I'm going to suggest we postpone this to February 20, 2003. MEMBER TORTORA: Re-scheduled to February 20, 2003. 7:38 pm AppL No. 5203_RONAI.D and D1ANF FKSTF.R, This is a request fora Variance under Sections 100- 242Aand 100-2448, based on the Bui]ding Department's March 1,2002 Notice of Disapproval, forpennission to locate a deck addition at less than 35' from the front property line. Location of Property: 1700 Main Street, New Suffolk;Parcel]17-9-23 CHAIRMAN: Good evening, could you state your names for the record'! DIANE EKSTER: Diane Ehter, and this is my husband, Ron. CHAIRMAN: You have a vcf)' nice house in New Suffolk. And you want to put a front porch on, RON EKSTER: A little bit bigger one. CHAIRMAN: And that is going to go to - how close to the property line, 24? MEMBER TORTORA: I think it's 24. CHAIRMAN: And the purpose of the front porch is? Page -iC Hearing Nove_ 2002 - Regular Meeting Southold Town Board of Appeals MRS. ElCSTER: To have it a little bit bigger so we can put some chairs out there. MR. EKSTER; 1 have one chair, and you can~ open the door. CHAIRMAN: I'm just looking for the survey. As you know New Suffolk is a relatively small lot-ed area, and we do have alot of houses, and in the front- in}Ourcase you have two front yards, but they have re1atively small setbacks to the property line, in lieu oftha! situation, I don't have a particular problem. We1l start with Mrs. Olivia. MEMBER OLIVIA: An)Way you can take offa little hit less, because again, you're going to be forward from some of the other properties in the neighborhood. MRS. EKSTER: There's pictures in there that maybe you should have, that show you, we're the furthest in. CHAIRMAN: Do you have any idea how close that house across the street on the comer is? MRS EKSTER: Directly across? CHAIRMAN: Yes, The little one, Is there a little one across from you? MRS. EKSTER: There's a ranch across up on a hill on cement, and there's one to the right of us, and then we have, Bennynexl door on Ihis side- MEMBER TORTORA: Can I say something? I had the lovely occasion to meet this gentleman and his dog. I'm just lucky you were home otherwise this is an inspection I would have readily passed up. This is what I ob~ed, the porch is rotting. The setback on the west side of the house for the principle structure, not a porch, not an addition, more than half ofthat building is close to the road than this applicant. Opposite the 2nd street, the house on the east side, not a porch addition, but the principle structure is also forward of it. So- CHAIRMAN: Do you know how far forward? MEMBER TORTORA: At least 10'. Ifnot more, and that's - you know - I could go back and measure and give you exact. But that's what I looked at. I looked at the existing setback of the other neighbors, and conc1udedpreny readily that even with the addition that he's proposing, that the additio nisstiJlgoingtobefurtherbackthanhis inunediate neighbors to the east and west. That's just my observations. CHAIRMAN: That's what I concur with, I agree with you. Mr. Orlando. MEMBER ORLANDO: I'mjust trying to clear up the Notice of Disapproval. I believe it's an error because it slates that your setback now is 32' and your new setback will be 24'. That states that you're making it 8' larger than it is now,andthepieturesdon~shov.,that. You're going to add on 4',but they are saying you are 32'from your porch now to the street and you're reducing it down to 24'. According to this you're making the porch 16' from width, according to this. That's wby I'm saying the disapproval is wrong. MR. EKSTER: No. What we are doing is- MEMBER ORLANDO: You're tacking on 4' from the existing porch, approximately. MEMBER TORTORA: The Building Department is measuring from the principal structure btX:ause their existing porch is 28',and that's not calculated. MEMBER ORLANDO: The original is exempt from that. The Building Department's measuring 32' from the principle structure-so 8 from 32. e Page 18. Public Hearing November 14, 2002. Regular Meeting Southold Town Board of Appeals e MEMBER ORLANDO: The new addition, well actually, you're going to remove the old one, and start over, is going to be 8xl~. So then the math does work. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Homing? MEMBER HORNING: I have no questions. CHAIRMAN: We thank you, please don~ leave until we close this hearing. We are going to find out ifan)Une else wants to speak. We hope to have a decision for you by next week, and we thank you for coming in. MR. EKSTER: Thank )UU, CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone who wants to speak for or against the application? Seeing no hands I'll make a motion closing the hearing reserving decision until later. PLEASE SEE MINUTES FOR APPLICA nON 7:45 pm AppL No, 5206 - PATRICIA GARABRANT. Proposed Accessory Bed and Breakfast use incidental to the applicant-owner's residence in the existing dwelling, located at 9625 Main Road, East Marion; Parcel 31-3-2 I. Applicant proposes lodging for up to four (4) guests and a maximwn of two (2) guest B&B rooms, with serving of breakfast to the applicant's guests under the Bed & Breakfast. LYNNA TKINSON LOVELESS, ESQ: I'm Lynn Atkinson Loveless, representing Patricia Garabrant, property owner. CHAIRMAN: This is a B&B, 2 bedrooms, is thai correerl MS. LOVELESS: Yes. CHAIRMAN: What would you like to tell us'! Why would you like a B&B? PAT GARABRANT: I have a beautiful house and want to show it off. CHAIRMAN: That's a good reason. We noticed in your survey you have written in the parking area to the rear of the house. It's very important on main state highway, no question about it. These 2 bedrooms are upstairs. MS. LOVELESS: Yes they are. CHAIRMAN: By the nature of this application, which is a special permit, in your own mind, do you see anything that would affect either the neighbors or cause a blight to the conununity, would disrupt any functions of anybody in the inunediate area with us granting you a B&B. I just have to ask)Uu these questions. MS. GARABRANT: I don~ see any problems with it btX:ause I have a pretty busy area there, and I'm a pretty quiet person, I don't see any problems. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Horning, any questions for this ladyl MEMBER HORNING; No. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Orlando. MEMBER ORLANDO: Have you ever run a B&B before, or 3Il)1hing similar to this? Page -iC Hearing Nove_2002 - Regular Meeting Southold Town Board of Appeals MS. GARABRANT: No, but I raised 4 children and entertained quite a bit, and I'm a very good cook. MEMBER ORLANDO: So you don't have a problem with strangers walking in or anything? MS. GARABRANT: No I don't. MEMBERQRLANDO: Youhaw2frontdoofs. MS. GARABRANT: I have::' side entrances. MEMBER ORLANDO: Which would be the main entrance for the guests? MS. GARABRANT: The main entrance would probably be the front entrance. MEMBER ORLANDO: Closest to the road. MS. GARABRANT: It doesn't matter, they can come in either, bu111! use the front entrance because that's the main entrance to the parlor. MEMBER ORLANDO: Doesn't the walkway- MS. GARABRANT: J have a walkway. MEMBER ORLANDO: Doesn't that lead to the other door? MS. GARABRANT: It lead, to both doors. It also leads from the driveway. And in the back, I don't know if you were at the house, but in the back,the back door is right by there. Itisfencedinwithalinlepatio. MEMBER ORLANDO: You don't have a designated entrance. MS. GARABRANT: No, they can use any entrance they like. MEMBER ORLANDO: No other questions. CHAIRMAN: Mrs. Tortora'! MEMBER TORTORA: I did go to the house, I didn't have the pleasure of coming in the house. It is a beautiful old house. I've got a couple of questions. 1t's a main road, and I see you have a drawing for parking for 4 cars. The 4 cars, you know, that you have parking for, the most important thing here is that they are not backing out into the main road. I really would like you to think about and submit to us, it's no big deal. Submit a plan to show that those cars can come in and out, so they are not backing out to the main road. I went in, and quite tTankly, there's no area indicated now, that I could get out of there without either going over yow lawn, running into a tree. The one thing I'm concemed with is cars backing out, and there appeared to be one tree that- MS. GARABRANT: By the way it's set up now, it would be confusing. But what I plan on doing is, where that tree is to the back ofthe house, there's plenty of room there for more than 4 cars. MEMBER TORTORA: There's room but- MS. GARABRANT: You're looking at the "az-d, but it's going to be cut offliu1her, So that you can fit in between the tree and the fence. MEMBER OLiVIA: You can make an "L" shape. MS. GARABRANT: You could back out and be facing fOl"\vard. e Page 20 - Public Hearing November 14, 2002 - Regular Meeting Southold Town Board of Appeals e MEMBER TORTORA: Could you draw if! MEMBER ORLANDO: Because I had to back out as well when I wenL MS. GARABRANT: People think that's pan of the "az-d because I don't have any ties anymore. They all rotted. I'm putting ties and crushed stone so you would be able to pull forward, then you could just back out and be right down the driveway, facing forward on main road. MEMBER TORTORA: That's very important, and let me tell you right now, it would also be a condition of our approval. Next question I have, I did not go in the house, I just was curious as to, because I know the Building Inspectors will check you for the windows and the egress and the smoke detectors, and everything else. You get one stairway leading up,isit ananow stairway? MS. GARABRANT: I don't know what you mean by a narrow staircase. Can two people go up it abreast? MEMBER TORTORA: I mean is it 28" wide? MS. GARABRANT: I don't know. 28-30. MEMBER TORTORA: Is it? Okay. It will be up to the Building Inspectors, and what we usually do is we approve it subject to them reviewing all the interior things. The parking was the big thing. les a lovely place. MS. GARABRANT: It's going to be nicer. CHAIRMAN: Mrs. Olivia? MEMBER OLIVIA: It is a lovely house. I live in Orient. And I did want just to know, what are your ceiling heights upstairs, are they the regulation size? MS. GARABRANT: 9'. One of the side - the side facing the house, on the other side, the ceilings are slanted in areas. MEMBER OLIVIA: But you can stand? MS. GARABRANT: Oh,)es you could stand. One is 9 and one is 8. MEMBER OLIVIA: You,l have no objections if we require rope ladders or steel ladders to get out of the 2nd floor windows. And I'm sure they'll check it to make sure the windows are wide enough for someone to get out. MS. LOVELESS: So, in other words, the one other thing you want before)Uu could render a decision would be a parking plan? MEMBER TORTORA: A parking plan so we could include that in the record, showing that there are not going to be any cars backing out on that road. MS. LOVELESS: A sketch with measurements, foot measurements. MEMBER TORTORA: You don't have to be architects to do this,just figure it out, size. We like that the cars come aroWld as opposed to backing up. MS. GARABRANT: We do have the room there. MS. LOVELESS: Then a decision would come a week or so after that"! Page -iC Hearing Nove_ 2002 - Regular Meeting Southold Town Board of Appeals MEMBER TORTORA: You will give us that information by next Wednesday, okay! MS. LOVELESS: Just turning it into the office here? MEMBER TORTORA: That's fine. CHAIRMAN: Please don~ leave W1til this hearing is over. Is there anybody else who'd like 10 speak. Would you slate your name for ther<x:ord please? LOIS AGABROAD: My name is Lois Agabroad. I have a house directly across the street. Pat does have a beautiful house, beautifully maintained. My only queslions, you already addressed the parking issue, because I was hoping there wouldn't be parking on the main road, The other issue is signage. is there going to be a sign, what's the lighting on the sign? CHAlRMAN: We really don't deal with signs on any residential property, okay! I believe the sign cannot exceed:! sq. ft. on a B&B. It almost and should conform very similar to a name sign, MEMBER TORTORA: It cannot be internally lit. That's all in code. MS. AGABROAD: There's several B&B's there now, and they've all had pretty subdued lighting, and I didn' know ifthere was any regulation on that. MEMBER TORTORA: Yes there is. MS. AGABROAD: Thank you. CHAIRMAN; ]s there anyone else who would like to speak'! Seeing no hands 111 make a motion closing this hearing reserving decision unli]]ater. PLEASE SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION 7:55 pm Appl. No. 5205 - FRANK AND CAM]LLE PIROZZI. This is a request for a Variance under Sections] 00- 244B, based on the Building Department's July 23, 2002 Notice ofDisapprovaI, for proposed additions/alterations to existing dwelling which will be less than 35' from the front lot line. Location of Property: ]090 Bayview Drive, East Marion; Parcel 37-5-9. CHAIRMAN: What would you like to tell us"! FRANK PIROZZI: I'm adding a playroom and game room I have my b'Tandchi]dren most of the sununer, and I want to create a room for them in bad weather. CHAIRMAN; It's going to put you approximately 35' from the front property line on Bayview Drive. MR. PIROZZI: Yes, that's right, CHAIRMAN: You actually have 2 rather good sized lots. I mean the house sits on:2 good size lots in reference to manyofthepropertiesinthissubdhisionwhichareonsmallerparcels.It'slot]8& 19 in the original subdivision, MR. PIROZZI: I think you notice though, there's no room on either side to put an addition on. And no room in the backaswe]1. The on]yroom to put anything is in the fronl. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Homing, any questions for this gentlemen"! e Page 22 - Public Hearing November 14, 2002 - Regular Meeting Southold Town Board of Appeals e MEMBER HORNING: Did you consider ap]an that you wouldn' need a variance? MR. PIROZZI:,lfI made the room any narrower, I'd end up with a room only about ]O'wide. II really would not work. I think if you look at the design, I'm Ir}illg to make the house "L" shaped so it has some appeal to it rather than destroy the whole house. MEMBER ORLANDO: I personally don' have a problem with it. You're looking for a 5' variance. MR. PIROZZI: There are houses in the neighborhood that are even closer to- MEMBER ORLANDO: You're on a comer ]ot kind of, you know, you have:2 front yards, angled otrlo the sides. think you're fine. YOll have to find a new place for yo\ll" boat then. MR. PIROZZI; You noticed that. It's only there because the driveway's ne.\', I'm waiting for illo setlle, then I'm going to put it back on the driveway. MEMBER ORLANDO: No other questions. MEMBER TORTORA: YOllhavekindofapie-shaped]otwith:2 front yards, MR. PIROZZI: It's kind oflike a football. It's an odd shaped lot. CHAIRMAN: Mrs. Olivia? MEMBER OLIVIA: I dnn' have any questions because aI] of the lots in that area are skewered one way or another. CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone who would like to speak for or against this application. Seeing no hands, m make a motiondosingthehearing,reservingdecisionuntil]ater, PLEASE SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION 7:57 pm AppL No, 5196 - MARC RUBENSTEIN AND PATRICIA PIERCK This is a request for Variances under Sections lOO-:243A, I(X)-Z42A, and 100-244, based on the Building Department's July 5, 2002 Notice of Disapprova],forpermissionto conslructadditions and alterations to an existing dw elling and two accessory nonconfonning guest cottages which increases the degree of nonconformance, and which is proposed at less than 55' from the front lot line. Location of Property: Madeline Avenue, Fishers Is]and; Parcel 6-7-7. CHAIRMAN: I need }'Ou to state your name for the record. BARBARA HAM, ESQ: I have some memos. My name is Barbara Ham ofMatlews and Ham, 45 Hampton Road in Southampton, NY. With me is Patricia Pierce, Dr, Pierce and her husband, Marc Rubenstein have applied for a building permit, and two areas came up that they need a variance on. One is the extension ofa deck, which faces Madeline Avenue and is only 17' from the front ofthe road. The other is 10 put an addition on an existing guest cottage. I don' know if you've had a chance to look at the plans belbre this, but- CHAIRMAN: We did look at the plans, but we don~ have any visual idea of what these buildings look like. MS, HAM: ]n your packet, I believe there's some drawing of what they will look like. MEMBER ORLANDO: The porch facing Madeline, that one porch is pre-existing. MS. HAM; Yes the one porch is pre-existing. The part that was declined by the Bui]ding Department is an extension of7' onto that porch. In other words it would still be the same ] 7' as exists. May I bring this up to you? Page -iC Hearing Nove_ 2002 - Regular Meeting Southold Town Board of Appeals CHAIRMAN: Sure. MS. HAM: These lines are the existing structures. The proposal is to add 7' onto the porch area. That would be the deck. Ibave,in}'OUTpackets,I thinkthere's3,4orS houses on Madeline Avenue, I think 300' that are built just as c1ose_ This would be an extension of70' here. The owners propose to incorporate this existing guest cottage into the main house. That's one less structure that would be there. The second part that was declined by the Building Department is this proposed addition to the existing guest cottage. The proposed addition was 58' for a bathroom, which I'm going to draw this here. The bulk of it is storage space. It does nOI have an entrance to the living space. This would be storage, and a porch would be covered. This studio would stay, and about 19981his studio was reducedinsi~eby2I3rd'svoluntarilybytheownersoftheproperty. MEMBER TORTORA: What t)pe of studio? MRS. PIERCE: Not for us, but it was a painter's studio. My husband uses it to practice guitar. MEMBER TORTORA: It's not the area that's been disapproved. It's the use. MS. HAM:: That's right. But it's a pre-existing conforming use. MEMBER TORTORA: So it's an expansion of a pre-existing conforming use. CHAIRMAN: You're not expanding, you're just adding to it. MS. HAM: It is an expansion of 58. CHAIRMAN: You're not adding anything to the studio. MS. HAM: In fact the studio was diminished. The studio was 3 times. They are inco'l'Orating 4 structures into 2. CHAIRMAN: Could that be enlarged'! This is the extension that you're looking at. This is the open portion of it that you're referring to. MEMBER TORTORA: What do you have in the guest cottage right now? Do}Ou have a kitchen, bathroom"! MRS. PIERCE: I have a bathroom, full bath with a shower. MEMBER TORTORA: What do you use it for? MRS. PIERCE: The cottage is not winterized. MEMBER TORTORA: Could you go back there and put that into the record, and]et me just get that into the record one more time, MS. HAM: The existing guest cottage which would be connected to the studio by the porch is not winterized. The o",mersandapp]icantsagreetomaintainitasnotwinterized. MEMBER TORTORA: Is there a kitchen in the guest cottage'! MS. PIERCE: No there is not a kitchen in the guest con age. MEMBER TORTORA: Vlhat is the purpose of the cottage, what is it used for'! MRS. PIERCE: It's for overflow housing in the summer. e Page 24 - Public Hearing November 14, 2002 - Regular Meeting Southold Town Board of Appeals e MEMBER TORTORA: For guests'! MRS. PIERCE: It's usual]your kids. MEMBER TORTORA: That's what 1 wanted to know. CHAIRMAN: Assuming the board grants this application, when we do come over in August, we do like to look at some of these so we might - when you know everyone is coming over, we might just casually stop injust to take a ]ookatit. MEMBER TORTORA: Are}Ou suggesting we'd be overflow? CHAIRMAN: We'd be new-flow. Just so you're aware of that because it gets us the idea of what we granted and so on and so forth. MEMBER ORLANDO: Nothing special, just finger sandwiches. CHAIRMAN: Thank you for that presentation. It makes it much easier. Any questions from an)'body regarding that? Ladies and gentlemen. An)'body in the audience like to speak for or against this application. This is a Fisher's Island application. MS. HAM: May I add something'! CHA]RMAN: Sure. MS. HAM: The lot coverage would be well WIder the 20% allowed. It would still be aboul6% of the lot coverage with all the proposed additions. CHA]RMAN: Wonderful. Hearing no further comment, 11] close the hearing reserving decision. PLEASE SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION 8:06 pm AppL No. 5197- AI EXANDERD. WALKER m. This is a request fora VarianceunderSecrion ]00- 244, based on the Bui]ding Department's Ju]y 8, 2002 NOlice of Disapproval, for proposed additions/alterations to an existing dwelling at less thai 55' from the rear lot line. Location of Property: Mansion Drive, Fishers Is]and; Parcel 1000-6-6-16&] 7 (combined as one lot). BARBARA HAM, ESQ: This is another Fisher's Island property. The Walkers are proposing an addition over the footprint over an existing deck. They bought the house with a rear yard setback issue. They would like 10 close it off in order 10 use it as living space. CHAIRMAN: Is this encompassing both lots that are shown on the tax map? MS. HAM: I'd have to check it. CHAIRMAN: It says lot 16&17. MS. HAM: Yes,that'scorrect. CHAlRMAN: But it appears it's used really as one lot, is that correct'! MS. HAM: Yes. The lot size is ,88 acres, and that's the 2 of them. This would be the addition. They would like to use it as a study. Page -ie Hearing NoverW 2002 - Regular Meeting Southold Town Board of Appeals MEMBER OLIVIA: That was part of the deck'! MS, HAM: They have a deck there that came with the house when they bought it years ago. They are also pUlting a 2005101)'00 CHAIRMAN: Just say it again quickly. MS. HAM: The applicants are also planning a::led floor, but that isn~ part of the variance. The existing deck floor would be used as the foundation to an addition \vhich would be a study. CHAIRMAN: Thai's what throws it off on the rear yard. MS. HAM: That's correct. CHAIRMAN; Again, because of the way the house is skewed, okay. AnyqucSlions of Mrs. Ham regarding this? MEMBER ORLANDO; One quick question,. can~ really find the garage in my drawing. How do they access- CHAIRMAN; That's a good question. It's not really shown in this lloar plan. MEMBER HORNING: I walked all around the house, I didn~ see the garage. MS. HAM: I don~ believe there is a garage either. Alii have here is a small shed. I don~ think there's a garage. MEMBER HORNING: The houses of the neighbors are at least 100' away from, there's nobody in the rear. CHAIRMAN: Seeing no hands, m make a motion closing the hearing reserving decision until later. PLEASE SEE MINVTES FOR RESOLUTION 8:10 pm AppL No. 5150. T. & A LAOIJmS. (Continued hearing, carryover from October 17, :!002). Height variances are requested for proposed stonewall and gate Slructure, al1 exceeding the c ode's height limitation offour feet in or along a !font yard, at 635 Kimberly Lane, Southo1d; 7D-13-20.4. CHAIRMAN: Mrs. Moore, how are you tonight? MRS. PATRICIA MOORE, ESQ: Fine, thank you. [have a large rendering for the board. I have a smaller rendering for each of you. Mr. Laoudis has gone back to the drawing board and tried to minimize his request to really the bare bones of what he wants, and wants to achieve here on this pr operty.lfyourecall,thisisthelarge matter house. He had a gated entrance on this property that was a 10' gated entrance. It was removed while the construction was taking place. He wants to - it can~ be put back. It's been damaged in the removal, and he wants to replace it with this entrance gate which has the pillars with the wrought iron gate, and you can see from the design, the larger rendering, that's it's intended to be architecturally compliant with the r est of the house. This is the large manorhouse,it'sbeentheoriginalhouseofthiselltiredevelopmentanditisa very imposing structure and the gate and the entranceway similarly they want to make it important as you come in to the house. He's tried to address some ofthe neighbors concerns, he's tried 10 address some of the board's concems. He's really toned it down to the extent he felt that he could. He's going to - instead of the wall- the stone wall which would have been very lovely- he's going to put in a privacy hedge. The complaints of the neighbors as far as the golfers and such will hopefully end very quickly when all of the construction ends, and the privacy hedge comes up. It will be very difficult to see anything that's going on except from the water obviously. e Page 26 - Public Hearing November 14, 2002 - Regular Meeting Soulhold Town Board of AppealS e CHAIRMAN: Question, Mrs. Moore. This is the main entrance. There will be no gate over on the south easterly side'! MRS. MOORE: Two gates of the same sl)le, size. There are 2 equal entrances. The house, the way it is positioned on the property runs along Kimberly Lane, and the entranceway, it has 2 equal entrances. CHAIRMAN: So we've lessened the height ofthe pillars, lessened the height of the antlers- MRS. MOORE: The base on the- CHAIRMAN: The base is the same, it's still 3'. MRS. MOORE: The stanchions it sits on has been reduced, brought down. Therefore the statuary on the top therefore equally comes down and then the gate. The gate is for the most part remains the same. CHAIRMAN: Any of the neighbors seen this at all, do you know'! Any of the neighbors here today. Mrs. Olivia, any questions? MEMBER OUVIA: I'm still studying. MRS. MOORE: The larger - it's very small detail, the larger rendering if you would like - you'l also be situated on the property. MEMBER TORTORA: Let me see if I understand this, I see the different designs to lower the antlers, etc. and instead of continuing the wall past what we see on this drawing, we are going to put in a hedge- MRS. MOORE: No wall. MEMBER TORTORA: So this eliminates all of the wall of it, the only thing you are requesting a variance on, I just want to get this real c1ear is what is in this picture. MRS. MOORE: Yes. On both sides of this picture. That's it. ]s there something that- MEMBER TORTORA: Because the last time we talked about the height- MRS. MOORE: The length. now we've eliminated all those issues. MEMBER TORTORA: I just want to make it very clear that the only thing that's before us is now the two sets of antlers and the height on that. MRS. MOORE: And the wall that sWTounds it. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Orlando. MEMBER ORLANDO: Just for the record, what was the original height? MEMBER TORTORA: According to the Notice of Disapproval, it is 11.78. CHAIRMAN: That was without the deer. I think it was either a mean level or whatever, but it didn~ include the antlers MEMBER ORLANDO: I thought it was up around 17 with the deer. It was very much reduced down. Did the deer in proportion shrink? MRS. MOORE: No the statuary, the placements were brought down? Page -iC Hearing Nove"~002 - Regular Meeting Southold Town Board of Appeals MEMBER ORLANDO: With a reduction ofalleast 7'. No other questions. CHAIRMAN: Mr, Homing? MEMBER HORNING: Mrs. Moore, are both of these gates going to be identical'! MRS. MOORE: Yes. MEMBER HORNING: What is the ma'l:imwn height oflhe tallest? MRS. MOORE: To the lop oflhe antlers shows 10' MEMBER HORNING: Rather than 17. MRS. MOORE: COITIXt. MEMBER HORNING: The column ilselfis at7. MRS. MOORE: The lOp of the column, and then itsitsona basewhichtheydon~lell me. Theyjusltell the total 10. So the base being 7-3'. MEMBER HORNING: And the length of the walls on either side of the- MRS. MOORE: There has to be a measurement here, but I don~ see it. CHAIRMAN: It sa)'S VIS. You might wanl to ask them what that means. MRS. MOORE: I will, I don't know what that means. MEMBER HORNING: And the height of the sections of the wall? MRS. MOORE: 5'6". There are the 2 stanchions that are 7'x4' in diameter, then there's the wall that runs between it. It might vary depending on tbe grade and elevation. Ma)be it's not exact. Then there's the second column that is the finishing column and that is 6'6". MEMBER HORNING: In essence everything we've discussed is subject to the variance because it's higher than what code. MRS. MOORE: Right, front yard 4'. CHAIRMAN: Mrs. Oli~ia, anything else? MEMBER OLIVIA: No, I don~ think so. CHAIRMAN: Any comment on this hearing before we close it. Seeing no hands, I make a motion to close the hearing, reserving dedsion until later. PLEASE SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION 8:20 pm AppL No. 5160 _ MIRIAM REALTY. (Continued hearing, canyover from September 29, 2002). Proposedare(l) additions and alterations to an existing dwelling with setbacks at less than 10'on one side and less than 25'total side setbacks, (2) and accessory building at less than 3' from the property line, (3) total lot coverage for e Page 28 - Public Hearing November 14, 2002 - Regular Meeting Southold T 0'M1 Board of Appeals e all buildings in excess of the code limitation of20%. Location of Property: 425 Miriam Road, Mattituck; Parcel 1000-99-1-31. PATRICIA MOORE, ESQ: Patricia Moore, representing the applicant. Since I didn't have the benefit of the original application, what I did is I prepared my own points with respect to the standards of the area vari ance, and I1ljustworkolTofthat Yesterday in the rain because}(lu always ha\le to take pictures in the rain,1 took pictures of the property so everyone could see what I was talking about. Some of you are more familiar with this property than others. What I've done is I've identified, I only have 3 sets I apologize, my printer was going to blow up if I tried to get anymore out of it. m ask you to please share. MEMBER ORLANDO: You're special Gerry. CHAIRMAN: No it doesn't - it stays in the file. MRS. MOORE: I'm going to point out the very important features here. I want to begin with Mr. Tomatsu - there is a languagebanier and if all due respect he has his assistant who will translate, and if yo lldon~mindshe'lbevery quiet to help him understand what we are talking about or if! say something that is in error. I want to make sure that he understands. If you hear, we are not trying to be rude, this is Mr. Tomatsu and his assistant Helen. I also have here this evening, Joe Fishetti,who is our engineer and who's looked at this property and is prepared totestity if you have questions with respect to this property. The picture shows more than an)'thing else on this property. I've identified the photographs. I did them in a kind of series. The first sheet shows the neigbboring house, and you can see the neighboring house has about 55'in height up there. It stands about 3Y, stories if}(lu were to look at. You know most houses 35'2 stories is the standard, this one ifyoll look at the -it's about 3 Y, stories, I include the garage and you look at the whatever the 3n.l little piece is up there. It also stands in a sense, itartificiallycreatedahill-it took the highest elevation and then built a wall around it. I was so upset when I saw this be Mr. Tomatsu, he would not say this because he wants to be very neighborly, he wants to - he - when they were building, he owned the propertyatthetime,andhegavepenrussiontotheownertousehispropertyasastagingareaknowing he was going to be doing some renovations so that activity on his property certainlywouldn~ offend him. When he came back after all was said and done, he saw this inunense bunker that was constructed, and quite to his surprise because that's not what was described to him and to anybody with any subjective viewing of this property, would just be incensed to havejusl bought a house and suddenly you end up with, I call it a bunker, a cement wall that becomes your side yard. 'l1tat becomes something that he now unfonunately has to deal with, and the area variances that he asked tor at least seem minimal, and in many respects trying to deal with this wall, and how to shield the \liew of this wall and preserve his property values. In this area, walls areneeded,andretaining walls are required but certainly this one has no sensitivity to the neighbor and to my client. The second set of photographs , the house when he purchased it in lets see 3 years ago, the rule at the Building Department was that you could expand your house within the footprint, as long as you don't exceed the existing setbacks. Thehouseisamodesthouse-itneedsalotofwork,but the people who owned it before did not put a lot of money into it, it was a summer home. He bought it expecting to renovate, at the time his architect looked into the code, and it was reasonable to expect that hewouId be able to renovate within the footprint, and they purposely designed the extension to go forward and back on the property line where it would conform. He took that into consideration and then that was the plan that was submitted to this board. Ultimately with the board's interpretation of the ordinance, any expansion up or down or wherever requires this board's review. The third set of photographs that you can see this is the equivalent of a waterfront house, but not a waterfront house. It is - you asked for a letter of non. jurisdiction we're in the process - Rob Hennan is getting that but I can tell you as an attorney practicing in Southold. jurisdiction of the DEC is 300' or any man-made break, whether it's a street or anything above the 10' contour is clearly out of the DEC jurisdiction. Town Trustees equally, they are about- I don~ know, 600' away from U SOlUldand up on a hill. There are no jurisdictional issues with DEC or Trustees, but at your request and reading the transcript you ask for these things and he is abiding by}OUT request. We expect the Trustees, they went out and inspected yesterday so I didn~ hear if they issued a determination, but I would be quite surprised if they jurisdiction here. I don't know how. The other picture on page 3istheneighboringhouseandyoucanseethepropertiesareaIl50'inv.idth. Theyareallequallytype-thisisan area that is common to this board in asking for variances. Attached is a memorandum and a photocopy of the tax map, and I highlighted all of the parcels in the area that have obtained variances, and most of them are reduced side yard, reduced front )3l"d, most are area variances. Again this is very conunon for Capt. Kidd Estates. You are tiuniliar with this area. Again the photograph on 3 show the neighboring house, a couple of things, the neighboring Page -ie Hearing Nove.2002 - Regular Meeling Southold Town Board of Appeals hOl1seis asquare-ishhouse-2storyhouse, it has a full 2nO slory. They also have a great deal of vegetation, moSl of theshrubberyactuallyislheirsilsfuJlygroV>'l1,malure,sotheydon~seeeachother. There's-this expansion should notimpacl the neighbor since it's screened and wi11 be maintained with the s creen, because I suspect that the neighbor's going to tear dO"TI his trees to be able to see my clients house. CHAIRMAN: Going back on one of your statements Mrs. Moore. [considerlhistobeabluff. Idon~careifit'sa bluff on theU Sound or ifit's a secondary bluff,but in your weekly, it isa bluff. II is a sand bluff. To further exacerbate that situation is what we now have houses down below, and those particular houses, they are the brunt of this sand hill. That's one of the major problems. Ecologically if we had no houses down below, we'd say yes sand moves, and there is going 10 be a degree of erosion, a degree of scouring with wind damage and so on and so forth, and I know for a fact that you've represented people in this area before, b ut the main thrust of this problem the coup degras so to speak iSlhe factthatthereisinthisplan,aswirruningpool,andth is off the top of my head. I did see the numbers, 27' somewhere in that + or -, I applaud people like that, who are the site plan people when they draw these site plans, but I really honestly think it should be done in stages so the board, the neighbors everybody else can see them as it's done in a stage. I think this stage should be the construction of the house and the deck, and then we are going to hear from Mr. Fishetti on what his feelings are regarding this, because I know he's an engineer. Then afterthenurturingisdoneorwhalevertheapplicanltendstodosothatsanddoesn~fall down on neighbors down below on Sound Beach Road, then we11 talk about the s\vimming pool. MRS. MOORE: Y OUTe asking us 10 come back, till out a separate application"! CHAIRMAN: I am saying to you that in a utopian situation, that is the wayit should be presented. I'm going to tell you tbat Mr. Fishetti is going to have to be very convincing. I know Mr. Fishetti can bea very convincing person- that'sagenericstatement,butl\ntellingyouthat'stheproblemwehave. We have a neigbbor that's- MRS. MOORE: Let me address that because I want the board to have my reviC\\' of the record reveals, which is Mr. Tomatsu, when he was clearing the dead shrubbery on the bank, he accidentally - he admits and the neighbor admits accidentally took out dead shrubbery that went bC)Ond his property line. As soon as he discovered it, he took Mrs. Lamoyne 10 Doroski's had her pick whatever she wanted which amount to 8 dwarf apple trees, paid for Ihe materials and paid for the planting of those trees, and from whal we could tell, she seemed to be happy and satisfied that it was taken care of and it was, and from doing it just yesterday, 10 check to see, because my memory was that they had taken very well, and confinned that yes, it's lush, it's taken, and they are growing the way it should. Yes there were dead trees, the shrubs that were taken are still on his property piled up becaus e he's so afraid to do anything, everything is still there. It's the dead branches and everything are still piled up there. He absolutely was in the wrong, he admits it and he apologized, but let me say that he addressed it. Now as far as the bank goes, I do want Joe to address the bank because I asked Joe specifically, and he11 tell you very point bl ank that the renovations for thehouseandthepoolhavenoimpactonthebank,none. We are going to address the bank and deal with it as far as making sure it protects my clients property and certainly it protects anybodydov,'lI at the bottom from any possible erosion that can occur for any reason because there are poople on either side of him have the same bank and have similar structures and vegetation all kinds of ways up there that have been used to stab ilize and maintain the bank. CHAIRMAN: The majority of the people lip there have been very lucky truthfully because there is very lillle thaI has been done 10 those banks only because the wind forceslhat sand back in to Ihe bank. However, when flook al Ihisparticularbank,I'mnotaneducated person regarding this I can tell you I hat il scares me. MRS. MOORE: Let's have Joe, if you don't mind, 111 bring him right up now. You have my presentation of the area variance criteria we clearly, unless you want me continue with the area variance issues, I will proceed. If you want to take a step into the issue that you are concemed about- CHAIRMAN: What do you want to ask questions on George? MEMBER HORNING: Some of areas like the garage and the- CHAIRMAN: Let's deal with the house first. e Page 30 - Public Hearing November 14, 2002 - Regular Meeting Southold Town Board of Appeals e MRS. MOORE: The lot coverage -let's bring this back 10 focus here- MEMBER HORNING: There's quite a discrepancy in the Jot coverage as judged by yourselves and the Building Department. MRS. MOORE: No. What happened is that the original lot coverage they were looking at the brickwork and everything around the pool,all the patio that ifit'sdesigned as a raised pa tio, obviously it gets all included as lot coverage. What they did is Iheytook that out and said no, we11 keep evel)1hing on grade, whether it's grass or brick orcemenl. Ifil'songrade,ildoesn~cover,it'snotlotcoverage. Clearly what is lot coverage is the house, the extension, the garage, and the pool. What we did is we took the architect and I confirmed with him today because he had a family - his children had a school event, he couldn~ be here. But I confirmed this morning, I said, are you sure, are}Oupositive 101 coverage calculation and he said yes, yes I checked and I calcu!ated everything and he's at 22.7-2.7 over the 20% lot coverage. MEMBER TORTORA: Let me just slop you right there. The plans we have do not show a grade level patio. They show steps going up 10 it. So if)llu're going to amend your plans I want to see amended plans showing it at grade, I want to see the lot calculations on that. MRS. MOORE: But we can supply that 10 you to confirm that those things. MEMBER TORTORA: I'd like to move this along. MRS. MOORE: I know)'Ou have a lot of issues that)llu raised at the last meeting. When I read the transcript- MEMBER TORTORA: We asked for an engineers report testimony's fine, an engineers report would have been fine. 111 make an observation. There's a bow in that retaining wall. MRS. MOORE: Which retaining wall'! MEMBER TORTORA: The 20' concrete retaining wall on that side, it's quite visible. MRS. MOORE: It's not his retaining wall, you understand that'! MEMBER TORTORA: You propose to put a garage up against that retaining wall at 0 lot lines because well, it's going to support the garage, well frankly the retaining wall my fall into the garage. The fact that the retaining wall was put up in that manner - yes it is very intrusive - but the landowners bought that eyes open- MRS. MOORE: No. That was not there when they bought. That was added afler Mr. Tomasubought. Hebought in April :l:OOO, that retaining wall went up just last summer. CHAIRMAN: It was a woodltimber retaining wall. MRS. MOORE: Not to that extent MEMBER TORTORA: I live in the neighborhood. That was done in the middle of the winter. Just 10 note ironically enough the retaining wall that you're speaking about - Ili..e in the neighborhood - 111 put myself in evidence in lestimony. That retaining wall had 10 be restored in emergency conditions because that whole bank blew out. I was there. I saw it. I saw the contraclors working on it and I know the fellow who did the work. So 10 saythatthat'snotasensitivearea-itis. MRS. MOORE: No. What I'm saying is we now have to deal with a bunker looking property. You tell me that)'Ou would want to live next to that wall. MEMBER TORTORA: I would have filed a complaint. We don~ want 10 see one bad situation on top of another. Page -Ie Hearing Nove_~OO2 . Regular Meeting Southold Town Board of Appeals MRS. MOORE: No, I understand that. It is not a party wall. It is not using that wall as a structural support for the garage. Whal we are trying to do is bring it as c1oseto the wall as possible because if you leave the 3' setback that zoning would allow, you're going to have small vennin. You're going to have compost. You're going to have all sorts of health issues that are going to develop in that small space. You almost have a situation like you bave in the citywhereyouhavetheneedforpartywallsbecauseyoudon~wanttoleaveanalley. MEMBER TORTORA: What if the wall collapses? MRS. MOORE: !fit collapses, it collapses. It collapses on our property. It collapses on a garage that would be 3' otTthe property line. The collapsing of that wall is going to be something that that property owner is going to have to deal with and I hope togod he used a good engineer and really when he construc ted it used proper engineering techniques because we can\ assure we can\ guarantee that wall is going to be there. Just like we can\ guarantee you know whatever, but what we have to do is address the sit<Lation. We have an 18' waIl as a side yard to our property and that is so offensive to our property. He wants to put a garage in. Where else is he going 10 pul it? He can\ il on theothersidebecausethere'stoolilllesideyard. It'sawaterfronthousesoyou'renot,butit'snot}'Oucan\putitin the front yard because it would need a variance for a from yard and there really isn\ much r oom for a front yard and most of the houses in that area do not have garages in the front yard. This is the logical place for it and the logical place is also pushing it is close so that one you hide that 18'wal1 it crea tes some kind of visual screen. My suggestion to Mr. Tomatsu because the board has done this in the past is pUlling::! garage doors on the garage so there's always access, there's no concern about circular access in the property. He would have no problem with using::! garage doors. It seemed like an easy solution there. But the movement pushed we don\ have to be here for 3'offthe property line because at the light place, 110 its not the right plac e. MEMBER TORTORA: What you said is true. Y ouVe got a small lot. And you've got pre-existing setbacks, youVe got 7'on one side and 9'on the other. MRS. MOORE: It's 9.8, almost 10. MEMBER TORTORA: The botlomline is when you drive by that it's wall to wall building. MRS. MOORE: What yo<L have now is wall to house. That's what you have. MEMBER TORTORA: Y OUTe talking vertical, 1m talking horizontal and it just makes a situation that is very bad worse because- MRS. MOORE: But don' Pl.mish Mr. Tomatsu for the actions of a neighbor that really offends the character of the neighborhood. MEMBER TORTORA: He is one that wants to go up two 510ries 7' from the propeny line on one side 9' on the other, and then he wants to put a garage so that when you drive by that you're going to see wall to waU building. That's why you're here for variances. You're not here because it was within the parameters of the law. MRS. MOORE: But let's assume that the garage no, no he's offby ::!.7 of lot coverage so ifhe can squeeze- MEMBER TORTORA: Both sides. MRS. MOORE: But you have a pre-existing I V, 5101)' house. You have right now a::!td story on that house. He wants to improve it and donn it so his family can fit in the house. It's not an unreasonable request, it's still a relatively small house. Look at the house next door. Look at the size of that property. MEMBER TORTORA: I don' know how it got there and 1 can' explain how the people did what they did. MRS. MOORE: But that's the character of the area. You're ready to deny a diminimus ::!.7 lot coverage. MEMBER TORTORA: For lot coverage only. Not on a side yard and not on the garage. e Page 32 - Public Hearing November 14, 2002 - Regular Meeting Soulhold Town Board of Appeals e MRS. MOORE: What do you mean? MEMBER TORTORA: A zero lot line on a garage? MRS. MOORE: But I've already explained what the reason is for the need for the garage on the 0 lot line. If you leaveitat3',youteUmewhatisgoingtohappenwiththatI8'wallwith3'you'regoing to be squeezing in trying to clean out an area that's just going to be more offensive and more of a detriment of the neighborhood. The neighbor has no objection to having the garage moved more toward the wall. He doesn' care. He didn~ put any vegetation. You see the photographs. He vegetated his house is beautiful. He's got more vegetation than any other house in the neighborhood. Did he put one strand of vegetation on the side that impacts his neighbor, none. Now we have this wall and we have the house that's gOlltg to be a 2nd stol)'addition over an existing structure, an dallhe'saskingforis a small garage that's a one car garage. The minimal garage that's necessary for any residents to keep the house maintained. CHAIRMAN: Lets go on with Mr. Fishetti. JOE FISHETII: Good evening, I'm Joe Fishelli. I wasn' here last hearing and I don' think Pat was. I received the minutes of the meetings and the transcripts and as Pat said it was all, I couldn' make head or tail of it but I know you wanted a repon, I couldn\ really get out of that transcript what type ofrepon}'Ou wanted, Pat and I talked about it, I went over there, I reviewed the property. I made myown feelings as to what would be needed there, bull did not write a repon, I thought I'd more or less talk to you tonight and see what direction }Ou wanted because- CHAIRMAN: I'm unclear on how far the applicant owns down the bank that's nwnber one. 1m unfamiliar to the way to the swimming pool on the top ofa fragile bluff. That's nwnber two. Nwnber three, I'm worried about the scoring ofthat bluffin the wintertime that would either undennine the swimming pool, undermine any wall that might be placed. We can't say seaward but we can say northward, and that's my main concern. MR. FISHETII: When I was there I was more concerned with the lOp of the - we have 10 look at this differently than a blutTthat's on the ocean. We're using the same terms. This is not on the oceanrront where we have water, the problem there has always been the toe of the slope and erosion at the toe always the concern. Once the toe is eroded, then the slope wants to find it's bank again. We don\ have that problem here. The bOllom of the slope is prettywel151abledbecausethehousesd0'M1onthebottomhaveretainingwaHs,sotheyareall pretty well solid so we don' have to worry about that. The only other reason, once a slope reaches it's stable bank or the angle ofre pose depending on the material that's there, the only thing that would cause it to change would be an earthquake which would cause it to shake, erosion which it what you talked about and actual people at the top. Being at the top of that bank, and coming to the edge and causing the top of the bank to erode just from use now that's what I looked at. When we were dealing with bluffs on the sound side, we have setbacks. We don' have setbacks here. He can use- he can walk right up to the edge there, stand on the bank, the bank goes down. My concern was stability. CHAIRMAN: Mr. fisheni, as you know you've testified before this board many times. You are a local resident in this town and normally you know, we swear people in particularly professional engineers but we know you so we are not going to do that. In your professional opinion, is there going to be a change in the angle of repose in yo ur opinion or any change that would cause a major blowout of either the 510ne area on top of the swinuning pool, any cause to worry about the swimming pool on the original plan that's before us at ground level that is and to include those brick walls or the brick tabors around it. Is there anything that we have to worry about in your professional opinion'! MR. FISHETIl: That swimming pool is outside the angle of load on that bank. In other words, if that angle of repose is greater than what is required, if the swimming pool is closer than that angle, it would cause impact on that angle. That swinuning pool is almost 25' back I think. Bul it's way beyond any impact on that bluff. CHAIRMAN: I know you're not a landscape engineer and 1m not putting you in that position, but what can we plant northward of that swinuning pool to preserve that area so that there is no load on th at bank. Page -iC Hearing Nove.2002 - Regular Meeting Southold Town Board of Appeals MR. FISHETTI: What I~n reconunending here, and I can give you- CHAIRMAN: You don't havc to give il 10 me tonight. Youcansendil. MR. FISHETTI: What we want to do here is stabilize the lop of that slope. I've talked to Rambo, Tom Samuels and we want to put a bulkhead wall at the top. What happens there - do you have a survey that shows? CHAIRMAN: Yes. MR. FISHETTI: The top oftha! bluff is not su"aight. CHAIRMAN; That's correct. MR. FTSHETTI: It slopes back. The angle of repose on the west side is 41 degrees and probably higher. As)'Ou go to the east side, it's:28 degrees, now you are getting farther away from that area, so it gels more stable. What we want to do is bring a retaining wall. It's really a bulkhead wall, cutting that across there, And what we would end up doing is having, trying to stabilize the bluff at an optimum 33-35 degrees. So the side that's funher back would be filled in and the bottom would be about 35 degrees and the tront one would actually be cut back and that also would bring it more stable. That's two things, one it would bring it more stable, it brings the slope to it's optimum angle of repose and it protects it's top another thing in that the top of that bulkhead wo uldbe about a foot higher than the existing grade. Right now the grades slope forward which causes erosion. If I could hring that just slightly higher, I'd have it pitched backward so we won~ have erosion. And if Mr. Tomatsu could come here, he could walk right up to the edge. His kids could come and play. It's not going to affect that bank. Bydoing that first step, which is a very expensive wall,we would stahilizethe top of the bank, bring the rest of it at this angle of repose and now wewouldplanttbebottom. MEMBER TORTORA: 50 you'd backfill in there'! Backfill to a right angle. MR. FI5HETTI: Right. It's just a straight line right across. And then the rest of the slope, what would happen would be the rest of the retaining wall which would be black sheet piles actually very nice Mr. Samuels gave me some pictures. I'd be glad to share them with you. Would be exposed about 6.8' and the bottom of the slope would be at a constant angle, and we would plant that. I'm not doing the planting. I told Pat my father was a landscaper but I don~ know how to do that stuffand we would get somebody to do that. Wind erosion is the only erosion }Ou'd have there and that bank will be stable and what's there, that swimming pool will not affect that bank. That will solve all those problems. That's what 1'1 propose. That's what we are going to do. CHAIRMAN: Fine. I thank you. Anyquestions for Mr. Fishelti"! MEMBER OLIVIA: I don~ agree. CHAIRMAN: That is the first concrete statement that J have regardless if anybody agrees. That's no reflection on you,Ruth. MEMBER OLIVIA: I know you had an architect here. I've been trying to read the transcript, that's really the way to solve that. I don~ agree because I looked at the bottom ofthat bluff, it's eroding badly. The weight of the swimming pool, I don't care if you benn it up or what, you have the weight ofthat swimming pool, you're going to have the runoff from the gutters and what.have.you going down that bluff. It's all sand down at the bottom there, and they have these httle wooden things holding the thing in Joe. Franklyldon~trllstit. I would not want the safety on my shoulders. lcan~approveit. MR. FISHETTI: Iffor any reason when we're doing that construction we can protect anything up to our property line. We will protect at that property line that toe. I looked at it, it looks reasonably stable. It's only a matter of adding stability at that toe. If you can stop it from eroding, that's all you have to do. Ifit'samatterofdoingan additional small retaining wall to protect that toe, our cJient will do that on hi s property line. It'snotgoingtogooff his propel1y line, then it's up to anyone else. I can~ do anything off the property line our concern again is to protect e Page 34 . Public Hearing November 14, 2002 - Regular Meeting Southold Town Board of Appeals e the toe which is fme. It's not going to erode from water which it does on a bluff and we'l do a small retainer - it's a very small wooden retaining wall, not anything that's major, just 10 protect it from washing out and W1derstand, by me raising all the roof runoff goes into - the town requires it to be in drywells. I now raised that grade and pitched evel)1hingbackwards. MEMBER OLIVIA: I would want a soil survey. MR. FlSHETTI: It's all sand. I have a lest hole here. I have it right here. It's all sandy soil. It goes sand down to 15'. MEMBER OLIVIA: Sorry, Joe - I\:e seen too many of these. I'm really scared for the people above it and the people below. I really am. MR.FISHETTI; We're scared too. MEMBER OLIVIA: It's a big liability. MR. FISHElTI: We need to address the problems that we can address. MEMBER OLIVIA: I can see doing something with the house, but having that pool with that in the back scares the heck out of me. MR. FISHETTI: I appreciate that. CHAIRMAN: Last question is did you get a chance to evaluate the wall itself that's next to this? MRS. MOORE: I don't think he wants to give an opinion on the structural integrity of that wall. MEMBER TORTORA: If you don~ want to give an opinion on the structural integrity, then why the heck would }OU want to put a garage against it? MRS. MOORE: That's got nothing to do with it. MEMBER TORTORA: That's the bottom line. And if you don't want to then we'l have our town engineer give his opinion. MR. FlSHETTI: I really didn't look at it Lydia. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Fishetti. The only thing left I think Mrs. Moore, are some issues that you wanted to bring up quickly or can we take them out of your brief that you have giveo us. MRS. MOORE: I Ihink my brief has all of the points and some of you have made up}Our minds it's difficult to persuade}Ou otherwise. I think my argument stands. You have to be reasonable when you are lookiog at this property, the 2.7 if we were to eliminate the gazebo I think we fall within the lot coverage. So we're oot asking for that much and I know I've been here many a times asking for a lot more lot coverage and we have a client who's addressing the bank. He was trying to put up his own wall and knew fast enough not to do anything and I think that's the activity)'Ou saw there because he very quickly realized that you need a profess ionaI and you need to do it right, so fOl1unatelyhe stopped and you see what's there. You seethe planks, but that's his own activity,he stopped immediately when he saw that was way beyond the scope of his abilities, and so we have the engineer with his expert testimony that he stated how we can stabilize this and that it is stable and th e fact that the pool and the house will have no impact on it beyond that, what more can I lell )'Ou. CHAIRMAN: You were going to give us a letter saying that the deck areas aren't grade. MEMBER TORTORA: You were going to give us a revised plan, show the grade. Page -Ie Hearing Nove'~002 - Regular Meeting Southold Town Board of Appeals MRS, MOORE: I have to check with the architect and see what plan because we got confused on which one's he's got. I1l have him give me the final plan of where everything is going to go and we canjust show you, again, the lot coverageisonlytheslruclW"esthatareshowingonthesurveyatthispoint.lsthereany other questions? CHAIRMAN: Is there anybody else in the audience who wishes to discuss this with the board? Mrs. Moore, we are going to recess this to the next regularly scheduled meeting for closing, no more verbatim testimony - we'] send a letteroverMr.Richter. MRS. MOORE: Okay, he can go and look at il. CHAIRMAN: And have him go and look at the whole thing, and we'1 go from there, MRS. MOORE: ] did ask Mr. Tomatsu very quickly if you want to increase the distance 10 the rear, if you wantlc bring the pool doser to the house, we have a little bit of room to play with bringing the pool closer to the house, if that's something the board would want us to consider. CHAIRMAN: 100r 15'wou]dbewonderfu]. MEMBER TORTORA: Ijllst want to see how yOllTe going to put the pool and the barbeqlle and the gazebo and all of that with the tile at grade leveL MRS. MOORE: Okay, and any of those structures obviollSly YOll can mandate that you have proper dTy'Nells so any hard structures go into drywells so if you're concerned about TWloffgoing anyw here- MEMBER TORTORA: You would show that on the plans. MRS. MOORE: A]right, 111 ask the architect to show it as well. CHAIRMAN: The next regularly scheduled meeting is 12-]2-02, so we would really like have this in our hot little hands about 5 business da}'S before that. MEMBER TORTORA: Otherwise we are going to be recessing that again to review plans. MRS. MOORE: 111 ask the architect. 111 do my best to get itto you before than. So the pool moved over and showing a1] dl)Wells and hard surfaces. MEMBER TORTORA: And where you're going to have drainage for the pool, overflow for the banl,- MEMBER OLIVIA: Right, everything. CHAIRMAN: And basically a small synopsis of what Mr. Fishetti has told us. MRS. MOORE: Yes, Joe will give us a report now that he understands where you're focused. CHAIRMAN: The date is 5 business days before the 12th of December. Thank you very much. Good night. Everybody has been waiting patiently. We have been here 3 hours. We will break for 5 minutes before the final hearing ofthe eveninl!. We are recessing it to no more verbatim testimony recessed until December] 2'" for the purposes of do sure. 9:16 pm Appl No. 5051- CLIFF AND PHIL'S LOBSTER HOUSE. (Continued hearing from February 28, 2002). Based on the Building Department's Notice of Disapproval issued November 13,200], amended/updated October 22, 2002, applicant requests roning determinations for: (al an InteJllretation WIder Anicle XXIV, Section e Page 36 . Public Hearing November 14, 2002. Regular Meeting Southold Town Board of Appeals e 100-243 to Reverse the Building Department's determination which states that the proposed addition/alterations to an existing restaurant establishment is not pennitted in a Residential R-40 District, or a1ternative]y a Variance authorizing the proposed addition to the existing restaurant, a nonconforming use in a nonconforming building; and (b) a setback variance is also requested under Section ]()().244B for an addition to the existing building which will be less than 40' from the front property line. Location of Property: Comer of the east side ofKennys Road and the southsideofNorthSeaDrive,Southold;ParcellQOO-S4-S-22. CHAIRMAN: Council is standing at the mike, we're going to ask him to identify himself, although we know who he is, and then we are going to go over some ground rules, and then we11 go from there. GEORGE TUNIS, ESQ: Thank you Mr. Cbainnan, my name is George Tunis, I'm with the law firm of Rifkin Radler, EAB Plaza, UniondaIe, NY. I'm the attorney for the applicant, Cliff and Phil's Lobster House Inc. commonly known as Elbow East restaurant. CHAIRMAN: What we need from you is to pass this around to everybody so that we bave everybody in the audience, and hopefully their telephone numbers so if we need to get back to anybody, we will be able to do so. I am expecting this hearing to gono later than 10:45 and so I'm going to ask everybody to kind of step it up, and with that in mind- Chairman, can ] ask you to ask the people to identify themselves as Kenn}'S Beach Civic Association member as opposed to those who are with Cliff's'! Would that be out ofline'! CHAIRMAN: Everybody will be swom in, they can tell us after they are sworn in - where they live if they choose to do so. It would make more sense to do that. We can try that. MR. TUNIS: Chainnan, as you are aware, the restaurant is located at 50 North Sea Road, at the comer ofKennys Road in Southold, the parcel is approximately 22,000 sq. ft. it is zoned residential as this board is aware. It was subject to an upzoning without compensation about a decade ago, and exists as a pre-e xisting non-conforming use. The issue before this board this evening - there are severa] issues but the applicant seeks reliefboth with area and use variances to renovate and expand an existing restaurant. We wish to bring the restaurant into ADA American Disabilities Act compliance, add a handicap lift, handicap bathrooms. We also wish to beautify the restaurant and expand it. At this point and time, Mr. Chairman, I have prepared a briefing book for all the members of the board and introduced it into the record as an exhibit. If you may indulge me for a minute that I may go through it with you, we have a summary of the application I have here photos of the current restaurant. We have north elevation east elevation west elevation, and east elevation and that is in tab 2. You can see the cwTent Slate of the building. I would call it under whelming and I think everyone might agree that it could be more beautiful. These are some pictures of the interior in tab 3.}Ou clearly have a photo that has a bar area with 18 bar seats currently. You can see the bathrooms as they swing out into the lounge area behind tab 4, we have the site plan. I have the elevations as well. Tab 6 is the public hearing notice and the paper which I'm appealing from the Notice of Disapproval. I have a memorandwn of law tab 7. I did this as the hour is late and there's many speakers and this is the second time we are doing this, I have listed the criteria in the proofs for both the area variance and the use varian ces on paper for the record that you can read at}Our leisure so I don't need to be redundant. Mrs. Tortora you had mentioned that you see all the cases that I mentioned in the prior hearing. I have them all for you behind tab 8. Tab 9 there are 600 signatures an overwhelming majority from the Town of South old, all of which are patrons of the restaurant and support of this application. I know that's not depositive and I know that public reaction does not factor into this board's duties, but I thought that it would behelpfu] to show the support thatth e restaurant has. I also have because this is going to be part ofmyprooffor a use variance. The certified financial statements for the establishment and I have professional written testimony by a recognized expert behind tab II which I wiU get into a little later. As)Uu are aware this is a pre-existing non-conforming use. It's a residential area. Clearly no one is denying that. Also no one has objected to operating a restaurant which has a legal and valid right to operate in this neighborhood. It's been there since the 1950's. But people always have concerns. Some very sensible, some maybe a little misguided. Judge Cardosa in 1927 recognized that the ZBA should have an important function a delegate jurisdiction, and one not easily abused that under special circumstances and there really needs to be special circumstances, that ZBA's are permitted to grant use variances. That's why we are here. Upon a showing ofurmecessary hardship, general rules are suspended in this case for a pre-existing estabHshment, one in a residential zone for the benefit of individual Page -iC Hearing Nove_2002. Regular Meeting Southold Town Board of Appeals owners and special privileges are established where the burden ofspecial e xceprion creates a special hardship. To this end, NYS law stated il is 10 promote equal justice. Where there is a situation thaI is so unfair where the applicant cannot properly operate a business and have a reasonable rate of rerum, ZBA's have swore fit to grant variances to create social justice. An UIU1ecessaryhardship has several prongs. You cannot achieve a financial rerum. This has to be shown to the board with dollars and cents, certified financial data. In the prior hearint!:, years 2000 and 200] certified financial documents were given to this board. Respectively they showed a 25,000 and 4,500 annual loss. Since the calendar financial }1:ar ends on June 30"', I now have 2002 certified fmandal returns, and I'd like to give them to you for the record. Mr. Chainnan, 2002 was a better year than 2001. It showed a$],700 profitlbr the year as certified byour accountants under oath. The law is quite clear on this. That an individual needs to have a reasonable return on a lawsuit there were losses in the two prior years. That's not the standard there's not to be a loss there needs to be a reasonable return. Clear]ythe owners can go with their jobs elsewhere and get a greater return. Another prong is the uniqueness prong that stems out of the Douglas Irm Civic Association case. The uniqueness prong is very novel. There was a concern by the legislature courts and ZBA's that said if we grant the re]iefthe applicant is seeking now do we not go on a slippery slope. These are not to be handed out like candy, if you want that you go to the Town Board and you get a change of zone . They are not to be handed out cavalier]y so this situation needs to be one of uniqueness. It doesn't have to beth e on]y one. It hastobe]ess than the majority. And] wou]d ask this court to take judicia] notice that this situation is the 0 n1yone in that particular neighborhood. This restaW"ant has been around since the 50's. It's the only one - it's now a residentially zoned property. Ifit ever burnt down - if 50% of it's value was decimated, you couldn't rebuild it and I want eVer)Qne to understand-all the neighbors-if this board grants this particularreliefother l1eig hbors cannot tear down their houses and build restaurants. This is it, it's the on]y one. It's the on]y one. It's the only parcel that once had a commercial designation, was an existing restaW"ant in that whole community. There is no president set here. This is a very unique parcel and as I mentioned earlier, the uniqueness is exasperated because it was the site it was the subject ofa taken. It was upzoned with no compensation. It makes it further unique and in the interest of justice and fairness, you should be able to operate a business and seek reliefin an effort to improve their business and seek a financial return. Whereas jfthey didn't have that upzone, we wouldn't have to be here for most of these variances. The last prong is the character and nature of the community. I have before you a report by Andrew Stype who I believe is recognjzedas an expet1. He has done an ana]ysis of all the home in the area, both the in]andhomes the inland lots and the waterview homes, and in conclusion, his high load difference for inland homes is 88-90% increase from 200] to 2002. His inland lots indicate an increase from 41-73% and his waterview homes indicate an increase flum 21-44% and I would ask this board to take judicial notice of what I think many of the neighbors alreadyknowoverthe]astlOyearspropertyvaluesinthisneighborhoodhave appreciated and appreciated substantially and what I respectfully present to this board is that I'm sure that some people will try to make this restaurant out to be the nastum of the community. Property values have gone nowhere but up it's been complimentary to the community. This restaurant was here before most of these homes. As a matter offact, this commumty- MEMBEROLlVIA: Can you p]ease go up to the mike? We can't hear you. MR. TUNIS: I'm sorry. I was going to show you some elevations. This community was one of beach bungalows. Beach bungalows that over the years were tom down, and homes built, and I think it the trend follows many manses and mansions being built. I think many of the neighbors and learned council more stated that many of these homes are going for a million dollars now. Talk about changing the nature of the community. I think most ofthe people in this neighborhood have participated in creating equity and value in tearing down which were beach bunga]owsor at thevel)']east in expanding and renovating existing homes creating new one s,creating equity for themselves and good for them, good for them. But clearly, the trend in this community has been to much larger homes. If I can I'd like to point out as to what we are proposing to do, bul before I do that, iryou look behind one of the tabs, you will see what the premises looks like today. Clearly it's box in nature from eveI)' standpoint. The area which we are going to construct the expansion does not unhinge on the parking lots so we'l be able t o have the sufficient 43 parking spaces, but clearly I think anyone would say that this could be better, and i t's not keeping within the character and nature of our Southold community. What we are proposing is a building that has peaks and mortars and flat board. I think it's very sensitive. It does cost a lot of money, but I think it's a great improvement for what doescurrent]yexist. I think it looks more like the homes being bui]t than the current restaurant and this ist he front entrance and if you don't mind 111 put them over here so the neighbors can see t hem. e Page 38 - Public Hearing November 14, 2002 - Regular Meeting Soulhold T O'M'l Board of Appeals e CHAIRMAN: They mayor may not stand. We can always take a recess so everybody can review it. MR. ruNIS: Because one of the prongs are the character and nature of the community, we have taken various photos of the surrounding homes. I think you will find these homes to be very large in nature and with a very out- stated peaked roof and dormers. I think you will see that two of these homes are adjacent to the restaurant. There is a million dollar home tltat is being construCted across the street that I have a photo of and I'd like to enter them as exhibits into the record. I'd also like to point out how the restaurant would use the proposed expansion. And if I may, I'd like to turn your attention to this floor plan. We're asking for an approximately 1400 sq. ft. addition, approximately 32% of that or approximate]y4OO sq. ft. will be a dining area, approximately 34% of that and 476 sq. ft. will be a1] your halls, bathrooms, again to become ADA compliant. There wiU be a handicap lift access to become handicap compliant. I cannot tell you the imponance of providing facilities so that handicap members of our community can properly access and again that creates one of those special situations where relie fshouldbe granted in these cases. There is a utility storage area of approximately 80% or 120 sq. ft. and there is a lounge area addition ofapproximately 375 sq. ft. the size ofa hotel room which is approximately 26V, of the proposed expansion. I'd like an opportunity to discuss what type of restaurant has been operating there and I'd like to caIl the oWller Mr. Berliner to call some testimony. m be doing it in the form of questions. CHAIRMAN; Do you solemnly swear the information you are about to give us is the truth to the best ofyoW" knowledge? WILLIAM BERLINGER: I do. CHAIRMAN: Can you state you:r name please? MR. BERLINGER: William Benjamin Berlinger, Jr. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. MR. ruNIS: Mr. Berlinger what is yoW" occupation? MR. BERLINGER: I am a chef and along with my sister, an owna' ofE]bow East. MR. TUNIS: And how long have you been associated with the restaurant? MR. BERLINGER: It will be 14 years this coming March. MR. TIlNIS: And can you describe for us what type of restaurant you operate. MR. BERLINGER: It's a family restaurant. We have 2 dining rooms and a small lounge. MR. TUNIS: CouId you deSl;ribe to us a little bit about the menu? MR. BERLINGER: We are mainly steak and seafood. Of course our marinated steaks have been a famous item on the North Fork for quite a few years. and surfand turfand fresh seafood. MR. ruNIS: Could you tell us a little bit about your patronage'! MR. BERLINGER: Well we are open for lunch everyday and our lunch is very reasonable and I wouId say mainly it's senior citizens. We have some people that work in the area quite a bit. And at night, again a lot of senior citizens because our menu is reasonable all the way through. And a lot offamilies mainly on weekends. You know the people are out forpwnpkins and to visit vineyards and so forth. MR. TIlNIS: Are there associations and trades'! Page -iC Hearing Nove~2002 - Regular Meeting Southold Town Board of Appeals MR. BERLINGER: We have Lions Club meetings, fire departments, Southold Town PBA was there a few weeks ago. MR. TIJNIS: The Southold PBA Can you tell us in the 13}ears thaI you have been there ifthere have been altercations'! MR. BERLINGER: Never. Not once. MR. TIJNIS: 50l.lOds like a nite place. Thank you sir. This concludes my application. In chief, much of our professional testimony you have in written fonn. I did wanl to keep it brief. I look forward, Mr. Chairman, to answering any questions this board or anyoftbe neighbors may have. CHAIRMAN: Thank you sir. Mrs. Moore, good evening again. PATRICIA MOORE, ESQ: Good evening. I have a memo for the board. I would like to begin with -111 trylo be loud. '11 get loud later as 1 gel heated I'm sure. I would like to point out that after reviewing the docwnents in the file and the testimony ITom the previous meeting. I had some difficulty in figuring out what the actual sq. footage is because every time I look at a document, it's a little off or it's a different number. In my memo I put down the existing building that is shown as 2,860 sq. ft. it comes from one of the docwnents thaI is cUlTently submitted, however when [look at a '84 site plan which was submitted to the ZBA in their files. It comes to 2580.75 sq. ft. I think that's relevant because with respect to the ordinance and the degree of ex pansion that this board will have to detennine whethcr or not it's applicable, the existing sq. footage is imp ortant 501 think you have to reach a conclusion as to what is the actual legal sq. footage of this building. I couldn~ tellITom the nwnerous documents, it varies somewhat. CHAIRMAN: Can I just ask a question regarding all that"! I think the issue is when was the tire"! And what OCCUlTed. MRS. MOORE: I am going to get into that. Let me just go in the order of my points. Mytirst point is in respect to the standards of the use variance and the need to prove no reasonableretum andfi nancialhardship.lactually submitted the original tax retwn to one of our members who had access to a very fine accounting tinn of Captain and Negrin in Great Neck. They actually do work on the south side for restaurants as well as are very familiar with restaurant accounting. I've submitted attached to this memo the letter that they review the analysis or statement that was prepared for the 2000-2001 and they criticize or critique that statement and essentially what they conclude is based on that statement, they can~ conclude that there is financial hardship. The disclosures aren~ sufficient to really revie.v the financial data and come to a conclusion the big question why the June 30, 2002 wasn~ submitted and thank you Mr. Tunis and his client for submitting it, now I will send that off to the accountant to give additional infonnation that will help them with the financial data. If I could very quickly also review the - they point out what we obviously alIeady know restaurant is a cash basis business and the infonnation that was certified 10 is based again on the clients documentation that they give to the accountant and again they co uld not verifytheinfonnation that was submitted to them for the financial statement. They also anal)'Ze the breakdown of sales and cost and in particular the turnaround, the seating of the profit is actually in the nwnber of times you can turn the seats during the work week during the weekday off season you maytwn around, twn the tables over 4 or 5 times whereas in the summer peak you might have the tables turn over 20 times that's actually if you were buying a restaurant business you would be looking for that kind of data to determine exactly what is what is the profitability of this restaurant. Again, he mentioned that he is the chef I didn~ realize that chef/owner he does state in the financial data 135 for the btldget or salaries of the chefisthere more than I chef. Other issues like depreciation that it comes right off the top it comes back in these are accounting methods to minimize your tax consequence btlt on the other hand it's not detennative of profit so the financial statement does not meet the burden that is required and it is a very difficult burden for the applicant to establish a use variance. This board know and the attorney knows it is tantamooot to a legislative act and it is an extremely high burden going on to the other poi nts, as I went tltrough I tried to tind out what was the expansion history, what was the history of this property. To some extent it was given last time and we know ITom last time and we know from one of the neighbors that testified that lived there that she said she lived there in the 50's and yes the btlilding was there, but it was a hot dog stand. That's how it started, a very small very innocuous seasonal type of food establishinent. Thereafter in 1984 we know from the towns records that a variance e Page 40 - Public Hearing November 14, 2002 - Regular Meeting Soulhold Town Board of Appeals e was applied for. Now an occupancy rating of the restaW"ant from what I can tell, I went to look at the Health Department applications sometimes all the information is in here in our own records. I went and reviewed the health department records. Often times you see what you are looking for in other agencies. When I went and re.iewed the Health Department records, the '88 application after the fire or actlla!ly it was right before the fire was occupancy of '4950 we know that at one point in time in the '80's it startedOtlt with about 49 occupancy rating. In '88 the Health Department reviewed the application after the kitchen fire. That would be '88 application in the application which I attach here so yotl can see for yourself, the application for the Health Department asked you to identity what you have and then what you want. What yotl had at the time was 49, what you requested was 70. After extensive review by the Health Department, the Health Department granted them seating for 70. in '89, between '88 and '89 there was a kitchen tire and they came in for an application for the Bllilding Department for repairs to roof replace unsound framing members all windows, floors, wall covering insulation and new kitchen. What actually ended up happening is that there is are-arrangement ofthe building and they ended up with 78 seats. Now at the time that the variance was granted in '89, excuse me '84, the roning had already changed the zoning of this area was in the 70's because in '84 when the application for this board was made, it was made as a use variance, so we know that at that time, it was one of the wne changes that occUITed between 70 and '82 so right off the bat this was and has been f ora very long time. a nonconfonning use. That's important because in most recent times when the board was looking, the previotls or current board was doing the rezoning on Rt. 48 there was a consideration for nonconforming uses and it was primarily for the properties that we about to be or could be rewned on Rt. 48 when the roning was adjusted tip on the North Road and certain properties were nonconfonning the board at that time looked at it and said you know, we are listening to you, we hear )'Oil, we are going to give)'Ou an opportunity to get you some fonn offelief and the board in the code pro.-ides fora 15%asofright increase and I would submit to this board becallSe they benefited already for a sizable use variance and expansion. They went from the 46 to the 70 according to the permits when in fact 78 pieces and some of the paperwork here so it grew a little bit by 8 seats, but more or less in that general range, so in '89 the building and the nonconfonning use was expanding by 63%. That's an enormous - this board granted a verygenerotls use variance and a sizable expansion at tbattime, and you did consider the area varianc es to the street. You did consider the neighborhood and the fact that they wanted to renovate, do some small renovations, I think it was considered a small sumoom type of expansion, but the end result was that there wasn~ in your files any internal layout that gave an idea of what the seating was and how many seats there really were so in effect after the renovations and the use variance there was a huge expansion of63%. Now they've got an application in 2002 that they are asking for 144'. I've looked at the floor plan and bycoootllooked at the proposed floor plan and again still they are not providing you and you haven't asked them or I can~ tell that you've asked them for an existing floor plan. What are the nwnber of seats that you have there now? Because how are you going to control the expansion if you don~ know .what they have there now. It's very tricky and it's very easy to massage a building when yotl are asking for a handicap bathroom to put it in the middle of the btlilding and aU of a sudden the whole thing gets renovated and everybody gets new seating and it suddenly grows. We believe the best from the applicant, but on the other hand, we want to control it. Going back to the numbers, 118 seats at the table and 26 seats at the bar. From what I can tell from a photograph actually that was in your files, and again, I really want this board to ask - I would ask the board to ask the applicant to supply intemallayout of the seating. Let's tind out how many actual barstools there are, but I think the actual from what I can count from photographs and la}Quts, there are about 8. So he's going from 8 to 26 barstools. And he's going from whatever the nwnher of seats are for the resta.want up to 144, however the nwnbers break up. That's from my calculations, almost 300% increase. That's way off the charts., it far exceeds any standards. It's unfair to place and I know there are a lot of people here in support and there are a lot people here in opposition. Your pitting 2 groups against each other and everybody's very cordial and nice but we shou!dn~ have been placed in that position. Ask for something reasonable. It might be considered, it certainly will be considered by this board it would be considered by the neighbors. What they've asked for is truly off the charts. Again looking back at the ordinance the way it's written, you have a great deal 0 fdiscretion on how you're going to interpret that section of the code it is the first time it's going to be interpreted and Iwouldsubmitto}Quthat}Qu should interpret it very narrowly because in this instance, they have had a 60% expansion not that long ago, certainly in the Chainnan's lifetime on this board and you're all local, you've seen it }Qurselves }Qu've probably been there in the time ITame that they've done the renovation. So I would ask you to be verycareflli ask for the right infonnation and limit them very carefully. I did provide to}Qu a 1977 citation which was actually was a bullstring of what the board can do. Y Otl are permitted to - obviously you have that right ooder the statute, but you will be sustained by court, particlliarly that it's being reviewed by the first time. By this board it's being applied for the first time. Ifwe were to apply the ordinance with the 15% as of right lot coverage, or expansion of the footprint because iI'S very clearit'safootprint-15%ofthelegallyexistingslructure,againgoingbacktowhat is the size that is legally Page ~c Hearing Nove_~002 - Regular Meeting Southold Town Board of Appeals existing there, I come to 387 sq, ft. That's what a 15% expansion oflhe footprint. That's not veryml,lch. ThaI could give them II handicap bathroom. That would deal with it. If they need a handicap ramp, weill think they have a handicap ramp, hut if they want an additionlll one, that certainly nobody would object 10 that, hut tbe t)opeof expansion, the type of proposal, the proposal is being madeisjust not acceptabl e,lwouldalsoaskiftheyareusing and their sq. toolage calculations and their renovation, the outdo or seating. It was not clear in my review of the plans if when they are looking at the sq. footage and the expansion if there is some outdoor seating area that may have been used in thelOlal square lOolage ca1culation and that shouldn' be. Thal'snol-that's outside seating area and are Iheyplanning to replace it with another outside seating area. CHAIRMAN: Mrs. Moore - when I was over there this past weekend, it was clearly stated to me by Mr. Berlinger- there is no outside seating. I don't know what you are talking about. MRS. MOORE: It showed on a plan. I didn~know either, I'm afraid to go over there to dinner now because until this is over and it all blows over, I don't think [11 have some soup. I~n sure theywouldn~ want to bring me harm, but just in case I think 111 skip it. They are a very good restaurant. If there's no seating, that's fine. But it shows up on a plan in one of the site plans that was one of the site plans that was the '84 or '86 proposal I didn~ know if that hadbeeoincorporatedintotheoverallexpansionornot. Again, I'm working with paper and certain things showing on paper verses what in actualily is there. CHAIRMAN: Just clearly state this so [ can understand it. Prior to the lire, which you say occurred in 1988, the seating capacity was what? MRS. MOORE: In '84, 49. What I took that from is look at the Health Department application made by the owner in '88. That has the - here SC Dept. of Health application for construction of sewer disposal facility water supply righlonratedoccupancyonthefirstcoltunnontherighthandsideitsa~it's- CHAIRMAN: That's 1984, prior to- MRS. MOORE: The application and Health Department sa~ '88. What happens is your files don~ have an occupancy, and your variance applicalion, I could not lind anything telling mew hat the occupancy, how many tables, how many seatings, how many bodies were going to be in there. It was clearly on the sq. footage calculations and so I went backwards. CHAIRMAN: What are you telling me ]988, prior to the fire was. MRS. MOORE: lin saying that prior to the fire from what I can tell it would have been 49. In '88 when whether maybe they can clarify the history for me, but did they do the renovations, then have a lire, then do anotber renovation? My guess is that before they started renovations they had a fire, now they actual Iywentaheadanddid the full renovation, but before they could do that, they needed Health Department. Theymay have had a variance from this board in fact the Building Department issuing the '89 buildingpermi t referred back to the variance that was granted in '84 in order to grant that '89 pennit. They used it as a basis to grant this bel;ause it was already I don't want to say as a right it ran with the land and it was there. CHAIRMAN: How much more do you have to go, I'd like to clear this issue up. MRS. MOORE: Please clarify it. CHAIRMAN: Are you able to clarity this tonight, Mr. Tunis? MR. lUNIS: Yes Chairman. Do you want meto speak on that issue alone, or various other points that council has brought up? CHAIRMAN: The point is that I just want to clear that issue up, and then what I'd like you to do is hold those, we1l go to the audience, and then we11 come back with a wrap up or else it become scounterproductive. e Page 42 - Public Hearing November 14, 2002 - Regular Meeting Southold Town Board of Appeals e MR. lUNIS: Certainly, sir, if this board would turn to tab 5 and goto the]ast sheet of paper and let me make a point clear. There are currently 18 bar seats and 74 dining seats for a total of92. Those are barSlools included which would not factor into the Health Department calculations. This is not II Hea]th Department matter that is under the jurisdiction of the Board of Review. We are proposing to go to 26 bar seats and increase it 8 and we are asking to go to 98 dining seats, an increase of24 the total seating will go from 92 to ]24,32 additional seats. That's approximately a 1/3% increase- you have in your booklets the current site plan with the amoWlt oheats. You also have the proposed expansion clearly delineates areas that are dining lounge and foyer bathroo m. Handicapramp, handicap bathroom, handicap lift I'm sorry if there was confusion but they were in the booklets and ar ehere available. This drawing is not correct. That is the proposed < what you have in your left hand is what is existing. What you have in your right hand is what is proposed and the difference is 32 seats, 24 in the dining room, 8 in the lounge area. CHAIRMAN: Before we leave thaI point, the purpose of the red diagonal area is an area that I assume has been brought up to me to be the smoking lounge, the smoking restaurant area? MR lUN]S: It's one of the - on February 28 when we were before this board, it was to be an enclosed smoking dining room. A dining room for smoking palrons early. The thought was to enclose the area and protect the other patrons in the lounge area and the other dining area from second hand smoke. We ask this board to not only do a code interpretation of the American Disabilities Act also the smoking laws of Suffolk COWlty that it would be a benefit to the entire commWlity and an improvement to the restaurant and under those circumstances that the court allows you to consider to grant the expansion provided we do good things with this. The law still exists. I don~ know if it's going to continue to exist, so with good faith I can't come up here and say we are asking for this expansion so]ely for the purposes of the protection of second hand smoke. That mayor may not be rendered mute, but today with the existing Jaw, that is our plan. MEMBER TORTORA: When you say a code interpretation of the ADA, and you say a code interpretation smoking laws, you're wayout of my league, I'm not sure what you mean. MR. TUNIS: Town law 2678 provides for legislature grants this board tremendous authority you sit as a quasi- judicial body you sit as a body that interprets everything. MEMBER TORTORA: When you interpret the town code by-law, 2678 ofNYS town ]aw- MR. lUNIS: You are also granted powers of interpretation, you are the body that can overrule the zoning enforcement officer what I've asked this board to do under their powers granted by 267Bl is to give us an interpretation as to whether we lit within the special circumstances and as to a benefit to the conununity to aIlow us additional areas to ].providehandicapaccessiblefacilities,aproperfoyer,properbathroomsand a handicap lift because if you've been to the restaurant, you know that it's sort of on 2 different - the demarcation is slightly different and you'd have to go up steps to go up to Ihe dining room that we wo uld provide a handicap lift. In addition to that- MEMBER TORTORA: In special circumstances, this is exlremely important, the special circumstances is in lieu of meeting the criteria of the use variance is that, am I? MR. lUNIS: Yes there are, we have asked forreliefin terms ofa use variance and in thealtemative, under your powers under 267BI to make an interpretlltion and to overrule the decision made by the zoning officer of the Building Department to allow additional space to pro\ide enclosed smoking facilities to protect the citizenry from second hand smoke and to provide handicap and proper and compliant handicapaccessi b]e facilities for the entire community. MEMBER TORTORA: The smoking as you've just conceded I mean since we don~ know the outcome of that law and since you certainly there would be no desire on your part to covet thaI it be pennanent]y be used as a smokinl!; area, I'm sure in view of the fact that that law could change at any time, that would be very difficult, it would also be so we can hopefully get you through this by the end of the year 2005. Page .. C Hearing Nove_2002 - Regular Meeting Southold Town Board of Appeals MR. TUNIS: J would appret:iale it and I willlesl my good friend Pal Moore's soup if she goes into the restaurant. If I lose, I may have a problem. CHAIRMAN: Mrs. Moore, we can~ ask you to rellect on anything tbat was just said, but I would like to continue if it's alright with you. We are going to start with the left hand side which is my left, your right which we refer to the east northeast side of the building, andwe11 ask an>-body iflhey would like to speak . The nice lady in the back of the foom on the west side very simply said if you are part orlhe Kenny's beach association or you are a community personinthatareaandyou'dlikelorecognizethatyouarecertainlywelcometolcan~forcean}bodytodo anything. However you will be sworn in and I will ask you to give us)'Ow- statement if there are any spokespersons for any groups I ask you who you are speaking for and we ask you to speak as quickly a s possible because we have many people here, so we11 stan over here, just raise your hand and come up, Come on up, Raise your right hand sir. Do you solemnly swear the testimony you are abol.lt to give us is the truth to the best of your knowledge'! RONALD PETERSON: It is. My name is Ronald Peterson, Good evening and thank you. I've been a long time resident of that hamlet of South old and also a business owner in Mattitu cklByearsinbusinessand:!5yearsin residence. I~n one of the local residents v,-ithin 500 yards of the restaurant. I'm very aware of the problems of owning a business in this area and how hard it is to stay in business and make a profit with all the regulations of the state and local governments. [~n a firm believer in supponing local businesses including the Elbow East restoration project. This is a family owned business owned and operated by a family who are also long time residents who had an opportunity to own a business. [know the family who is running the Elbow East, they are a family of high moral standards, hard work, terrific ethics and professionalism. Aesthetically I feel the proposed building expansion will only increase the value of our homes and also improve our quality oflife. Thankyou, CHAIRMAN: Anybody else on the east side of the building, for or against'? You act like you're a Trustee or something. ARTHUR FORSTER: I know what you are going through here. Retnemberwhen it used to be easy'! CHAIRMAN: It's never been easy, but I appreciate that. Do you solenmly swear the infonnation you are about to give is the truth to the best of your knowledge'? MR. FOSTER: I don\ want to be redundant. Ron said a lot of things that I was going to say, but I have to just say that it amazes me that, maybe I better not get into that. 111 just say that it is difficult to do business in this town. Times change, That place has been there since the '50's. I was in there when I was old enough to eat and it was a hotdog stand and it's been a restaurant fora longtime. I operated a business in town for 30 years, and it's getting worse by the day, and we have aSllccessful business there. They do a fmejob. I think they are an asset to the community. They suppon a lot of events that go on there, events that go on there, events in which money is raised which is turned back into the community to local charities. I think they are an asset to the community and should be allowed to stay. I'm kind of thankful to lawyers because I go home at night and read my dictionary. I try to put this in layman tenns and make it a little bit more simple so at least I can wH1erstand it, I don\ know about anybody else, I don\ think there's too many people in here who haven\ eaten in there or anyone of the restaurants that Cliffstarted that is very famous for his marinated steak and hospitality and just being a part of the conununity and I think it's time local government reached out and started helping our local business. You go into Feather. excuse me - )'Ou11 have your chance in a few minutes. Yougo into Feather Hill and some of these places are open one day and closed thenexl.it'sverydifficulttodobusinessinhereandwhenyougetabusinesswithlocalpeople, local residents that have put sweat equity into it to make it survive, I Just think we have an obligation to support them. The idea of goingintobusinessistobesuccessful,andifyouwanttobesuccessful)'Ouwant to try to expand, The idea is not to stop them from expansion and hold them to the point where they are not making any money, you might as well get a job working for somebody else. You can make $80,000 a year cutting lawns out here. So if there isn\ some incentive to stay in there and fight to try and do things and put your hard sweat and eq uity,andlpersonallyfeelafter ha\-ing done it for 30 years that it's the local government's obligation to suppon these local businesses. Now I know these people are - I know this is a classic example of moving in at the other end of the runway and then calling the FAA to change the traffic pattern, I really urge you to take a good look at this and I urge you to approve this application and give these people a chance to expand. You have children, you have families born and raised here and I think that's what smail community business and government is supposed to be about. Thank you. e Page 44 - Public Hearing November 14, 2002 - Regular Meeting Southold Town Board of Appeals e CHAIRMAN: Anybodyelse on the east side? Go ahead. Raise your right hand sir. Do you solemnly swear the information you are about to give is the troth to the best of your knowledge? TOM SADOSKI: Myname is Tom Sadoski - T Jive on Hyatt Road, Horton's Point. I'm not adjacent to the restaurant, I frequent it quite often for dinner, I've known the owners for a long time, I've know Cliff Saunders for a long time. I see nothing wrong with the addition and grass cutters don\ make 80 grand a year, I'm one of them. But it is a nice place to go for dinner, and it's a nice place to go and watch a football game with our neighbors, There's been a lot of bad press that I really don\ like and I really don\ like to be called a drug addict. Thank you very much, MR, TIlNlS: Instead of having all the people speak in favor, perhaps- CHAIRMAN: No, I said for or against. MR. TIJNIS: I know perhaps all the people who wish to speak in favor, for the interest of time just to stand up- CHAIRMAN: Well, we in effect are going to do that, but the individual, but this is Southold and I know Mr. Tunis and I don' mean that sarcastically, people are coming to this hearing because they want to speak. Mr, Sullivan, Do you solemnly swear the information you are about to give is the truth to the best of your knowledge? GEORGE SULLIVAN: I do. My name is George Sullivan. I'm a resident 0(275 Midfann Road in Southold. I have previously spoken on behalf of the applicants and my comments are part ofthepu blicrecord.lspeakonlyasa resident of the town as one who has been in business for over 30 years, I was faced with a similar situation when I moved my business to an area that was zoned residential but pemtitted business use. The neighbors were at first resentful as this incursion however I insured t1tat the building and grounds were of the highest standards and in effect that example increased all the sUITOundings. Even though I do not have an interest in the property today, I believe the block is the most attractive in the Town of South old. The neighbors have always complimented me and have realized that all can benefit with the right intentions. I feel that the applicants have the right intention and their plan will only add to the quality of life that we enjoy here in Southold. Thank you. CHAIRMAN: I'm not stopping anybody on the east side but is there anybody in the back of the room or outside that would like to come in and speak? Okaywell go the middle. Anybody in the middle? Do)'Ou solenutly swear the information you are about to give is the truth to the best of your knowledge? CHUCK LEISTER: I do. My name is Chuck Leister. How do you do'! I had no intentions of coming to this meeting, but I am here and I am a resident on l.eyton Drive, and I've been there a long time, and I saw the hot dog stand and actually, the only thing that I would have a probletn with as a resident is the fear as a resident is that with an expansion, correct me if I'm wrong, but I think in Suffolk County bars can stay open until 3:00. Is that true, does anyone know? 4:00, okay when 1 was a kid it was 3:00. I'm wonied about that bec<luse it sounds like this is a place where,great,ynucanhavefun,butat30r4inthemoming,itwouldgetverybusyinthatveryrurallittle neighborhood, and I wouldn't liketltat, nor would my family. CHAIRMAN: Has that been the case with this restaurant'? MR. LEISTER; No, Because the restaurants that have been there and this restaurant I don' think had a big bar business. Now at 3 or 4 in the morning}'Our dinnec is over so whatever is happening, it's different. Thank you. CHAIRMAN: Again in the center of the room? Do you solenmly swear the information you are about to give is the truth to the best of your knowledge? WHITNEY BOOTH: My name is Whitney Booth, I'm sort of a neighbor of this place, I live on the opposite comer oftha! block. I measured it yesterday, it's 7.1 O's of a mile by the road as a crow flies, it's a little closer. That doesn\ mean that we don' have a little offshoot of what goes on because I walk vinuaIly everyday past the restaurant to get a little exercise. I've seen a very good business going on there. I can\ imagine what the hardship there. Geelseeit from let's say a good business to a crashing business. I kind of envy these fellows already. I'm trying to figure why Page - C Hearing Nove_2002. Regular Meeling Soulhold Town Board of Appeals they need this huge obvious investment as well as-it'snotjust something that's going to happen in a nonconfonning area. J think a lot of people would think twice about doing that. I was a kid, we used to hWlt rabbits right through there, there were no houses between Horton's Point and except for one in through Peconic inlet it was very pleasant then but what the heck nothing stay.; the same. In the 1960's I ran the Traveler, The fellow who ran that place came to me and said hey the neighbors want to put me out of business. And I said why'! And they said I don't know, but they don~ like me, and they want 10 put me out of business. I said that doesn't seem too fair so I got involved in it, I got quite a bit of tlack. He stayed in business as a nonconfonning thing you know, he sold pieces a few hot dogs and hamburgers, couldn't see anything \\Tong with that. The business got better, there was Larry Mitchell was there, Arno]d you know it sort of grew as it went along, It's doing fine I have no objection to it now except I do gel nervous as to what I consider happy hOlU and I'm walking, and I get a little nervous when the vroom goes by me. But I don~ \'..orrytoo much I'm still pretty lively. My grandchildren I'm a little worried about. Theycould go over to a place that my brother and I have an interest in and dozens of grandchildren go in and out of that p]ace. They have picnics in the evening. All that makes us worried. I'm not talking about]egalities. I'm talking about quality of life and what worries us. That's all thank you. CHAIRMAN: Yes, sir, in the back'! Do you solemnly swear the information you are about to give is the truth to the best of your knowledge? ANNETTE MITSCKLEE: My name is Annette Mitscklee and I live on Kenny's Road. My husband and I very often late at night are on Kenny's Road, and we see people coming from the restaurant, which I guess they are allowed to do, and very often they go right through the stop sign on Kenny's Road. There have been many times, now not everybody who comes down that road comes from that restaurant where we've had to get off the road fro fear. I have a 9 year old son who wants to ride his bicycle down there. I'm afraid to let him ride his bicycle down there. You know, when people sit in a restaurant or a lounge until 2 or 3 in themoming, and then they get out and there is no public transportation I would like to know how they can get into a vehicle and drive safely and within the law. That is my concern. It may be a beautiful building, but I'd rather have an ugly building and not have any danger to my farni]y. CHAIRMAN: Do you solemnly swear the information you are about to give is the truth to the best of your knowledge'! CHRIS POPPY: My name is Chris Poppy. I'd like to just present a petition to you people. I think you have a copy of it 20 or 30 names- 20-30 residents who live in the area. MR. POPPY: The second thing I would like to say which I don't think anybody has brought up too much is there's a public beach about 100' from this restaurant where kids come down there every. I see 3]ittle boys pul]ing a raft during the summer down the center of Kenny's road heading down to Kenny's beach a car came out of that restaurant, spun around the comer, luckily he didn~ hit the kids but he came really close. Now you also are going to have the parking in this restaurant according to the Planning Board is barely adequate it's a quarter spot over what he is supposed to have. The people if they have Southold penuits are going to park in the beach parking lot. I watch the peop]e in the summer go to the restaurant, go out of the restaurant, open their trunks take their chairs, and go down to the beach. They leave their after having a couple of drinks, all of South old is going to be hurt by that. It's going to be more crowded, there's going to be more people going to the beach. There's going to be more cars leavingandsomekiddo\\llthereisgoingtogetTwloverandeverybodyisgoingtosayyoushou]dn~haveallowed this. The other thing I just have to say quickly, I have nothing against them fixing up the restaw-ant, my big concern is I know the Planning Board's problem. I read what the Plarming Board recommended they said the parking was barely adequate and they said that they do not recommend variances given topre--ex istingbuildings in residential areas, but I just took a couple of pictures - this is what the parking looks like in the summertime. Now how are we possibly going to have more, there's no stakes, no room for more cars. You know and more people so they are going to go down to our beach down there which the residents of the whole town ofSoutho]d come down there and I think we're going to have more problems and then the town is going to have to clean up after people down there and I know they are going to try to cut the budget down there. It's going to be more and more problems in the area. Thank you. e Page 46 - Public Hearing November 14. 2002 - Regular Meeting Southo]d T~ Board of Appeals e CHAIRMAN: Do you solemnly swear the information}'Ou are about to give is the truth to the best of your knowledge? State your name for the record please. ARLENE R1CIITMAN: I do. Good long evening Chairman and mernbers of the board. My name is Arlene Richtman and I'm the president of the Kenny's Beach Civic Association. The owners of Clift's restaurant have submitted an application to expand this restaurant once before. Nowhere in this revised site plan do I have that is going to indicate what the addition will stand for. All that is shown is footprints. The original plans were to enlarge the waiting the room and enhance the bathrooms. Now the plans are not on]yto enlarge the restaurant and the bar as well. Theywant to totally increase the area by 49.6%. Keep in mind that this is a nonconfonning building, nonconfOlming use in an R-40 district. nus restaurant, yes it was a sma1I seasonal shack that catered to the summer patrons with hamburgers and hot dogs. It certainly expanded over the years and recently the CWTent owners have turned it into a year-round business where it wasn~ before. How many times is a variance going to be given to alter and to add on anonconfomting building in a nonconfonning use in a R-40 district, There are 43 parking spots noted on this site plan, how many spots will the wait staffand the kitchenhe]p occupy? To even suggest on the site plan the overflow of commercial parking on Kenny's beach lot as listed under municipal is outrageous. Zoning Board members to permit any addition will spoil the integrity and character of our neighborhood. And the quality of life as we know it will be destro}\'id. We the members of the Kenny's Beach Civic Association therefore urge you to deny this petition. Thank}'Ou. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Do you solemnly swear the information)Ou are about to give is the truth to the best of your knowledge? 10HN KASMA TIS: 10hn Kasmatis, I live directly across the street from the restaurant. I've lived with the restaurant since 1980, and he's been a pretty good neighbor, but we have to differentiate reality from fiction. First of all the house thatleamed council said is a mimon dollars that's being built behind me is a [200' ranch house on a slab so if that's a million bucks. The parking area of 43 spots overlaps the commercial entrance to the propeny. If you going to have deliveries, how can you have 2 parking spots in your delivery area. I don't see a dumpster on the plan that's been submitted and again, the municipal parking thing that permit parking by Southold Town rules. Last year we discussed the fact that the town of South old has no cabaret rules so we don~ know from the owner ifhe's planning live music or juke boxes and we al] know from lhonny's on Rt. 48 that sound travels for miles and miles, and you know in Mattituck, churches that have parties are being brought into Town Hall about the quality oflife and that's what this is all about. I think the restaurant has a fantastic business in fact ifhewantsapartnet, l'mretirin gin 14 months,l'd be more than happy to. The trucks back out of the delivery area and of course damage to my property and adjacent property because they are turning around usually they are big straight jobs and it's kind of hard to turn around in there. We talk about I agree with Mr. Booth it is a very good business and it's sizable investment in the flood area. The other thing somebody said, it's an asset to the community. Well Nassau County is impressively being re-assessed and if you live an)M'herenear a school or restaurant or any other commerci albusinessyoucan petition the people that are re--assessing your property to reduce)\lor assessment because it's an adverse impact on your home. Thank you. CHAIRMAN: Do you solemnly swear the information you are about to give is the truth to the best of your knowledge'! PATRICIA POPPY: I do. CHAIRMAN: What's}'Ourname'! MRS, POPPY; I'd like to just read a prepared comment. Owners of the E]bow East restaurant have just added satellite TV apparatus, quick draw and lotto. These are 7-11 and tavern type offerings. Family restaurants do not usuallyolTer this kind of entertainment. It appears the character of this restaurant is being changed. Businessesare imponant to all residences. 1bey provide service and a tax base and it is a difficult time to run a business. From my place at the end of a runway where I live, I can see that the ]ot is very, very crowded. Many business owners are residents of the town as well. However the right to own a business should not impede the rights of those who live in a residential area. That is why we are fortWlate to have zoning laws that prevent this from happening. The zoning Page -Ie Hearing Nove'~002 - Regular Meeting Southold Town Board of Appeals laws protected this restaurant by allowing it to exist in a residential ar ea. It was a relief. It was respectfully submitted that the zoning laws should now be interpreted to prote<:l the residents. I do live at the end of the runway, and l\n not asking the FAA to change the flight patterns I'd like them to stay the way they are. Thank you. CHAIRMAN: Do you solemnly swear the infonnation you are about to give is the truth to the best of your knowledge'! DONALD JOHN KIRBY JR: Yes [do. Donald John Kirby Ir. [happen to live absolutely 0' from their house borders mine. I'd like to say something about children walking down the street. I drive up and down Kenny's road all the time going to and from work. I have to constantly slow dO'WTI for people, not walking on the side of the road, walking down the middle ofthe road, biC}des are required to ride single file to not get in the way of traffic. It happens all the time, you have to keep your eyes out lor children it's even a bigger concern especially when you're that close to a beach. You have to teach your children to stay out from the midd]e of the road. It has nothing to do with people coming out of the restaurant, it has to do with trafiic in the middle of the street, it has to do with traffic you're not supposed to walk down the middle ofthe street. The other thing I'd like to say is I've never seen any of the staff or owners at the Elbow Room deny someone the ability to use the telephone to deny someone to call a taxicab. There is public transportation in Southold. It is not free. Transportation anywhere is not free. You can caU a cab at any time whether it be 10:00 at night or4 in the morning and they will come and get you. Even past that, I've seen the staff personally offer people rides home if a cab was notavai ]ab]e. I've never seen any other business do that and take such an interest in the community. Living right next door on the subject of noise. ] am literally 60' out their kitchen door and I have never heard so much as ap]anking dish, screaming 0 ryelling. I'm right there. I'm closer that any other neighbors. I've never heard an)'lhing. I hear more noise from children playing at the beach than 1 do from the restaurant. I think I make more noise myself than all the patrons in the restaurant combined. It's not a concern to me. I can~ imagine that people living Y, a mile or 7/IO's ofmi]eor a mile and a Y, away ever hear an)'lhing from that restaurant. Traffic always makes noise. I'd much rather live whefe I do than Main St. in Greenport. I've never been woken up in the middle of the night by traffic leaving there. The restaurant doeSll~ open until noon. Early mornings it's not construction in the middle of Manhattan so noise simply is not an issue. Thank yo'. CHAIRMAN: We are going onto another issue, we'l be back to you in a couple of minutes. We are now going to go onto Mrs. Moore. I'm concluding this hearing until no later than ]0 minutes to II, okay? Mrs. Moore? MRS. MOORE: No, I think aU the things have been stated. CHAIRMAN: By the way we are still looking for the sign-in sheet whoever may have it. Stosh can you just send it up? MR. TUNIS: Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to speak again. I don't think that the goals of the applicant and the community are mutually exclusive. J've listened to the neighbors here and I've found them to be with basis. I think theircommenls are well placed. I think they spoke articulalely, and I think they spoke with a sincere heart. I think they like the fact that they like the fact that there isa restaurant here bul goo dpeople operate thisrestauranl and I think they would like to see renovated and beautified. [think what they are concerned about is you know, does it get much bigger, does il change in nature, does it become more of a nightclub or a bar. And intentional deleterious impacts that could come with than. It's incumbent to everybody to make sure that doesn~ happen Ihal mitigation occurs. There's a 13 year history that Mr. Berlinger spoke about. And the l3 years that he's been there, a lot of these things that many of the neighbors are concerned about have not happened. Theyhaven~ happened. There's no basis to think that they might happen. I understand their concern, it's incwnbent on all ofus to try to address that - Mrs. Tortora we had a discussion the]ast time I was here about condilions and covenants and restrictions. ] think and IVe spoken to Pat Moore who's a tough and worthy adversary but perhaps I can speak again with her to see about compromises and condilions can be achieved. MEMBER TORTORA: I was going to ask about thaI because as we a1] know the current owners, a variance runs with the land, a use variance, and we don~ know what's going to happen in Ihe futwe. 'Where you are going I like it. e Page 48 - Public Hearing November 14, 2002. Regular Meeting Southold Town Board of Appeals e MR. TUNIS: We can guarantee a future. I had Mr. Berlinger, the owner step up and tell us about the establishment. There aren't cabarets and all nighl drinking fests, and things of that nature. I don~ Ihink anyone would say that it has happened. But I understand that the neighbors are concerned that in the future it might. Or if the restaurant is ever sold that the new ownership mighl take it differently. But as variances run with the land, so do covenants and restrictions and enlorceable, J remember you asked me that question. With code enforcement, back to this board- Ihisboard can revoke anyreliefitgrants if there isn't strict adherence and comp liance with these conditions with these restrictions. I think reasonable people can sit down and work out compromises so these types oflhings do not happen to take adequate mitigation. Some of the covenants and restrictions thatlhere shou]d be a discussion about should speak to hours ofoperation,b]ack sp]ashlighting, a mature landscaping pi an,timerestrictionsondeliveries and things of that nature to insure that it's a sensitive neighbor,bul it stays a family type of restaurant and the restaurant that it has been for many, many years. I think this the Town Board if! can analogize if in it's infinite wisdom past legislation that allowed nonconforming uses to expand al a grealer rale than 15%, 30% if there is adequate landscaping and that the building is made more aesthical1ypleasing and that there isno restriction how Ihal space can be used. But I would suggest and I will conclude is we all wish 10 beautii)'the restauranl. We all wish that it's clapboard and it looks the way it's proposed and with handicap acces sand bathrooms and lifts and all of that, it will be a much better facility. In the law, it speaks about special circumstances and financial hardships there needs to be some sort of incentive to give my client an Opportunily 10 invest all those monies and seek bank fmanning to ensure that they get a rate ofretum to pay back the bank for giving lhem the money to beauti i)'thisand il'sjustnol feasible if there isn't some sort oflimited expansion and overall beautification and I think I heard someone say we should interpret these statutes narrowly, let's interpret them fairly. I think everyone will be protel::ted and win out. Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Mr. Patton'! MR. PATION; I have a question whal happens when the prior Planning Board - the Planning Board was a comment was made at the last Planning Board meeting when they granted a prior extension thaI the P]aruting Board was supposed to put bushes around the place. It was never done, did the Planning Board ever address that or you peop]e ever address that'! CHAIRMAN: We don't address those particular concerns. MR. PATTON: I don't think the Planning Board ever addressed that either. The old OWIlers were supposed to put bushes in and stuff and it was never done. What I'm concerned aboul is his anomeytalks about who's going to enforce this they never enforced the prior thing that was suppnsed to be done. CHAIRMAN: I assure you the Planning Board does a wonderful job with things in reference to things like that. And they are going to do it this time if anything occurs. Would}\:lu raise your right band. Do you so]enm1y swear the infonnation you are about to give is the tmth to the best of your knowledge? CONSTANTINE DRODROPOLlS: My name is Constantine Drodropolis, 1330 N. Sea Drive, Southold. My understanding of the restaurant business is that the sale ofliquorprovides the greatest retumofprofit. I think that needs to be taken into consideration in terms of the expansion of the bar. The floor plan if! remember accurately indicates thaI the looose will be adjacent to the bar. A very, very, convenient spillover for bar patrons. As Mr. Twris just indicated, money will have to come from some source 10 pay for these expansions and I suggest that a great deal of that money will probab]ycome from the sale of liquor. I would aiso like 10 caI] for your attention that in terms ofcovenanlS that run with the land, which I agree with Mr. Tunis are certainly enforceable. He was careful not to mention covenants that run with the land that would prohibit live music, jukebox music or any other sort of entertainment that would certainly adversely affect the quality of life in the area. Thank )OU. CHAIRMAN: One more hand on the west side of the room. You spoke before, sir. 10HNKASMATlS: "1 try not to be too repetitive. Ijusthave a question. 10hn Kasmatis, I'd like to ask the question how does the zoning board enforce covenants? CHAIRMAN: We don't enforce anything, it's done by code enforcement. page" c Hearing Nove_2002 - Regular Meeling Southold Town Board of Appeals MR. KASMATIS: If there is no code for what the covenant covers like noise and music and live bands. How is it enlbrced'! MEMBER TORTORA; There are conditions. There are a couple of things that he is discussing. Covenants and restrictions and their specific condition. He has just said that he is willing to discuss restrictions, limiting the hours of operation, limiting the impacllo the community. As a matter arlaw, this board is required to address thaI 10 listen to him to hear what he has 10 say, and to enter that into evidence, and I would like him to submit that to us. How that is enforced can either come in the fonn of a covenant and restriction. It can come in of condition that says if it's not, any board member can inspect it and irit's not enforced, the CO can be ripped right there. CHAIRMAN: In jeopardy. MEMBER TORTORA: So, there are a number of ways that this can occur. We are starting to talk about this now, but in fairness to the applicant and fairness to everyone in this room. We should be talking about it. MR. KASMATlS: I agree, but my question is if there is a noise violation, or on a Saturday night when all officials of any town are not available, can somebody call the police in the town of South old and say issue a noise summons'? CHAIRMAN: No. Wedon~ have a noise ordinance. MEMBER TORTORA: But you don't have that for your neighbors either. If your neighbors are playing music at 1:00 in the morning, you do the same thing I do, you call the police and you say hello, it's waking me up, but there is no noise ordinance. So there are certain things we can restrict and certain things that we can look at. But I think we all should look at those things right now and put them on the table. CHAIRMAN: I don't want you to leave thinking that we enforce anything, we don~ enforce it. We write it, and it's enforced by somebody else. MR. KASMA TIS: You answered my question, thank you. CHAIRMAN: John Nickles, Jr. Do you solenmly swear the infonnation you are about to give is the truth to the best of ).'Our knowledge'? JOHN NICKLES, JR; Yes it do. John Nickles, Jr. of South old. I represent the Southold Business Alliance. I'd like to commend the Southold Tovm Board of Appeals on the job they are doing, unfortunately I think that our town code has made just about everything nonconfonning to it's current use. That's a common thing that we find on business properties, and when you look at both schedules and setbacks, you can fmd other nonconfonnities. CHAIRMAN: That's why we are so busy, John. MR. NICKLES: That's why I'm giving you some credit. The people here that live in the neighborhood, their concerns are valid. I think the track record of this restaurant speaks for itself,and I think that that s houldbetrusted. I think these people are reasonable and they understand the concerns of this conununity. And if they are willing to talk about covenants and restrictions that run with theland,andin the event that these people are not he owners an}1nore, and it would restrict the type of activities that are of concern then I think that there isn\ a whole lot here to hold back this renovation. I'd just like to say that I give it my support and as the president of the Southold B usiness Alliance 1 think that my board of directors whom I had a meeting with this evening also agree. Thank you. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Tunis can I ask you a question, sir'! MR. TUNIS: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN: In light of the hour, is there any submission that you would like to come forward with regarding those particular conditions that you are a[luding to before'? e Page 50 . Public Hearing November 14, 2002. Regular Meeting Southold Town Board of Appeals e MR. TUNIS: Certainly. I don~ think it should be done Wlilaterally by the applicant. I've asked this board and I have discussed it with council and I've asked this board for some guidance on that. I would be happy to have, and 1 don\ know ifit's appropriate, a member of the Town Board, a council of the Town Board, a couple or I'll meet with all of them if they want, but neighbors- CHAIRMAN: Just submit whatever you want. You have the best guidance in the world, he has Southold CoucH here that represents the entire members of the association, so how much better guidance could you have. MR. TUNIS: I will submit a written set of proposed covenants and restrictions that will be in format fonn that would be the identical covenants and restrictions filed with the countyc1erk and permanently placed on the deed. Those are enforceable by the town attorney, code enforcement and various other bodies. We spoke about noise ordinances - it's my understanding, my co-council has stated that there are such limitations and legislation passed by the County of Suffolk and police have always been verycarefu/, especially in a residential neighborhood, not to allow an establishment to go unfettered especially if there's a valid complaint on noise. I don~ think there has been one in the past. We don\ anticipate there will be but, Mr. Chainnan I would be happy to sit down with council, we'l come up with some proposed covenants and restrictions, and m submit them in writing. I don~ hear a lot of these covenants and restrictions that would go a long way to addressing or mitigating these potential hannful deleterious impacts these neighbors are stating might occur in the future. Jt'snot our intention. Jt'snotourintentiontochange what we are. Reasonable restrictions are prudent, proper and we will certainly be providing that and any guidance this board will give to that I think will be veryhe1pful. MEMBER TORTORA: If you were to bring something before the board, I would be interested in homs of operationtopreventitfrombeinga24hour. MR. TUNIS: Certainly, I think we have no intention of staying until 4, 3, or even 2. The type of business that we have now and in the future does not necessitate it. It's never been done. The bar crowd are people who have had dinner and who go the lounge with their parties and have an after dinner drink, and go home. That is the type oflate night business that exists. CHAIRMAN: Remember we are concluding very shortly here. MR. TUNIS: We are happy to provide hours of operation, m discuss it with council and- MEMBER TORTORA: Will you also include-- MR TUNIS: m discuss it with my client, we1l take a very reasonable position on this. MEMBER TORTORA: Ifthe:re is a meeting grOlUld, we can find it MR. TIJNIS: I will do so, thank }'Ou. CHAIRMAN: This is my suggestion to the board, I am still letting you speak sir, so hold on. We are going to conclude this hearing to no more further verbatim testimony, okay. We are asking you to submit those conditions by Dec. S"'ifyou would. We will then close the hearing as a matter of right on De>:. 12. And the record will still remain open for anybody who would like to submit a letter to this board. Who either has not spoken tonight or because of this meeting has thought of something that they maybe slept on. Whatever the case maybe. I just want to have one discussion, Mr. Berlinger before we leave. Could I just ask you to step up to the mike one more time, Mr. Berlinger'! Mr. Berlinger, I've known you for a long tirne. I in fact went to school with you. You are a little younger than I am. I've known you to be a very upstanding individual. We were in the same school. An}thing Mr. Tunis has said tonight regarding your restaurant is the truth,is it not? In other words, you are not changing an)1.hing, there's anything but a facelift in this and an increase of the restaurant. MR. BERLINGER: That's right. I can hardly keep my ~s open right now, we have no intentions of keeping the restaurant open until 2 or 3 in the morning. Page - c Hearing Nove'2002 - Regular Meeting Southold Town Board of Appeals CHAlRMAN; Evel)thing he has said tonight is absolutely correct? MR. BERLINGER: Yes. CHAIRMAN: I'm not questioning anything he said, I'mjust wanted you to affinn that. MR BERLINGER: You have my word. CHAIRMAN: This will be the final speaker, by the way. Can you state your name for the record? MONTE SQNOMBORN: Monte Sonombom. CHAIRMAN: Do you solemnly swear the information you are about to give is the truth to the best of your knowledge? MR. SONOMBORN: Yea. I guess really it's a series of questions. J have a home diagonally across from the restaurant, and what strikes me is the restaurant has already expanded dramatically. There is a bar crowd. We hear it in the swnmer. In tenns of economic liability, r don~ know how a bank would finance an expansion unless the restaurantweren'alreadyfairlysllccessfuL What troubles me, this is not an anti-business issue, but it's an issue of trying to preserve what is a residential neighborhood and I think that's real Iythe issue that I would ask you to consider. CHAIRMAN: Ma'am I've said this is the final testimony, can I ask you please to reduce it to writing because of the hour. I thank you for your courtesy, I thank evel)body for everybody's courtesy tonight. This was an eXlremely courteoushearingtonighl. I wish you safe home, and a happy holiday. I make amotion closing the hearing to verbatim testimony and recessing the hearing. Endofhearing. Prepared by Jessica Boger ftom lape recordings. e -