Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-09/10/1970 lapp Southold Town Board o eals SOUTHOLD, L. I., N. Y, 119'"71 Telephone 765-96~0 APPEAL BOARD MEMBER Robert V-/. Gillisple, Jr., Choirman Robert Bersen Charles Grif~onis, Jr. Ser~e Doyen, Jr. Fred Hulse, Jr. I~INUTES $~O~D TO~N B~ARD ~ APPEALS A ~eg~lsm meeting of the ~$ou~held Town Beam~ of ADpeals was hel~ at 7:30 P~N., Thursday;' $eptem~er 10, 1970, at ~e To~ 0ff2ee, ~ Eoa~. $~$he~, New Teak. Also p~esen$: Absent: Nm. 'Reber~ Be~gea; Nr. ~erge Doyen, Jr. P~B~.T~ ~RIN~:- A rehesm~ng em A~aI Ne. '1342 -7:30 P.E., (E.D~S~T.), mp~. appltsati~ ef H~ro$~e Re~y Oe~p~, $55 ~r ize Hi.way,. ~0ek,~.. NeW Ye~k, for. appr~al of access. ~ ove~. p~iva~e ~i~-ef-~y ~ ae~e~ce wi~h the ~ate of New York T~ ~w~ ~C~i~' 2~A. Lecati~ ef preper~$: private ~i~t-ef.way ~f south ~st side of Hickory Avenme (p~lva~e ~oad), Map of Goose Bay Estates, ~utho~, New. Ye~k. ~ .~hai~ ep~ed t~ ~g by re~d~g ~he ~pliea~ ~r app~e~I of access, legal noti~e of'he~ing, ~fi~avit a~eS~ing ~e ~s p~bliea$i~ ~ ~he official newspapers, ~d me, ice $~ the appli- THE GHAIRNAN: I~ there anyone present who wishes ~e speak for this a~plicatien? (There was me response. ) ~n~ CHAIRMAN: Is ~he~e anyone D~esent who wishes to speak against -2- I~R. ~AROID L. 3MITH: I am 3ecreta~y of Goose Bay Estates which opposed this application on June 4th. I and so~e ot~ ~ers ef ~til toni~t but it was net cle~ w~ther it was adjoined for a f~t~ he~g or decision. I was ~structed by t~ Board of Directors to appe~ as an observe. Before the Board makes a decision, I would like to ~ake two requests. I preface each with the same explanation. The Association opposed the application om the ground that the Association does not own the roads. Tt has a financial interest in that it ~aintains the paving of tho roads. TEE C~l.~: l~ho does own the roads? ~. -~IITIt.- Tho roads are owned by abutting owners. Since the Association maintains the roads, and since it is ass-mad that im- provement of the property is likely to damage tho roads, the A~soci- aries feels it has a financial interest and is concerned about what it will have to spend to repair the roads. The first request is that if the Boa~d grants the application its decision will ~ake it clear that the Board is not deciding the question as to whether 2[arrotine Realty Corp. has the right to use private roads. The other request is that if the Board grants the application it will be conditional upon Harrotinels undertaking to repair damage done to Goose Bay Estates caused by Harrotine. Both of these requests are made without intention to waive our objection. If tho Board grants the application, we would like to have the Board sub,it these two requests. T~E CHAIRMAN: No. One- yes; No. Two- no. This Board does not intend to intervene in what may become a legal matter. We have enough trouble understanding zoning regulations (along with attorneys) without intervening when the condition would be that the applicant repair damage that could take in hundreds or thousands of feet of highway. It would be difficult to say whether the damage was caused by frost or so~e other reason. I donlt think the Board should bo put in that position. ~R. ]~'ur.~: ~ believe F~. Smith has posed two questions. One, that we say ~ have no right to give access. Two, that Harrontine fix the roads. ~. BH~: I am not going to volunteer an opinion on a legal question. On the second question you are not, in doing that, taking a position as to who owns the roads. You are Just taking ou~ word for it that we maiutain the roads. -3- HR. HULS~ You miBinterpreted what I acid. I feel that if we have no right to give access over yeu~ roads, we have no right to deny access over his own property according to tho usual ~ules, eS. THE CHAIRHAH: Mhat he is saying is that if we have no right to give assess we certainly have no right to require that amy access should be reimbursed by the applicant. HR. ~14XTH: You know definitely what the limitations a~e. are merely suggesting that you do this if you feel you san. THE CHAIRNAH: 0u~ experience when trying to adjudicate differences is that if people reach a point of coming here and a~guing, sometimes we a~e able te get people together. HR. fl~XTH= We have talked to I~. Reese. He was here on the 20th of August. He wanted tho Association to waive objection. He would meke an agreement that he.would repair any damage to the road but what his position would be now, I dontt know. TeE CBAIRI~S~ Are we not talking about a lot of things that the Boa~d santt do. I would interpret it this way, ~self. The Boa~d is em~°werod only to consider access. Access is several thousand feet in most cases that we encounter. -qection 280-A of the To~3 Law of New York State deesn. Jt eu~owor the Beard of Appeals to go beyond ou~ legal constituted authority to ~ake conditions to l~preve all roads that might lead to an individnalJs property. It would seem to me that you have the power to deny access to Harrotino Realty if you wish. I donJt know how the scurfs will decide. HR. ~ We a~e not presu~aing. We are Just asking you to consider this to see if you have the power. HR. ~RIG(~ISl I dontt think we can put any restrictions on it. I don~tt think we should great this as he has applied for it. The court would have to settle it. Find out whether he has the right to uso your roads. ~ C~AIR~AH.- We first eonsidured this back in June. Is there anyone else who wishes to spea~ at this time? W. F. Hasle, Taxpayer** I live at 19% Oak Avenue. ~ls property involved.is about 300 feet bac~ from tho water. I belteYo at the previous meeting you g~anted pe~mission for two buildings to be put on two lots. Nothing has been done yet. HR. I~A~IA~ Would it be possible for a ~an to build, in this town, on 100 ft. x 12~ ft.? This p~operty may even be able to take that. T~o houses on each of these three lots; so there could be six houses on that piece of property. -4- THE C~AIRNA~ You would have to go be£ore the Planning Board and it is unlikely that it would be g~anted as the County has gone to ~0,000 sqo ftc, and the To~n now requires 20,000 sqo ft., so I W~Ald say, ~o#. Here is a propert~ that Il 10O ft. m the water and 300 ft.,long.., thetis about 30,000 sq. ft... 90,000 sq. ft. total. What ia requested is that the original property which was o~ned by someone else be permitted to be divided into a,b,c, and obviously it~s a difficult place to get into. That's the reason they came in here for access. There would be no problem at the moment. There would be a problem if there were more than three houses. I think you a~e safe as fa~ as thefts concerned. Does that answer your question? Yea. ~. ERNE3T C~RI~TE~EN~ I live on Ceda~ Drive. Is there Just one application before the Board? TEE CHAIRI~.AN= We are considering Appeal No. 13~2 to subdivide a piece of property for access. ~. T~RY, Building Inspestor~ There is the question of access te ~wo vacant lots there. '2~ CEAIR~AI~ For approval of access. T~at is the only thing the Board is~acting on. Yhere I ~tsled you was in reading the Notice of Disapproval of the Building Department. I will offer a resolution g~anting application as applied for. Approval of access is granted to applicant ~ver his o~n property, subject to the approval of the Building Y~spestor as to the conditions of access. Does that cover everything you wanted? MR. SI~T~ The Board is not deciding whether or not Har~otine has the right to use such roads. 1,~. JA~ ROGAN: I live at 115 Oak Avenue. Does that mean that lot in Goose Bay Estates or does that Just mean the property that has been known as ~the farm#? T~E OEAIRNAN.' Thi~ Just concerns the Harrotine property. ~. KOCH, 850 Oak Avenue: You stated that these roads do not belong to Goose Bay Civic Association but they belong to the people who live in Goose Bay. They take care of them through a certain amount we pay each year. The roads belong to individual owners. I mean the individual owners can stop anyone from going through their property that they pay taxes on. It would be better for the Realty Co,any to deal with all panties..You would have to have each individual gra~t the privilege to go over the road. T~E CEAIRFA~: I think we understand this. Every resident of Gosse Bay will have to grant. After ~wvestigati~n and inspectic~ the Boa~d finds that the applicant has had so~e disagreement with Geese Bay Civic Association, Inc. with regard to access to the applicantts property over roads which a~e ~aintained by Geese Bay Civic Association but net c~ned by Goose Bay CiVic Association, but which are claimed by Goose Bay Civic Association to be private reads. T~e Board is making no determination as to the merits of this dispute. The Board finds that strict application of the O~dinance would produce practical difficulties er unnecessary ha~dship; the hardship created is ,,-ique and would not be sha~ed by all properties alike in the immediate vicinity of this property and in the same use district; and the variance will not change the character of the neighborhood, and will observe the spirit of the Ordinance. 0~ motion by 1~. Gillispie, seconded by ~. Hulse, it was RE~OL~ED Harrontine Realty Corporation, 855 Sonrise Highway, Lynbrook, New York, be ~ANTED approval of access as applied for. The approval is g~anted ever his own property; subject to the approval of the Building Inspector as to the conditions of access. Vote of the Board:- Ayes:-Messrs: Gillispie, Grigonis, Hulse. PUBLIC HEARING: A rehearing on Appeal No. 1361 - 7:45 P.M., (E.D.a.T.), upon application of Peter T. Neyland, 115 Broadway, Rockville Centre, N. Y., for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, ~ection 303, 305, 308, Section 300, Subsection 6, and Section 309, for permission to build new one famil~ dwelling on lot with less than 12,500 sq. ft. ef a~ea, and construct accessory building in front yard area. Location of property: east side of Cedar La~e (Private Road), East Fission, New York, hounded north by Lot..~ 126 of Gardiners Bay -~ub., ~ec. II, and Spring Pond, east by Spring Pond, south by LOt ~ 127 of Gardiners Bay auD., Sec. II, and Spring Pond, west by Cedar Lane (Private Road).. T~E CHA~i~AN: Let the records show that we have received a letter from Mr. Gary..Olsen, attorney for Peter T. Neyland, Appeal Nc. 1361, withdrawing this application. ~n motion by F~. Hulee, seconded by l~r. G~lgonis, it was EE~OL~ED application of Peter T. Neyland, 115 Broadway, Rockville Centre, New York, (Appeal ~1361), is being withdrawn without prejudice to the filing of a.new application. Vote of the Board: A~es:- Messrs: Gillispie, Grigonis, Hulse. -6- PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 1365 - 8:15 P.li. (E.D.S.T), upon applisation cf Robert l~eib & Wife, private road ~Truma~ts.Paths, - #Bay-Lake Park#, bounded north .by J. lillligan; east by 8chmltt & Lynch; south by N. %/illiams; west by Marion Lake; East Marion, N. Y. for permit to locate a detached accessory building in the front yamd area. A Variance to tmticle III, section 300, subsection 6 and section 309 of the Building Zone ordinance. Fee paid $5.00. The Ohairman opened the hearing by reading the application for a variance, legal notice of hearing, affidavit attesting te its publication in the official newspapers, and notice to the applicant. THE CIlAIRMAN~ Is there anyone present who wishes to speak for this application? 1~. R(~ERT I~EIB~ I would like to know what is Article III, subsection 6? I was Just wondering who is the Judge as to where your front ya,~d is. We thihk it ia c~ the lake. THE CHAIRMAn: I sha~e your feeling. I have a similar situa- tion. Lawyers disagree. Legally, the front yard iJ~.the yard that faces the access. In your sase, you enter the property from a private road and that would be your front yard from a legal sense, which is why you are in here. In y~u~ particula~ eit~ation you do not have a plashed subdivision but have houses scattered a~onnd, w~ich is pleasant enough. I~R. I~EIB: No person that I know of would have their front yard they facing the backdoors of others. THE CHAIRI~AN: This is one of the arguments for planners, get to work soon enough. I*~. I~EIB~ ~uppose we were to buy the road? I%~. ~: I don~tt think that would be necessary. no difference. 1~. l~EIBi The access is the right-of-way. if It would thing is that if you have a street along the lake or Sound, people with lets overlooking the Sound or lake consider the rear of their house is part of the highway; but what about people on the other side of the road? They are afflicted with garbage cans. However, I am on you~ side,. I donSt know how the rest of the Board feels about it. Other houses in the area are afflicted with the same problem. If you are happy with it where it is, I think iris the best place. ~e reason why we have to consider this sort of MR. ~: I am not opposed. -7- TEE CHAIRNAX: Is there anyone present whe wishes to speak against this application? (There was no resp~se.) After investigation and inspection the Board finds that the applicant requests permission to locate a detached accesse~y building in the front yard area. If the building were located in the back of the house (lak~ side), they would lose the stall amo~t of outdoor living area that is there. Other properties and buildings that border on the road have their back yards and sheds facing the applicant. Also, preperties that border ea the lake have their front door on lake side. The Board finds that strict application of the O~dinance would produce practical difficulties or --~ecessary ha~dship; the hardship created is unique and would mot be shared by all properties alike in the immediate vicinity of this property and in the sans use district; and the variance will not change the ch~acter of the neighborhood, and will observe the spirit of the Ordinance. On n~tion by ~r. Grigonis, seconded by 1~. Hulse, it RE~O~VED Robert ~eib & Wife, Bay Lake Park Road, True,ets Path, East l~arim, N. Y. be GRANw~ approval to locate a detached accessory building in the front yard area. Location ef property: private road STrun~nts Pathe, SBay-Lak~ Park#, East l~ion, N. Y. Vote of the Board: Ayes:- ~ssrs: Gillispie, Grig~is, Hulse. PUBLI~ HEAR~XG~ Appeal No. 1364 - 8~30 P.N., (E.D.~.T.), upon application of Henry Barry & ~ife, Pine Neck Road, ~onthold, New York, for approval of access to an interior lot bounded north by Jockey Creek; east by C. Albur~tsen; south by other l~d of applicant~ west by I. ~haef; as a variance in accordance with the provisions of~eetl~ 280-A of the Town Law. [laid property being ~ the northerly side of Pine Neck Road, Bouthold, New Yerk. Fee paid $5.00. The Chairman opened the hearing by reading the application for approval of access, legal notice of hearing, affidavit attesting to its publicatl~ in the official newspapers, and notice to the applicant. THE CHAIRIng= ~s there anyone present who wishes to speak for this application? ~. u~Ry BARRY~ I think the situation ie substantially as indicated in the application. The previous owner, Chadbou~ne, originally had a cottage on the Creek and built a cottage on the second portion. In 19~0 they mold a cottage on the north portion, and in 194~ sold one on the seuth portion. I bought the whole property in 1962. -8- 1~. BAltRY ~ ~ockey Creek. ~. RUL~E: T~ C~AIR~: You bought from two separate o~nerc? ~. BARRY: ~ negotiatt~s we~e h~dled t~ou~ ~o~s ~ch but two sisters ~ed ~e of t~ corrals. All ~ed. ~ C~: I d~tt th~k it c~cems us because t~ p~operty il l~ge eng~ te divide ~ two now. clea~ ~d dist~ct ~e~ships. ~ C~: (Referr~g to ~p) ~e is a ~p. You have no~ caressed a divid~g l~e ~ you? t~ fr~ ~ouse ~ P~e Here Road. abou~ 170 f~. from ~ m~mn~ a~ ~e road ~o ~e midd~ of ~ preoum a s~y ~ be necessary. ~e you p~g on sell~g. You are goin~ to demolish this present cottage? 1~t. TE~RY, Butkldiug ~mspecto~: Not at the present ti~e. (M~. Terry aad Board me~bers referred to the N~p and discussed THE OltAIR~A~'. 230 feet would give about a 30 ft. backyard. ~. ~: That wou~d be okay because it could be put forward. ~ GHAIRI~: If you plan to do this, make another application to divide the lot. If the O~dinance does change, under the proposed new O~dinance you would have 40,000 sq. ft. miniwaxm. -9- 1~o TE~Y, Building Inspector~ If you approve access through the front lot to the rear lot that is-all that is necessary. Describe the front lot and leave the rear lot as a parcel. That would con- stitute enough to hold it. ~ C~A~RI~ We could define the rea~ lot by defining the front lot. That covers it. l~. BA~RY~ Yon are ta~king about making the line at what point? THE CBAIR~AN~ The dividing line between the north lot and tbs south lot would commence at a point 230 feet from Pine Neck Road along the west boundary on course north 5° and proceeding in an easterly direction at right angles to the aforementioned line to intercept a parallel line forn~tng the easterly boundary of the applicantts property.., a distance ef 100 feet. 1,~. T~RY, Building Inspectors l~ould you prefer to have access on the easterly line of tbs lot? T~E CtL4~RHA~: The access which the Board approves in this application is 1~ ft. paralleling the easterly border of the property proceeding fro~ Pine Neck Road, Lot ~ 8 as described in the survey of Van Tnyl, December 8, 1962. The access we approve is !5 ft. along the easterly side of Pine Neck Road lot. Sic have to describe the exact location of where your access is in case you sell this. THE CRAIRI~AN~ Is there anyone present who wishes to speak against t~is application? (There was no response.) After investigation and inspection the Board finds that the applicant requests permission for approval of access to an interior lot. It is desired that total property be divided into two parcels in a manner that will permit access to the northern portion and possible sale of either or both portions at a future date. The requested variance is for a continuance efa preexisting condition. The Board finds tBat strict application of the Ordinance would produce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship; the hardship created is unique and would not be shared by all properties alike in the immediate vicinity ef this property and in the same use district; and the variance will not change the character of the neighborhood, and will observe the spirit of tbs Ordinance. On motion by ~r. Halco, seconded by ~r. Grigonis, it was RES0LVED Henry Barry & l~ife, Pine Neck Road, Southold, New York, be GRA~TED approval of access to am interior lot as applied for c~ property bounded north by ~.ocke2 Creek, east by C. Albertsom; south by other land of applicant, west by I. 8chaef. This approval is subject to the following conditions~ -10- 1. The access to be 15 feet paralleling the easterly border of the property proceeding from Pine Neck Road. 2. The dividing line between the north lot and the south lot would co~aence at a point 230 feet from Pine Neck Road along the west boundary on course north 5e and proceed in an easterly direction at right angles to the aforementioned line to intercept a parallel line forming the easterly boundary of the applicantts property.., a distance ef 100 feet. Vote of the Board~ Ayes:- ltsssrs. Gtllispie, Grigonis, tIulse. FUBLIO HEARING: Appeal No. 1363 - 8:45 P.M. (E.D.I~.T.), upon application of Lois Barker, a/c The Love Lane ~cp, Love. Land, llattituck, New York, for a special exception to erect a wall sign on side wall of existing business building as provided in Article IV, section 408 and 408-(b) of the Building Zone (~dinance. Location of property~ east side of Love Lane, Mattituck, N. Y., bounded north by Dram; east by Hattituck Park District and others; south by M. Kelsey; west by Love Lane. Fee paid $5.00. The Ohairma~ opened the hearing by reading the application for a special exception, legal notice of hea~ing; affidavit attesting to its publication in the official newspapers, and notice to the applicant. T~E CIIA~: Is there anyone present who wishes to speak for this application? LOI~ B~: I am Lois Barker. I think I have explained it in full in the application. I have a big blank wall that is crying for advertising. I*~. T~tRY, Building Inspectors When the Ordinance first went into effect, there Used to be a bu!le~in board there. Since then it has been removed. There is now a blank wall. This is not a public street. The Park District owns part of it, Kelsey owns part of it, and the Park District leases it. NR. GRIG~IS: I move that we grant the application as applied for subJect.to the usual sign conditions. After investigation and inspection the Board finds that the applicant requests a special exception te erect a wall sign on side wall of existing business building located east st~e of Love Lane, Mattituck, New York. The findings of the Board are that the applicant is unable to erect a g~ound sign in this location. The Board finds that the public convenience a~d welfare and Justice will be served and the legally established or permitted use of neighborhood property and adjoining use districts will not be pe.~.u~.a, ent.ly or substantially injured and the spirit of the 0~dinance WLA£ De oDserYed. -11- motion by H~. Grigonis, seconded by Nm. Gillispie, it was ~OLVEDLois Barker, a/c The Love Lane Shop, Love Lane, Mattituck, New York, be GRANTEDa special exception to erect a wall sign on side wall of existing business building with the condition that this advertising display shall be 7 ft. x 8 ft. Vote of the Boamd=- Ayes=- Messrs. Gillispie, Grigonis, Hulas. On motion by Mr. Gillispie, seconded by Hr. Hnlse, it was RE~OLVED to postpone hea~ing on Appeal No. 13%1, Virginia E. I~ulcher, 7 Ha~lesS Place, West He,stead, N. Y., to October 1, 1970, at 7=30 P.M., if we hear from her indicating that she will be able to appea~ at that ti~e. Vets of the Board= Ayes=- Messrs: Gillispie, Grigonis, Hulse. On motion by Mr. Rulso, seconded by Mr. Grigonis, it was RF~OL¥~ that the minutes of the 8outhold To~nBoard of Appeals dated August 20, 1970, be approved as submitted. Vote of the Board= Ayes:- Messrs. Gillispie, Grigonis, Rulse. On motion by Mr. Grigonis, seconded by Mr. Hulse, it was RE~OLVED that Sign Permit Renewals; two for 01d Mill ?,n, and one for Gsmdiners Bay Estates be reviewed, approved and signed. Vote of the Board= Ayes=- Messrs= Gillispie, Grigonis, Hulse. On motion by Mr. Gillispie, seconded by ~. ~ulse, it was R~OLVED that the next n~eting of the ~outhold To~n Board of Appeals be held on Thursday, October 1, 1970, at 7~30 P.M. (E.-~.T.) at the Town Office, . Main Road, Southold, New York. Vote of the Board~ Ayes=- Messrs: Gillispie, Grigonls, H~lse. The following budget was prepared for the fiscal year begS--lng ~amua~y 1, 1971.' ~ecretarial Assistance at publio hearings Statimery, f~m printing and postage Library and Subscription to Zoning Bulletin Advertising of Legal Notices. Telephone Travel expense divided as feXlews~ 1. Esti~ated expense f~ three ~e~bers of the Board to attend Association of To,ns meting in New York in February 2. Esti~ted expense of l~r. Doyen, Boa~d $ ~00.00 ~e~ber from Fishers Island for attendance at Board ~eetings inSouthold 3. Estimated travel expense of the Board to Fishers Island Regeneration of Be~d ef Appeals~ na~ as 1~70 sal~; P~a raises as a~eed up~ by t~ C~; P~a ~ additimal ~aize of as a f~t~ differential to the C~. T~~ e~nse of ~ Bo~d of Appeals T~T~ ~eom f~em appel applicati~s ~00.00 _ 720.00 oo.oo 100.00 1,750.00 100.00 1,125.00 ? ~00. O0 Om ~otion by 1~. Hulas, seconded by ~. Grigonis, it was RE~LV~ that Budget fo~ the fiscal yea~ beginning 1, 1971 be adopted and submitted te the Town Board approval. Vote of the Beard: Ayes:- ~esrs: Gillispie, Origonis, Halsa. ~a motlm by 1~. Grigonis, seconded by ~. Hullo, it was RE~I~v~ that the Southold To~n Board of Appeals set 7z30 P.M. (E.S.T.), ~sday, Octobe~ 1, 1970, at t~ Te~ Office, ~ R~ad, ~o~tho~, Now Yo~k, as t~ ti~ ~d p~ce of ~ up~ appltoa- ti~ of ~t~y ~. C~, 1~ ~ ~t~eet, G~eenp~t~ New a/c G~ace B. Ra~, East ~im, New Yo~k, far a v~i~ce aeeo~ee ~tB the Z~g ~d~ce, ~tic~ II~, ~cti~ 303, fo~ pe~ssl~ to set elf lot with ~sa t~ 100 ft. f~t~e. of p~ope~ty: p~ivate rift-of-way off vent side of Roo~ Po~t Road, East ~t~, New Yo~k, bo~ded no~th by L. I. S~d, east by ~d of Grace B. Ra~d, south by p~ivate ~i~t-of-~7, west E~a Bereft. Veto of the Board: Ayes~- l~essrs~ Gilllspie, Origonis, Hulse. On motion By 1~o Gillispis, seconded By 1~o Hulse, it was ~E~OLvF~ that the 5outhold Town Boamd of Appeals set 7:~5 P.M. (EoS.To),.Thu~sday, October 1, 1970, at the Town Office, Main Road, Southold, New York, as the ti~e and place of. hearing upon applica- tion of Edna Koubek, 2~ Cham~lin Place, East Islip, New York, for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Amticle III, -~eotion 303, for permission to set off lots with less than 100 ft. frontage, and for approval of access over private right-of-way in accordance with the State of New York Town Law, ~ection 280A. Location of property`` east side of Harbor Lane, Cutchogue, New York, bounded north by W. P. Tuthill, east by Yugenets Oreck, south by S. Mitacchione, west by Harbor Lane. Vote of the Board`` Ayes``- ~essrs: Gillispie, Grigonis, Hulse. On motion by I~A~. Grig~nis, seconded by Mr. Gillispie, it was RF~OLVED that the Southold Town Board of Appeals set 8.'00 P.M., (E°S.T.), Thumsday, October 1, 1970, at the To~n Office, Main Road, Southold, New York, as the time and place of hearing upon ap~311ca- tion of George Ahlers, 250 Cox Lane, Cutchogue, New York, a/c Martha Milowski, Mattituck, New York, for a variance in assonance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, ~ection 307, for permission to construct addition to existing dwelling with insufficient side yard area. ?.oeation of property: north side of Sound Avenye to Middle Road, Mattituck, New York, bounded north by Middle Road, east by G. M. Riley Estate, south by Sound Avenue, west by F. L. Danowski. Vote of the Board: Ayes:- Messrs. Gillispie, Grigcnis, llulse. On motion Dy ~. Hulse, seconded by Mr. Glllispie, it was ~E~OLVED that the -~outhold To~n Boamd of Appeals set 8:1~ P.M., (E.S.T.), Thu~sdaR, October 1, 1970, at the Town Office, Main Road, Southold, New York, as the time and place of hearing upon applica- tion of Robert Lenzer, caaal Road, Mount Sinai, Now York, for approval of acoess over private right-of-way in accordance with the State of New York Tram Law, Section 280A. Location of property: private right-of-way located east end of Soond View Avenue, Mattituok, New York, Bounded north by land of the applioant, east By land of the applioant, south by land of the applicant, west bR J. Mishae le cko-Eentow. Vote of the Board: Ayes:- Messrs= Gillispie, Grigonis, Hulse. (~ ~otic~ by 1~. Gl~lspte, seconded by 1~o G~ii~onis, it was I~50LVE~ that the 5outho~d To-n Board of ~ppea2s set 8:JO 5outho~d, Ne~ Yo=k, as t~ ti~ ~d ~ace of. ~$~ ~ ~$~ ~f G. ~. ~mith · 5~s, ~c., ~ ~oad, Southold, Ne~ York, a/c ~ul DoefenBacher, P~e Neck ~oad, ~outho~d, Ne~ Y~k, v~ce ~ accerd~o~ ~th the Z~ ~d~ce, ~t~c~ III, dwe~g with ~s~ficient f~t~d setback. ~cati~ of proper~y~ seuth side of P~e Neck Road, Southold, New York, be~ded north by P~e Neck Road, east by ~w. ~iere, south by Fa~view P~k ~ub. ~st by A. M. ~. Vote of the Board: Ayes:- l~essrs. Gillispie, G~igonis, Rulse. The Meeting was adJeu~ned at 9:30 P.M. Respectfully submitted,