Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-08/20/1970MINUTES BOUTH01D TO~R,I B0~RD OF August 20, 1970 A regular meeting of the Southoid Town Board of &ppeals was held at 7:30 P.M., ~nursday~ August 20~ 1970~ at the Town 0ffice~ Main Road~ Southold, New York. There were present.~ Messrs. Fred Hu~se, Jr., Acting Chalrman~ Robert Bergen~ Charles Grlgonis~ Also present.' I~. Howard Terry~. Building _inspector° ~£osent~ Messrso Robert ]~. Gliiispie~ Jr~. Chairman~ ~. Serge Doyens Jr. upon appi[catlon %~est Hempstead~ ~lew York~ for a variance in accordancs with the Zoning 0rdinance~ ~o~ 303~ ~ _ ~00 ~5. ~o~ ~o~o~ o~ ~r~e~ ~m~e ~o~ o~ aou~ side of Peco~ic Bay Blvd. ~ ~ubdivislon ~ap of Edgemere Pa~k~ Map }~o~ 7~2~ part of lot ~ ~ Laurel, ~Yew York. The Chairman opened the hearing by reading the application for a variance, legal notice of hearing, affidavit .attestidg to its publication in the official newspapers, and not~ce to vhe applicant THE CiIAT_RM~J: ~s. Fulcher w~ote a letter to us as follows: (l~tter dated August 17th, and addressed to Y~. Gillispie)~ ~Thank you for your letter of July ~1. Z am sorry I have ~not been able to attend your meetings on Appeal ~13~l for a variance. .I will not be abl® to attend the meeting to be held on ~ugust 20, as Z will be out of to~uu for some ti~. I wish to let the matter stand as is at this time. Thank~you for your kind attention.~ (Signed- Virgin ia E. Fulcher). On motion by I~Lr. Hu!se, seconded by I,~. Bergen~ it was RF~SOL~ that hearing be postponed until further information is received from Virginia E. Fulcher. Vote o£ the Board:~'e~.o~. Messrs. Hulse, Bergen, Grigonis. A discussion was held on Appeal No. 1342~ Harrontine Realty Corp., 8~ Sunrise Highway, Ivvnbrook, New York~ for approval of access over private right-of-way in accordance with the State of New York Town Law, ~otion 280Ao Location of property: private right-of-way off south west side of Hickory Avenue (private road), N~p of Goose Bay Estates, ~outho!d, Ifew York. T~ CI~IR~L~2~: At a prevzous o_ea~ng the attorney For Goose Bay Estates _a~sed the ~uestion as to access of p~ivate roads to this property. Et was left up in the ~ a_r. Is there anyone present who ~shes to speak at this time? I~R. HAR0t~ Mo S!Z~TH: ][es, I represent the Goose Bay Civic Association, Inco I can state that ~ am here as Secretary off the Association which opposed the application. The gentleman on ~ left is Harold P. Schwert~ President of the Goose Bay Association. We received no notice o£ a further hear~ag~ During the day I was informed that this matter might come up tonight. Z spoke to the Building ]inspector sm_d he indicated that it might come up tonight. I raise the question as to whether it was proper to have any further hearing without notice. I then decided I should come and M~. Echwert. could come. E did norwalk anyone else to come from Goose Bay. E did not tmow if~ we would have an opportunity to pa~ticipate, tf there is a further hearing I don~t think it should be held without the presence of mn att orney. Tti~ C~IRF~!: That's a very valid point, i have to agree with you.. %~s are not actnally having a rehearing~ N~o Reese, I bel_eve~ talked to Chairman Gz_lzso~e_ and the Town Attorney talked to F~ G-il!ispie, who is tmable to be here tonight. personal Feeling is that we have no jurisdiction whatsoever tO determine whether the applicant has a right-of-way. ~fe will have to go to a higher court. That is as far as we can go in this matter. ~. S~i~TH~ Zt was my impression that the Board had decided that it could do nothing. At that time the Board felt they had no power. ~. GRIGONiS: I think we Felt that we would leave it open. ~omebody was going to submit a brie£ to us. ~. SMITH: There has been no agreement. ~. Reese attended a meeting of our Association and we discussed the problem and pointed out to ~. Reese that at one time i~. Re~a~d had had access to the property. ~'fe suggested he ascertain whethe~ he could get a right-of-way o~ might already have a right-off-way. He said he would have his attorney~ I~. Tasker, get in touch with us so we could tell him what Facts we have. We did not hear ff~om F~. Tasker. It was pointed out to ~@. Reese that all the property m~mers~ on the road he would have to use to get to the property, had title to the center of the street. The deeds of the p-_~operty owners were granted by !~ir. Reynard~s predecessor in title, before Reynard got his title, so he had no right to give a rlght-of-way. 'I~ne Association did not own the property and the only stipulation was that it maintain the roads and, therefore~ any injury to a road would have to be repaired by the ~&ssociation. it was really the property owners who were in a position of being able to assert property right s. F~o Reese said he wanted to tmow if the ~ssociation would with- draw its objection, and we told him that the Association should not unless the p~operty o~ers withdrew their objection because msmy are members o£ the Association. l~m. Reese said~ that if the Y~ssoci~ ation would withdraw its objections he would agree to fix the roads. The members off the Association felt they were not in a position to waive objection unless the property owners waived their objection. l~[v. Eeese also said he would have the purchasers of that property, omder application, make an annual contribution to maintaining the roads. ~. R~: Zn speaking to ~. Tasker, he indicated it was not in his Jurisdiction. Z am not saying we have legal access or not. ~[e would ask you to make the decision based on the greeds that ~n~ol~ed. f~n invitation was extended to us to join this Association and we fulfilled the requirements of making application and sending a check. The check was returned. They suggested that when t~ee properties were sold three individuals could make applicast2on. I have this letter here. ~ am mystified by all these objections. (6@. Reese showed Letters to the Board). ~SQ. SC~,~ERT: ~. Reese forwarded a check to me for $25 to join the Association. A secretary sent an application to Mm. Reese. The secretary sent the application but was not authorized to do so. Our by-laws say that the property o~ners of Goose Bay could be me~foers~ other members have to be voted on. k~e have never cashed his check because he is not a property owner in Goose Bay and is not permitted to use the roads~ etc. This is a legal question but he did not fulfill the requirements to be a me.foot of the Association. Therefore~ his check was returned. I~. Sd~I_,-TH.- The Y~ssociation, at the ~eeting~ decided not to accept the application. ~ne Harrotine property is not in Goos~ Bay Estates. i do not ;~ow about this second letter which suggests that the purchasers of Harrotin~ property might make application. Their applications would have to come before a meeting of the Association and might be granted but there was no action take~ by the ae~oership that if they apply they would be accepted. i~'~o 2CI~f~T~ This letter says onl~ that they can app!y~ a~ you can or a~yone else ca_n, THE C~v~I,1¢32,,T~ You realize that barring the problem of legal access to this property~ there is no reason wb_y this oo~rzpany can r~ot divide this property. There is more than sufficient area. The only question is legal access which we can not resolve. ?~ether they build a new access~ or however it is done, it is not within our province. ~Ro SI~IiTH~ The property is large enough. The question on this application is whether the access will be granted. YAq. ~,~E: F~o Tasker said it is not a question as to our legal rights of access but that this was not within their province. ~. SM~: Is ~k~. Tasker the To~a Board attorney? THE CI~.IRM~7: Yes. ~Lv. Reese says that i~[r. Tasker is ad- vising him. He gave him advice at the time of the original purchase. ~Lq..SC~ffERT: Am Z to understand that ,YAv. Tasker is i~. Reese's attorney as well as the To~a Board attorney? THE Ct~.IRt~i&2-~: ~ir. Tasker is the Town Attorney. He is not appearzng ~or anyone on tn~ case. He was ~,~. Reese's private attorney but has had no connection in the course of this applica- tion. ~ have not seen I~. Taskero It is possible that the Chairman~ ~o Gillispie~ has but he is out of totem this evening. As far as I am concerned, there wilt be nothing grmuted. I don~t think we can act on it until the rlght-of-way is resolved. If our attorney says we should act, i will see that you are notified° (There was a discussion among Goose Bay residents and it · was asked how it was possible there was no public notice. why was it put on the agenma~.. ~C~_at is the purpose of the discussion?) Thee C~L°.~.~N: This is not a hearing° As 5~ Reese talked to the Chairman. l~. REE~.~'E: I was not here at the last meeting but at the one before when the Chairman said he would like to check with ~. Tasker. I sent my girl do~m here to the last meeting and it was postponed, and it was suggested that i be here. Nobody notified me officially. ~HE CHAIR~N: ~gobody was notified. ~¢e were in the dark because we did not know whether any agreement had been reached. ~Aq. BCP~'RT: SYe have your assurance that we will be notified in the future? These people represent Goose Bay Estates. They have certain ~egal rights. T~ C~&~-R~i~: I guarantee that you will get a notice. If there is ~ny formal action in this matter you will get a notice, and if we decide to get any forma~ action you may be here with a~ attorney~ If there were going to be ~ decision made, you would be lnformed~ ~.s far as i am eonosrned~ we are still ~in and the Town Attorney. This is a progress report to see what has transpired. TT~~.'~ CI-L~.LW2~T~2[: I~ouL~ anyone else like to be heard at this time? (There was no response). On motion by Mr. Bergen, seconded by ~w~. Grigonis, it was RESOL~ that hearing be postponed to September !0, 1970, at 7:30 P. M. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Hulse, Bergen, Grigonis. ~' ~" -Ye 'X~ ~ ~' ~' PD'BLIC ~AR~-~G: Appeal No. 1361 - 8:00 P.M. upon application of Peter T. Neyland, ll% Broadway, Rockville Center, 2~ew York, for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, ~ection 303, 30%~ 308, Section 300, Subsection 6, and Section 309, for permission to build new one family dwelling on lot with less than 12~%00 sq. ft. of area with insufficient setback and insufficient rear yard area.~ and construct accessory building in front yard area. Location of property: east side of Cedar Lane (Private Road), East Marion, -6- New 7fork: bounded north by Lot ~ 126 of Gardiners Bay Sub. ~ Sec. and Spring Pond~ east by Sprlng~Pond, south by Lot ~ 127 of Gardinees Bay Sub., Sec. II~ and Spring Ponds west by Cedar Lane (~ivate Road)~ Fee paid $~.00. Th~ Chairman op~ned the hearlng by mending the application for a variance~ legal notice of hearlng~ affidavit attesting to its publication in the official newspapers~ ~ud notice to the applicant. Ti~ C~LR~&~: !~ there anyone present who wishes to speak for t~s application? G~RT 0~: Yes~ I am ~u attorney and represent Peter T. Neyland. There are a number of people here tonight~ and from what I hav~ gathered before tonight:s meeting~ the basic object!on is that the people here claim they have a better right to t~tle and interest than my client. I think there should be a basic presumption and ths. t Is that the applicant has title and the title question should not be decided in the gppeals building. If the people think they have a better interest let them tell it to the Supreme Court. My clients have the original d~ed. i also have the Titl~ ~surance policy guaranteeing clear title to my client~ which I show to the Board~ T~ C~%~I~Jt: ~t the record show that ~. Olsen has presented the Deed s~d Title policy. ~. O~q: I think there should be a presuraption that the applicant does have title, if the people fe~l they have ~ l~gitimmate dispute as far as title is concerned it should not delay this hearing. TI~ C~L~: ~e have no power on titles. ~. O~N: ~hing concerning titles should not be part of this hearing. The property as shown on the filed Map of Gardiners Bay Estates dated July 21st by Van Tuyl has 100 feet o~ Eedar ~ ~ -~ ~ 127. I h~ve a photostat the site is bo~dso, by Lot ~ 126 and Lo~ ~ copy~ The Subdivision I~ap is ~ilsd in the County~Cl~rk~s It see~s th~s hs~ring ~s not necessary as far as the Bmild~ng Zone Ordinance is concerned due to the fact that on Section 1013 there ~s the ~ollowiag language: ~All of the lots o~ the following described M~ps shall be accepted a~ 303 here~n: ~S'~2odivis~on Map ~ , I thi~k this of ~ecvion 2~ Gardinsrs Bay ~statSs~ July 21~ 19~7~ is sufficient to indicate that the lot should be accepted and~ thsrsfore~ ~hs hearing is unnecessary Inas~ch as the 0rdinanse accepts this partloular lot~ The lot does not have a ~_u~=oer~ I want to point out to ohs Board that there is no requirement in ~ection 1013 that the lot have a numbsr~ it sim~ply says ~all of the lots as described on the Map~. i have looked at subdivision regulations and there is no requirement that lots be given nuu~ers. I think we really fall within 1013. of the subdivision that the~_~e is a Ii the lot in question. There are four cutting it out, def~ing it as a sep~ areas where the road branches out to water. There is definitely a line b~ which I thlak should have a distinct parcel. There are other offf to the water. The road is a cont~ Isled indicating the people would if there Is go~ng to be any argument involved in the total question which It should fall under Section 1013. but at this point~ I will rest. You will note on the map ae between Cedar Lane and rate t~n~t' * There are other give people access to the tween the road and the lots ace as setting it aside as a as where the _ can branches auous road down to Fox v-e the right to use that. I think this again gets must be decided in co~t. have alternate argo. merits THE CH~}?~aW: Does anyone else wish to speak for this application? (There was ac response.) THE CHAIRI~L~N. Does anyone present wish to speak against this application$ RIC}~ J. I~N: .I am an attorr~ey ~rom Cutohogue, and represent 2wL~..~. Bullwzukle (12~-126), I~. R. J. Harder (l~), and . Rerer~In~ ICes. E. ~tewart (127) ( - - o to the map ~. Y~on po~ted out the adjoining areas of the lot in question). I would like to clarify concerning the uanumber d lot. We can likewise draw inference the other way. Yfe strongly state that this is mot in the ~ull subdivision. You will have to treat it as a separate p~cel. ~ven if you were to rule that it is part of the excep- tion off 30~ there are many other areas concerning its applzcat~ n that ~ll have to be resolved. To this we have strong objections for the reasons we w~ll give you latSr. wz=~ observe that the terrain Iff you Rook at the map you "~ ~ sfoout.level with that property. ~en one looks north and south you will see a rise in the road at as angle of about 20~ Drainage from other adjoining areas Flows naturally dorm Cedar Lane and f~ows in the Iow area ~joining Lot zmT. !t:s principle purpose was to efffect proper drainage. That is the inference that can be drawn for its being ~nun~ered. We Submit that it was not intended to be sold but should be used as drainage. I wou_m like to ooint out that there was no westbound des- cription o~ t~_zs particular p~ot. It indicates tO'::methat there was no ~ntent to convey any land to zne ~gn water mark. One notes that a building ~s to be built behind the high water mark. If they put a building there then they are oosvruc~n~ other users have the right to Spring Pond. You can't gr~t a building permit to build on land thoy don~t own. Section 303: ~is the first provision they ask a variance on. ~[e calculate that ares. is ~obably not greater than [~,000 sq. ft. which is substantially less than 12,~00 sq. ft. Moreover~ we believe they have to comply with the Suffolk County Board of Health to grant~ which is 4~00 sq. ft. Section 30~ this provides for a front yard setback of 3~ ft. The proposed construction on Cedar Lane has a setback of l0 ft. and 13 ft. This in no way ~eets the setback requirement. This would not be in harmony with others. Section 308: they ask For a rear yard variance. By special exception it can be reduced to l~ ft~ but we believe this Board can not grant less than i~ ft. Their rear yard depth is 12 ft. I don~t believe the Board has the power to grant this. Section 300: Subdivision 6. They ask for an acoessory building in the area o~ the street The ~ ~ _ . prooos~o, accessory building is in the front yard. This has to be denied° No one has an accessory building in the front yard. 6309~ also deals with accessory setup. Other factors= In particular, the drainage problem.., when one looks at the physical characteristics, we believe that was why the lot was left unnumbered. $(e believe they will r,un into considerable Health Department problems. THE Ct~IRI~FF: That has nothing to do with us. i,R. BUT~¢~: Z own Lot ¢ 126. A stand-by well was dug many years ago. on that. lot. P~. i~: if the proposition is approved ~y client would be in jeopardy of having his water polluted. For all these reasons we ask that this application be denied. THE CP~IP~,~&N: Does anyone else wish to be heard at this time? MR. ~t~RIGHT.- _r would like to file a written object,on. THE CY~L°a~: Let the record show that ~. Enri~ht has presented a ~itten objection. It is in the form of a letter from M~s. Richard ~. Enright, I~-~ap ,~27~ Lots Nos. 102 and purchased in 1947o The Chairman read the letter and it was entered into the record. ~I~S. ~. STLW%[~RT: I own Lots 127 and 128. They would be ri~s~t in my front yard, too close to the cesspool and well. Also~ u~y late husband tried to buy that property to c!ear~ it up smd make a parking place. He was told it was not for saie~., that it was definitely a right-of way. ROB~T J. ~P . '- 124 !2~} _- ~ water ~[~ ~aots & ~, I was told %h~t ~zn~ ~o~d: seay ~n~e i% is. ~,f%eP I 60% ~y house .... ~ 8o bring a larger boa~ %here~ ,}?~ Hicks said i could diS ce% pond so i paid ~00 and des i~ oct. After ! go% %Ina dip% du. P~. Thorpe said. i8 was wrong. }~. Hicks said it was okay. said i% was reserved for pubiio mss-and everyone had the right ~u~ o.~r~ on %~_e~e. i ~ol,,~ h~?c the dirt ?fas a~Pee,~y tbePe~ fop ~he yeaps I have been %here %he lo% has been used fop iaunchiug of 1,'~. B'~'~{i~: I have Lots 12~ & 126~ %,~l%en ! boe~t these two lots i asked lC,. G. Hicks ~:~ ':~ a~:_s~er or not I could buy the other two lots and I was informed that ! definitely could not because it was public property, and i would-have to have the con- sent of every property o~er in the district, i did not think it was worthwhile. Seco_mly, that piece of property was always considered public p_, opert} for launching boats into the pond. There was no consideration given at all by any of the people here that this was not a public property a ' ~ ,no. it zs used also as a dr~ainage property~ so ! object. I',~. Ee~gl: ! am Chairman of the Board of eardiners Bay Estates. Over the past few years we have negotiated With }Ir. P. Slaughter representing Gardiners Bay~ the idea being that We would purchase all rights of way to the beach and access to Spring Pond. This parcel was considered, i~7e feel we do have the ri~t-of-way~ that every owner has the right-of-way tb-~ough that property. ~re feel there will be restrictions at the head of the channel. One of the others could be flooded out~ the one adjacent to the Seeman property. Another access has a small bridge which could be carried away° Zn time you would disturb the natural flow of head waters and you will be in trouble. E£ you build~ somebody will suffer. You will disturb the natural terrain. Z believe the membership will direct me to fight this much further. I think we can negotiate so our friends are not in any financial difficulty. Z came unprepared because I have been on vacation. MR. ~: i herewith submit written petition on behalf of Bullwinkle~ Harder and Etewart. TB]E CI~I~M~.~ May we incorporate this petition without reading "' ~ }~o ~ OI,I: Yes. THE CPL%!RP~2~: Let the record show that }~, _~on has submitted written pet~5~on in behalf of Bullwinkie, Harder and ~tewart. RUTPI BUR~q~ ~as the title company insured the new owner of the property~ free o£~ any rights of others? Has the title company insured them to build out? THE C~iR~;~27: They don~t know what is going to be built. Thery insure the sa~_e description as in the Deed. ~,LqS. 5$~LTUS: if you buy this piece of property the title company insures against the rights of others, i w~ thinking of our young friends... _~orotecting them from "ouS~ng the lot. It is insuring their lot but not their right to build. i¥~. OL$~EN: I would like to make a few comments on wllat has been said in opposition~ Z am concerned with Section 30~. Most of the arguments involve questions of title and perhaps better interest and are not directed towards whether this should be . _oo~ at the lot on the filed ~ap accepted under 303 Xf you will ~ ~ it g~neraiiy conforms. There ar~ other lots a lot s~aller that have buildings on them. On Appeal ~o~ 1361, &rtlole 3~ Section we are mostly concerned as to whether or not w~ can get an area variance. Perhaps the design of the building can be altered. i would like to l~ow whether the Board feels that ws come under Ssction 1013 of the Building Ordinance. i~q. ~.~IG?iT: You would have to see this. it is almost like an amphitheatre. That water has to go someplace over this property. There was 1 ft. of water there this morning. Furthermore~ it is stated that this is a part of Section 2 map. My feeling is that it d~ not ~art of the map at all. It doesn't belong in there at all. ~ne ~eason is so the drainage can go ~. BB~uLW~~ifEE: Lu Gardiners Bay ]Estates you are restricted in your building. It has to be approved by Gardiners Bay ~states. Eecondly~ they restrict on two story buildlugs. Also~ you can not have any other buildings~ accessory buildings. There is a bath house to go on this lot. I don~t know why all these years we have all these restrictions~ and now all these restrictions are being discredited° THE C?L%iRI~: If you have Deed restrictions, this Board can't over-ride them. If you restrict an accessory such as this, we can not over-ride. ~G~M. The President of Gardiners Bay Company put time deed restrictions in. Apparently they have given permission to disregard these restrictions. 1~o Ir~ON: The only variance he has sought is tLuder Sect!on 303. ~_~y does the legal notice include all other areas? -ll- TH~ CPL~%q~'~N: ~_y Was this published this way? i~. T~RY, Building Inspector: ~_at~s the way he wan~d everything covered so we covered everything, that could be discussed t om ~ght. ~. LROI~: Is he only Section 303~ or all the others? ~. T-ShiRT, Building Inspector: This would be up to his attorney. ~ OLmEN: I th~uk w~ have to consider the variance first, The Appeal was prepared by my client with the Building ~spector. seems to me that in the event that this Board should hold that we have a variance~ exception 303~ any future plan should be given a variance~ also for frontyard setbacks~ because obviously t~he pr~sen~ lot d. oesn~t conform. Once you grant an ares. reliance the person should be permitted to bu~td a reasonable dwelling property aLa~ aiso~ pl~s can be alterem but we have to get over the area variance problem first. l~Lq %~R.a~¢~ I assum~ the oroposed building p~an was SOfDmitted. ~qo ~RY, Building inspector~ Yes~ Do you wish to look at the building plans? (A discussion was ne~d regarding Bualazng Plans) I~. 0~: i would like to state that we are primarily con- cerned with getting an area variance. IEy client is not particularly interested in pursuing this particular plan but would like to get an area variance~ There is no purpose is the Zoning Board of Appeals indicates it will not give an area variance. !~_y client does not want to be precluded frora submitting other building plans. We would like to come back with different building plans but we have ~o get the area variance. I~o t~0h~: I object to another procedure, if they want to come in with definite plans then the Board can rule on the variance. Let them submit bona fide plans before the Board acts on any area variance. FAwn. EG.~G~: 'They are asking fo~ a vari~ce here to improve the property. You are going to have a lake the~e. The co~m~nity Is going to suffFer. The Hig2mway Department or the ~fater Department should say what is going to happen to that water there. i~. 0~: !¢y client has indicated that if you decide this does not come under the exception and that he must so. fait derfinite pians~ that he is willing to make changes that the Zoning Board o~ Appeals cam recommend. ~. i~0i~[: The a-c~oi{cat'~on ~.namoates a .... '~ ' ~= ~' ' Are we going to ' -~'~ '~t ~ _~: ~b oon~e ~ to ~03 oz~ ~ ~ I~o ~,~ _,~ don~% think we have %o get a variance on ~une~ area bn~ s~noe ~he question has bee~_~ raised a._~m' ~_z we don~% fall under the excsp~ion~ we also have p~ob!ems ~'~ T~: CKg~R~ki,I: Our first decisic the filed 3~s.p oz~ if you ars not. I -. zou. raised a valid po'[n~ ab or no~ %his !s in cup province and be would like to talk to Town Counsel. I,~. 0~m~%7~ i gave my arguraents ~,vzoer. it was conveyed out. t~ied to buy it. ould llke the adv,ice out nun?sere oH lots. fo,_e Z make any decision~ It was owned by the original the people ~s testimony~ they ~,~. ~@~: For the benefit of a ~. OLS~:_¥t does boz_~": do~ to under exception 1013 or doesn~t~ and determined by your decision. Z,~o ~ON: gssuming the Board ms. this particular lot preclude an area proceed with his proposed plan mud ta preclude other clients from coming? I, not the individual buyer~ whether or not this comes bhe whole purchase will be ~es this determination does ~ariance~ ~'~ill the Board ~e in al~ part? Does it THE CH~IRF~hT: ~Once you have ruled-that this is a legal lot and can be built on, this does not preclude. You could refile a dozen times. TtTE C~IRI~Y~ Is there anyone else present who wishes to speak at this time? (There was ac response.) On motion by Mr. Grigonis~ seconded by ~. Bergen~ it was RE~O~ that hearing be postponed ~til ~eptember lO, 1970 at 7:45 Vo~ o~ ~h~ Board: ~yes: M~ssrs: Hmls~, B~rg~n~ Grigonis. PLrBLIC EEA_R~G - Appeal No. 1362 - 8:20 P.]M, (E.S.T.), upon application of Anne Pried, 4~ Pine Tree Road, Cutchogue, New York~ for a variance in accordance~ with the Zoning Ordinance, ~&rt~cle Section 306~ for permission ~to construct addition to existing dwelling with reduced front yard setback. Location of property: east side of Pine Tree Road~ Ifassau Parm=s~ Map ~o. 1179, Lot ~ 19, Cutchogue~ New York. Fee paid $5.00. The Chairman opened tk~ hearing by reading the application for a variance, l~gal notice of hearing, affidavit attesting to its publ_cat~on i~ the official newspapers, and notice to the applicant. T~ C~t~: Es there anyone present who wishes to speak for this application? Y$~ ~: Yes~ I am the owner of the property. (~e Board referred to Map and Sketch of proposed bedroo~- T~ C~i~: How far ars you from t~e might-of-way, 19 Ft. ~ T~ C~¢~ That will leave 7 Feet. .~ ~D~ E thi~k the house will look more attractive and w~ll be more suits, ble. }~. ~RY~ Building Inspector~ How Far back are you From Piae Tree Road? ~ ~O~ .2.t least 200 feet. ~ CP~d,I~ The lot is ~60 fit; deep and the land curves around, You are probably 200 feet back. Aiso~ the Board inspected the =z~h~-oz-wa~ a~d it is crow~ with trees and is only used ¢or pedestrian traffic. ~assau Farms is a civic association, t~, B~G~ Pine Tree Road is a to~a road~ the others are right-of-ways on the filed Map still o~ed by Sterling. Does Sterling pay taxes on its ~R. ~RRY, Building Inspector: Eventually the original develope~ gets sold out of right-of-ways and they will go to the kssociatlon~ or everyone i~ the vicinity will be increased in asses sment. T~ CP~.~F~N~ Does the Deed give you access? ~ ~D~ it's not mentioned In ~ Deed. I would like to buy the ri~_t-off-way but the Civic Association sai~ we can't ever buy. ~. TE~R~ Building Inspector: ~ey coul5 be sold but could act be used for anything, ~ believe Sterling still has the Deeds. T~ CH~M~-: As f~ as ~s. Fried is concerueS~ ! can see no problem~ -14- THE CHAI~&~: _Ts there anyone present who wishes to speak against this application? (There was no response.) After investigation and inspection the Board finds that the applicant requests permission to con'struct addition to existing dwelling with reduced front yard setback, located east side of Pine Tree Road, Nassau Farms, Cutchogue, New York. The extension will be 12 ft. x Ap ft. which will leave a side yard o£ approxi- ~.lately 7 ft. on the north side of the right-of-way knowua as Red Wood Road. The Board agrees with the reasoning of the applicant that Red ~ood Road is a pedestrian right-of-way to the water and will not create a traffic hazard° The house is set back 200 feet from the main road, Pine Tree Road~ The Board finds that strict application of the Ordinance would produce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship~ the hardship created is unzque and would not be shared by all properties alike in the immediate vicinity o£ this property mad in the camo use district~ and the variance will not change the character of the neighborhood and will observe the spirit of the Ordinance. On motion by I, fr. Grigonis~ seconded by Mr. Bergen, it was RE~0LVED~ne Fried~ 47 Pine Tree Road, Cutchogue, New York~ be GP~ITED permission to construct addition to existing dwelling with reduced front yard setback as applied for o'n property located east side of Pine Tree Road~ Nassau ~arms~ Map No. 1179, Lot ~ 19, Cutchogue~ New York. Vote of the Board: Ayes:- I~essrs: Huise, Bergen~ Grigonis. On motion by Mr. Bergen, seconded by ~,~r. Hu!se, it was tTE~OLVED that the ~inutes of the Southold Town Board o£ ~pp®als dated July 30~ 1970~ be approved as submitted, subject to minor correction. Vote o£ tho Board~ ~yes:- Messrs: Hulse, B~_gen, Grigonis~ Correspondence: ~Ir. Terry read letter from Frances Seewald requesting permission for additional right-of-way to beach. The ~hamr..~,an directed that a letter be ~itten to Frances ~eew~l~ suggesting that it is a matter for ~_er attorney. Mr. Terry read a letter from the l~a!lard Gun Club requesting permission for posters for Turkey ~hoot to be held the middle of ~eptember. On motion by ~Mro Hu!se~ seconded by w~,=. Bergen~ it was R~OLVED that posters for Yla!!ard G~m Oi~.b be GR~-T~.D under nso~al conditions. Vote of the Board: Ayes:- }~Iessrs: Hulse~ Bergen~ Grigonis. ~, ~, reviewed Sign ~ermit renewals for the month of ~,~ust were approved and signed. On 'motion by ~ir. Grigonis~ seconded by }.'~r. Hulse~ it was t~OL~J~D that the next regular meeting of the ,~outhoid Town ~0 _ 'Thursday~ September t0~ Board off Appeals will be held at f.~ P.M.~ 1970~ at the Town 0~ffice, Main Road, $outhoid~ New York. On motion by Mr. Bergen~ seconded by i~. Grigonis$ it was RESOLVED that the Southold Town Board of Appeals set 7~30 P.M. (E.S,T.)~ Tb._ursday~ Septe~er 10~ 1970~ at the Totem 0ffice~ I, iain Ros. d~ Southo!d~ New York, as the time and place of b_earing upon application of Harrotine Realty Corporation~ 8~ ~unrise Highway~ Lynbrook~ New York~ for approval o£ access over private right-of-way in accordance with the State of New York Town Law~ Section 280&. Location of property: private right-of-way off ~outhwest side of Hickory ~&venue (private road), Map of Goose Bay Estates~ Southold~ New York. ?~ Huise Bergen~ Grigon~s. Vote of the Board: Ayes:- ?~essrs~ ~ ~ On motion by l~. Hulse, seconded by~=~.~f~. Bergen~ it was ITE~OL~D that the Southold Tov~a Board of Appeals set 7:4~ (EoS.T.), Thursdays Septe~Der !0, !970~ at the Town 0ffice~ Hain Road~ Southo!d, New York~ as the time and place of hearing upon application of PeteD T. Neyland~ i1~ Broadway~ Roc!~il!e Center~ New YOrk~ for a variance in accordance ~t~ the Zoning Ordinance~ Article r!I~ Section 303~ 30~,308~ Section 300~ Sub~ectzon 6~ ~d ~ection 309~ for permission to build new one family dwelling on lot with less than 12,~00 sq. ft. of area~ with insu~flcient setback and insufficient rear yard area, and construct accessory building in front yard area. Location of property: east side of Cedar Lane ( (Private Road)~ East Marion~ New York, bounded north by Lot ~ 126 Gardiners Bay Sub., Sec. !I~ and SprinE Pond~ east by Sprisg Pond~ south by Lot ~ 127 o~ Gardlners Bay Sub., Sec. EE~ and Spring west by Cedar~Lane (Private Road). Vote of the Board: Ayes:- Messrs: Hu!se~ Bergen, Grigonis. On motion by F~r. Bergen, seconded by M~. Hu!se~ it was ~OLVED that the ~outhold Town Board of Appeals set 8:1~ (~.S.T.)~ Thursday~ Beptember 10, 1970, at the To~a Office, ' ~ hear-ng Main Road, Southold, New Yo~k~ as the z~me and place of upon application of Robert ~eib ~ ~ife~ private road ~Tru~ans Path~- Bchm~t ~ & ~Bay-Lake Park~ bounded: North by J. Milligan~ ~ast by ~ ' ~ L~ch~ ~outh by N. ~illia~; West by Marion Lake; ~East Marion, for permit to locate a detached accessory building in the front yard area. A variance to Article Z!Z, section 300, s~2osec~on 6 and section 309 of the Bu~ing Zone 0rdinanc~ Vote of the Board: Ayes~- Messrs~ Hulse~ B~rgen~ Grigonis. On motion by !~. Grigonis~ seconded by M~o Bergen, it was RESOLV~D that th2 Southold Town Board of 2ppeals set (E~S.T.)~ ThUrsday~ ~eptember 10~ 1970~ at the Town 0fffice~. Main Road~ SOuthold~ New Yo_m~ as the time and place of hearzng o ~ Southold upon application off Henry Barry & Wife~ Pine Neck ~oaa~ New York~ for approval off access to an interior lot bounded: North by Jockey Creek~ East by C. A~oertson~ South by other ~.no. of s. pp!~c~nt~ ~est by I. Schae~ as avarzaace in aocordance w/th the provlsioas o~ Section 280~ of the Town ~ · ~aza property - ~ a~ ~e ~ New YoPk~ oe~S on the northePiy s~de of 7~Teok ~oad Vote of the Board: ~.~es. }dessrs: On motion by ~ Hutse~ seconded by I~iro ~rigonis; it was E~0L~ that the Southold Town Board of >~peais set 8~[~_~ P~M.~ (E.S.T.)~.Thursday~ ~eptember 1% 1970~ at tbs Town Office~ Main Road~ Southold~ New York~ as the time and Plaoe~of hea~ing upon application of Lois Barker A/C the Love Lane Shop~ East side of Love Lane~ Mattltuck~ N. Y.- bounded: North by Drum~ East by Mattituck Park District and Othe~s~ South by M. Kelsey~ I~est bY Love ~e~ for a special exception to erect a wall sign on side wall of existing business building as provided in Article ~v section ~08& 408-(b) of the Building Eon~ Ordinance. Vote of the Board: ~y~s:- Messrs: Hulss, Bergen~ Grigonis. The Meeting was adjourned at !0:00 P.M. Respectfully submitted~ /~:~ "/ ] ' ~ _ /, Marjorie Mcdermott, Secretary