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