HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-07/30/1970MINUTES
SOUTHODD TO~ BO~.RD OF ~PPE~LS
july 30, 1970
A regular meeting of the Southold Town Board of Appeals was
held at 7:30 PoM., Thursday, July 30, 1970, at the To~n Office,
Main Road, Eouthold, New York.
There were present: Messrs. Robert ~Y. Gillispie, Jr.,
Chairm~n; Robert Bergen; Charles Grigonis, Jr.; ?red Hulse, Jr.
Also present: M~. Howard Terry, Building Inspector.
Absent: N~. Serge Doyen, Jr.
PUBLIC HEARING: A rehearing on Appeal No. 1311; upon applica-
tion of Joseph D, Zaiser, Mill Creek Drive, Southold, New York~ for
a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, grticle iii,
Section 300, Subsection 6~' for permission to locate carport
(accessory use) in front yard area. Location of property: east
side of Mill Creek Drive, Southold, New York, bounded north by
~m. J. Miller, east ~by Mill Creek, south by P. Porestieri~ west
by Mill Creek Drive.
The Chairman opened the hearing by reading the application
for a variance, legal notice of hearing, affidavit attesting to
its p~folication in the official newspapers, sad notice to the
applicant.
THE CH~.I~I®~T: You first m~de an appeal for a variance on
December 4, 1969. I~ your appeal dated June 26th for a rehearing
you have given a lot more reason for requesting the variance.
Is there anything you would like to add?
MR.. Z~I~E~: Mill Creek Drive is a dead end street. It is
a circle. Part of it is Grove Road. From Route 27A as yom come
i~uto the colony~ it is Grove Road. Mill Creek comes back and
meets Grove again.
THE CH~IRI~i~N: Would anyone else like to speak in favor of
this app~cat ~on.
(There was no response.)
T~ CHAiRtW~J~: Is there anyone present who wishes to speak
against this applmoa~on~
(Thoro was no ~e~onse.)
BERGEN: It should be set back~ moved back.
THE CH~R~I: It should be moved back at least a car-length.
There is some doubt in my mind whether this application should
be granted but in view of the beautiful reasons you have given,
you have something to hang your hat on.
i~. Z~,I~ER: Do-i have to move it back?
~ CHY..~w2~I&2~.~ You can't have it on the highway regardless
of what the other fellow did. I think'we would wsnt to speciffy
that the struct~e shall be open-sided. It IS a difficult thing
to describe as a carport is one thing in one place and different
in anothe~ pis. ce. in Piorida, it's different. ~e purpose of
its being open sided is what you have pointed out- not block~g
the visibility of the people across the street. However, we
mi~t be creating a series of carports. ~e other side of the
street would be look~g at ~ alley, a whole line of outhouses.
I~. ~A!EER: Can I leave the uprights as my neighbor has
done, and stretch canvas across the top?
~THE CH~.IR~2~: My definition is that it is still a struc-
ture. tt would be a means of avoiding this action of the Beard.
MR. ZAISF~R: Can this be done?
THE C~I~I~: My impression would be ~no~ but I would like
to hear from anyone else who has a~a opinion,
MR. ?~ISER: It would no longer be a permanent structure.
0~ Towr_ Counsellor thought it should be a car-length back,
at least. There is even some possibility that it should be
attached to the house, but Z th~k in view of the circumstances
of these t~ees~ it might be that if you had to attach it to the
house you would have to chop down a lot of trees.
~A~. ZAIS~: You would have to okay the idea of putting it
in the front?
THE CH~: He was agreeable to putting it a car-length
back.
MR. Z~qER.~ It would be almost against the house anyway.
It would loek like the devil. It would obstruct the view of the
people across the street.
THE CHAIR~L~2~: That's your opinion. Our opinion is different.
Y~. Z~tSER: Rather than-move it, could I put canvas on it
and take it off in the winter.
~rIE CEA!P~V~2?: I don~t like what your neighbor has done but
he was here before zoning. Z would like to hear from the rest
of the Board as to what they~think about leaving the uprights.
~Lq. ZA~R: I think it would look worse if it was moved ba~k.
~.~ ~-~t~_~: I don~t th~mk we can condone anything such as this~
would rather see a structure there.
~E CE&IRI~2~: I~oes anyone else have any questions? ~f nots
~. Hulse will offer a resolution granting permission f~ this
structure (carport) to be placed at least 20 Feet from the
property line, in the front yard area~ ~d to b, open sided. &t
no time ~y the sides of this carport be enclosed.
~ ~: ~o you menu 20 ~eet ~rom the road edge~
T~ ~t'~: 20 ~e~t ~om the property l~e. ! i~gin~
these curbs as sho~ in this picture are on the highway... 20 ft.
from the property l~e.
~. ~: May Z ask if ~nyone would like to buy a 10~ x 20~
structure For a floats It~Just needs st~ofoam ~da~eath ~d it
would be a beautiful f~loat. ~nen does it have to co~ do~?
~ ~P~: Tou have ~0 days to remove it. You put it up
last Nove~er without consulting the Build~g ~spector.
DOes anyone want to buy the top part of a float?
~.fter in-vestigation and inspection the Board finds that the
applicant requests permission for a varianc~ £or permission to
locate carport (accessory use) in Front yard area, located east
side of Mill Creek Drive~ Bouthold, _~ew ~[ork. The Board finds
that the applicant rejects advice of Town Co~usellor that carport
be moved back 20 ft. from property line, in front yard area~
also refuses to attach carport to his house or to relocate carport
in rear yard area.
The Board finds that strict applicatien of the Ordinance will
not produce practical difficulties or ~unecessary hardship. The
hardship created is not unique and would be shared by all properties
alike in the immediate vicinity of this property and in the same
use district? and the variance would, change the character of the
neig~hborhood and would not observe the spirit of the Ordinance.
On motion by ~r. Hulse, seconded by lf~. Grigonis, it was
RESOLVED' ~oseph D~. Zaiser, Mill Creek Drive, $outhold, New
Tork~ be D~NIED permission to locate carport (accessory use) in
front yard area, as applied for on property located east side of
Mill Creek Drive, Eouthold, New
Vote of the Board:
Grigonis.
Ayes~- Messrs: G~ll~sp~ ~ Bergen, Hulse~
A discussion was held on Appeal No. 1~48~ Ralph T. Preston,
Inc.~ Greenport, New Tork, This hea_zng was held over to 7:30 P.M.
(~.SoT.~ Thursday, July ~0, 1970, at the request of ~ir. Sts~ley
Corwin to. give him the opportunity to bring in a brief.
THE CHAIRI~N: Is there anyone present who wishes to speak
for th~s application?
MR. TERRT, B,~Id~ng Inspector: I spoke to I~. Ce~win and
exerc_se ~ futility, and he was not
he said it would be an ~ *~
going to bring in the brief°
THE CHAIE~W~M~: Is there anyone present who wishes to speak
against this app_~cat~on?
(~nere was no response.~
After investigation s. nd inspection the Board finds that the
applicant requests permission to use lot for storage of building
materials~ et~o ~ocat~_on of property: east side of Manhanset
~venue. The Board does not condone the use of Residential property
to store materials of any kind. ~mother means will have to be
Found to take care of business expansion.
The Board Finds that strict application of the Ordinance will
not produce practical ~' ' ~' ~ ·
~zFF~cu~oes or unnecessary hardshzp, the
hardship created is not unique and would not be shared by all
properties alike in the immediate vicinity of this property and
in the same use district$ and the variance does not observe
spirit of the Ordinance and will change the character of the district.
(~ ~otion by I~. Grigonis~ seconded by ~. Eulse, it was
RE~O~ Ralph T. Pr_eston, Y~_co, Greenport, New York, be
D~NIED permission to use lot For storage of building materials,
etc. on property located east side of Manhanset Avenue, Greenport,
New ¥orko The applicant has ~0 days to clear the yard.
Vote of the Board: Ayes:- Messrs. Gillispie, Bergen~ Hulse, Grigoniso
PUBLIC ~I~[G: Appeal No. 1~1 - ?:4~ P.M. (~oS.T.)~ upon
application of Virginia ~ulcher, 7 Hatless Place, ~est Hezpstead,
New Tork, For a varia~uce in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance,
Article III, Section 503, and Article X, Section 1000A, For per-
mission to set off lot with less th~u 100 Ft. Frontage. Location
of property: private road off south side of Peconic Bay Blvd.,
Eubdivision Map of ~dgemere Park, ~W~p No. 742, part of lot ~
Ee. urel, New York. _Wee paid
The Chairman opened the hearing by reading the application £or
a variance, legal notice of hearing, affidavit attesting to its
publication in the official newspapers, and notice to the applicant.
~E Ct~IR~N~' Is there anyone present who wishes to speak
For this applications
(There was no response.)
T~ CHA~I~L~: ts there anyone present who wishes to speak
against this applications
(There was no response.)
THE CPL~M~: This is a private road in Laurel. ~.e wants
to save the strip along the water and sell the lot. This lot ~
as described on the survey could not be used For a structure~ It
would have to be reserved and made part of lots on north side of
I~R. TERRY] Bui~ding ! ~ ]
Inspector: SilPs~mrth nacre the application.
THE CH~IP~ Write Virginia Fu!cher a letter stating that
the Board ks · cons~de~ ~-ng her application~ and is witbZ~olding
decision until ?:30 P.M., August 20, 1970.
A discussion was held on .~ppeal No. 12~4, Lloyd Hamilton~
~ove Lane, Mattltuck, New York. This appeal was held over For
decision - 8:00 P.M., 9Ynursday, July 30, 1970.
.~Fter investigation mud inspection the Board Finds that
this pro~ect was established prior to zoning, approximately
19~0, ~nd consists of nine Frame cottages with a single common
area~' which have been leased by Lloyd Hamilton to various
tenants over the last 20 years. .~. Hamilton now proposes
to sell each o£ these nine Frame cottages and give to each
of the buyers the right of use of a co~_~lon area For recreational
purposes.
The Board Finds that strict application of the Ordinance
will produce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship;
the hardship created is unique and would be shared by all
properties alike in the i~nuediate vicinity of this Property
and in the sa~e use district; and the Variance does observe
ti~e spirit of the Ordinance and will not change the character
of the neig~hborhoodo
on motion by I~. Bergen, seconded by M~. Hulse, it was
RF~OL~ED Lloyd Hamilton, Love Lscae, Mattituck, ~ew York,
be GR~.NTED permission to divide property and sell of£ existing
cottages on property located northeast corner of Bailie Beach
Road, Mattituck~ l~ew York, with the Following conditions:
1. The proposed o~mers shall be Formed into a corporation
to maintain the common area.
2, it is suggested that memoersh_p corporation should
be in a position to cover costs of maintenance and taxes.
Vote of the Board: ~.yes:- Messrs. G.11zspze, Bergen, Hulse,
. ~
Gr~gon_s.
PUBLIC HF~R~TG~- Appeal No. 13~- 8:1~ P.M. ~E.S.T.), upon
application of H~ M. Demerest & ~ons~ ~ain Road~ Orient, New
Tork~ for a special exception in accordance with the Zoning
Ordinance, Article X~ ~ection 1003, for permission to renew
farm labor camp permit° Location of property: south side of
~a~ Road, Orient, New .V_ork~ bounded north by R. Redden s~nd
others~ east by other land of the applicants, south by Narrow
River Road, west by Meyer~ Freeman, and others. Fee pd $~o00o
The Chairman read affidavit of Louis ~ Demarest disclosing
his interest in the above mentioned application in accordance
with the General Municipal Law of the State of New York.
The Chairman opened the hearing by reading the application
for a special exception~ legal notice o£ hearing, affidavit
attesting to its poJolication in the official newspapers~ and
notice to the applicant.
THE CHg~M~: is there anyone present who wishes to speak
For this application?
(Tb. ere was no response.)
~&R. T~Y, Building Inspector: It has had Health Department
inspection.
~ CHgIR2~q: It's a good labor camp. There have been no
complaints that I ~ow of.
THE CH~i~N: Is there anyone present who wishes to speak
against this application?
(There was no response.)
After investigation and inspection the Board finds that
the applicant requests permission to renew farm labor camp
permit. Location of property: south side ~ Main Road,
0rient~ New Tork. The Board finds that the labor camo is a
good one, and there have beea no complaints.
The Bo~rd finds that the public convenience and welfare and
justice will be served and the legally established or permitted
use of neighborhood property and adjoining use districts will
not be permanently or substantially injured and the spirit of
the 0rdin~nce will be observed.
On motion by Mr. Huise, seconded by M~. Giilispie, it was
~ons, ~.~azn Road, Orients I~ew York;
be GP~TE~ permission to renew farm labor camp peri_it on property
located s~uth side of ~.in Road, Orient, New York. ~
Vote of the Board*. Ayes.'- Iffes~So Gillispie, Bergen~ Hulse,
Gr igonis.
PUBLIC ~IB-G: Appeal No. 1~7 - 8:~0 P.M. (E.E.T.), upon
application of Adrianus sm.d Jerlna Van Ryswyk, Legion Avenue,
Mattituck, New ~fork, for a variS~Uce in accordance with the
Eoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 30~, and Article E,
~ection 1000A, for permission to set off lot with less than
100 ft. frontage. Location of property.~ south side of Legion
Avenue, Mattituck, New York~ bounded north_ by Legion Avenue,
east by A. Van Ryswyk, south by _T~ileska-McGrath, we~t by
Ac Van.Eyswyk. Fee paid $~.00o
The Chairman opened the hearing by reading the application
for a. variance, legal notice of hes~ving, affidavit attesting to
its publication in the official newspaper~ and notice to the
applicant.
THE CH~IR~L~': Is there anyone present who wishes to speak
for this application?
i~R. V~ff RYS~fk~K: Yes, (I~o Van Rys~vk, Board members and
N~. Terry, Building Inspector, referred to ~p o£ property
prepared by N~. Van Ryswyk. ~z~. Terry mentioned that F~. Van Ryswyk
is a qualified draftsman.)
~2, V~ R~: This is the Rot I P~opose to sell. (Referring
to map). ~ live here.
(After further discussion o~ the ~p by the Board, ~. Terry,
and ~. Van Eyswyk, the Ghairman asked if there was anyone else
present who wishes to speak for this application.) (There was
no response.)
THE C~iR~2~I: Is there anyone present who wishes to speak
agazn~t ~._~..s application?
(There was no respo.~se.)
After investigation and inspection the Bos~d finds that the
applicant requests permission to set off lot with less than
100 ft. frontage located south side of Legion Avenue, Mattituck,
New York. The Board is in agreement with the reasoning of the
applicant who purchased the entire parcel in 1946 and has had
a residence there since then. He is requesting that the
northerly part be divided into two lots. This division would be
in keeping with the lots on this side of Legion Avenue.
The Board £1nds that strict application of the Ordinance
will produce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship;
the hardship created is unique and would be shared by all
properties alike on the immediate vicinity of this property
and in the same use district; and the variance does observe the
spirit o£ the Ordinance and will not change the character o£
the district.
On motion by F~. Bergen, seconded by Y~. Hulse, it was
R~SOLI~D Adrianus and Jerina Van Rysv~k~ L~gion ~venue~
Mattituck, New York~ be GR~NTED per~ission to set off lot with
less than 100 ft. frontage on property located south side of
Legion Avenue, Mattltuck, New York, with the following conditions:
1. ~ne setback has to be ~ ft. on the corner lot.
Vote of the Board:
Grigonis.
Any additions would have to be in the rear.
Ayes:- Messrs. Gi!lispie, Bergen, Hulse,
PUBLIC HE~RIh~G: Appeal N~.~l~6 - 8:4~ P.M. (E.S.T.), upon
application of Marion Couloucomudis, ~o~ndview Avenue, Eouthold,
New York, for a variance in accordance with tlme Zoning Ordinance,
A~ticle III, Section 300, Subsection 6, mud Section 309, for
permission to remove existing accessory build~ug and replace
with laeger accessory building with living quarters. Location
of property: north side of So~ndview Avenue, ~outhold, New York,
bounded north by L. i. ~o~d, east by J. L. Dowden, south by
So~ndview Avenue, west by Meadow Point Properties. Fee pd. $~.00.
The Chairman opened the hearing by reading the application
for a variance, legal notice of hearing, affidavit attesting to
its publication in the official newspapers, and notice to the
applicant o
THE CHAIRM~I: is there anyone present who wishes to speak
for this application?
M~. ROBERT L. H~i~TT: I feel it has been described properly.
I think the reasons for.wmutlng it are just.
THE CH~IR~$~N: 1~at is the size of the lot we are talking
about~ that the Couloueondis people own?
~. H~&TT: ~ would say the depth would be ~00 ft. and an
average of 100 ft. wide~ However, there is an angle from the
front yard to the bac~yard~ Z~m sorry i c~n~t give you anyth~mg
acceptable because the people-left with the assumption that they
would not be able to be here.
T~vE C~iR~2~: How big would the structure be?
MR. H~Z&TT: A two-car garage with living quarters over it.
I would say 22 ft. x 24 ft. would be approximately the size.
~. TERRY, Building Inspector: It won't be smaller than that.
~Eq. BZFFATT: .&utomobiles are getting rather long. ~hat I
picture is a ~idedoor entry at the west end of the building. In
the Front you would have a stairway... 26 ft. would be ample.
Upstairs there would be a kitchen-living room co~J0ination, bedroom
and bath. It would be a complete apartment.
~w~o HUv~: Domestics would eat in the main house?
MR. HY&TT,~ There would be cooking facilities.
~ CPL%IPd~a~'~: it would be a 24 ftc x 26 ft. two car garage
with bedroom, living room combined with cooking area, and bath.
}~o TEREY, Building Inspector: Efficiency type?
!~ ~ HY~TT: Ye s.
THE Ci~P~2{: 0he of the stipulations wou~c be that under
no circumstances would this be leased or rented. ~lso, it should
be further back from the road.
~. HYRTT: ~e present building is to be removed. It's
26 ~t. back from the road now.
I~Ro HUME.* 26 ft. is plenty there because you are going down
the bank. ~e don~t see any problem.
THE CI~l~' I mi~mt suggest that the Buildf~ug Inspector
go do~,~a there~ and we.~ll go according to his advice if.we should
squeeze 2 ft. one way or ~uother. There is a little problem
because of an angle.
~o T~aRT~ Building ~spector: Fred asked about the Housing
Code... where it won't meet 8~0 sq. £t~ ~ but it could meet the
Hous~ug Code in room size. They would need 380 sq.~ Ft. and on
26 ft. x 22 ft. they have ~60 sq. ft.
THE CP~N: ~fD_at is in acceptance now?
~. TEP~RY~ Bu~±d~o ~m. spector~ ~0 s~o ft. They are going
to have ~72 sq. £to for temporary. Permanent occupancy is 8~0
sq. ft.
This is going to be temporary use.
~. TERR]f, Building Enspector; The ma~n house is year-
r o~nd?
_wR, ,~ffff~TT: I would say ~no~. ~ney flon~t live in it year-
round at the. present time.
~,o ~: Is it a year-round house? Do they have heat in
it?
~. H~ATT: Zt~s not completely winterized.
THE CHAZP~ Do you propose to win :~erize the apartment?
MR. HYATT: ~{e will have to insulate it but ! don~t think
they will use it in the winter,
THE CH~iR~: ~e cmn specify ~seasonal occupancy~. Temporary
occupancy is 4~0 sq. Ft. This is ~72 sq. ft. They speczfzca_ly
want cook!mg facilities.
~. ~E: This makes it a complete apartment. It would be
sm_ ideal rental apartment but it is specified that it will not
be For rental use.
~E CH&I~I~I: ~re there any other q~estions?
MR, GR_TG0~ES: _r will offer a resolution granting this
application ~with the stipulation tha.t thenew building to replace
the old garage shall not exceed 24 rz. x 28 ft.
MR. ~ATT: Z don~t have the drawings. 24 ft. x 28 Ft. would
give me room for a stairway.
THE CHA.~: The plans have been drawn For this building
but you don~t have them?
The ovzn~rs have them and they went away°
~ CPL~t~ ~ two-car garage with bedroom and bath and
living room-kitchen comb~uation above.., no larger than 2[~ Ft. x
28 Ft. A condition of granting this application would be that
the new structure shall be no closer to any of the lot lines
than the present struct~e. In other words, no closer to the
neighbor on the east o~ to the road. Tou may possible have to
adjust the driveway. I don~t think it would be fair to put it
closer to the lines than it presently is.
Fk°~. HY~TT: May I check this drawing? (~. Hyatt and Board
members referred to drawing.) ~'e can't go closer to the road.
~e can't go to the Front so we ~ve to ~o west ~les~ we
get two ~o~e Feet in the back, which I ~m going to ask
The bulldog ~i~t now is not adequate.
~ ~I~: ~ere is nothing elaborate abou~ the
way. I t~k it would be an infringement on the neighbors to
move closer.
~. TERRY, Building Inspector: idon~t see any problem there~
think it will fit in there.
After investigation and inspection the Board finds that the
applicant requests permission to remove exm~t~ug accessory build-
ing and replace with larger accessory building with living
quarters located on north side of So~dview Avenue, ~outhold, New
at the applicant desires
'~ork. The findings o£ the Board are th
to build a 24 ft. x 28 ft. structure cc
with living quarters for domestic help
T"ne Board finds that strict appli~
produce practical difficulties or unnec
ship created in u_uique and would be
in the i~mediate vicinity of this prop~
ntAfnlng a two-car garage
above, for seasonal use.
ation of the Ordinance will
essary hardship; the hard-
red by all pr~oerties alike
rty and in the same use
district; and the variance does observ~ the spirit of the Ordinance
and will mot change the character of t2~e district.
On motion by Y~. Bergen, seconded by F~. Huise, it was
RESOLVED l~arlon Couloucoundis, So~ndview Avenue, ~outhold,
New York, be GRA~TED permission to remove existing accessory
building and replace with larger accessory building ,with living
quarters located north side o£ Soundview ~venue~ So~o~hold, New
York, with the £ollow~ug conditions:
1. The £aoilities created For domestic help shall not
under any oircu~tances be leased to a~yone now or in the future.
zac~lz~mes to be created are £or seasonal use only~
2. The
Vote of the Board: Ayes:- Messrs. Gillispie, Bergen, Hulse,
Grigonis.
PUBLIC HEARI~TG: Appeal No. 1358 - 9:00 P.M. (E.S.T.), upon
application or.James Phillips, l~esland Road, Southold, New York,
for a varianc~ in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article iii,
Section 303, and Article X, Section 1000A, for permission to divide
lot with insufficient area. Location of property: Chesnut, Birch,.
& Wesland Roads, Southold1, New York, bounded north by ~esland Road,
east by Birch Road, south by Chesnut Road, west by H. MetzendorF.
The Chairmmm opened the hearing by reading the application
for a variance, legal notice of hearing~ affidavit attesting to
its publication in the official newspapers, ~ud notice to the
applicant.
THE CHAIR~: Is there anyone present who wishes to speak
for this application?
TERRY, Building Inspector: There will be no one here.
THE C}~Lqi~.2E~ Do we have any questions?
~. T~RY: I saw the property this morning. ~. ?killip~s
mother Is~ ill so he can't be here~ I suggested an even division.
He said that would be perfectly alright with him.
~ CHALP}~: It would be best to enlarge the new lot. You
can get a ~6 ft. house fac~ug south. The proposed lot would be
approximately 10,000 Ft. The total property is approximately
22,080 ft.
MR. T~qRT, Building Inspector: Divide it so you have an
equal number of Feet~ on each lot. Divide the frontage on Birch
Road in hal~. There would be ~n' equal frontage on Birch Road~
THE. CP~IR~: Is there anyone present who wishes to speak
against this application?
(There was no response.)
After investigation and inspection the Board finds that the
applicant requests permission to divide lot with insufficient
area located Chesnut, Birch and ~$esla~d Roads, Southold, New York.
The applicant would be agreeable ~to ~n even division.
The Board finds that strict application of the Ordinance will
produce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship~ the
hardship created is unique and would be shared by all properties
alike in the ~mmed~ate v~c~nzty o~ th~s p_oper~y and ~n the same
use district; and the variance does observe the spirit of the
Ordinance and will not change the character of the district.
On motion by i~. Huise, seconded by I~. Bergen~ it was
R~OLVED James Phiiiips~ %[esland Road~ Southoid, New York,
be C-R~J~TED permission to divide lot with insufficient area located
at Chesnut, Birch~ and Wesland Roads~ $outhold, New York~ with
the following conditions~
1. Birch Road frontage on the part of the lot to be set
off shall be t19 v~ .... __
_ .,~ ~. ~ustead o~ 1~5.~ £to The north line
shall co~uence 119.75 ft. from the intersection of Birch and
Chesnut mud proceed at right ~gles to lot line separating
applicant's p~ope~ty from property next door.
Vote of the Board: Ayes,-' Messrs. Giilispie~ Bergen, Huise~
Gr igon i s.
P~BLIC ~RING:' Appeal No. 1359 - 9:15 P.M. (~.SoT.), upon
application of Matthew Rao, 1533 Madison Avenue, West islip,
New York, for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance,
Article III, Section 305, for permission to build new one family
dwelling with reduced front yard setback. Location of property:
east side of Salt Aire~ Map of Salt Aire Eastates, Lot No. 27,
Mattituck, New Tork. Fee Paid
The Chairm~n opened the hearing by reading the application
for a variance, legal notice of hearing¢ affidavit attesting to
its publication in the official newspapers, and notice to the
applicant.
THE CPL~IRi~W,· Is there anyone present ~no wishes to speak
for this application?
I~. RAO: Yes~ I am M~tthew Rao.
~Z. T~RY, Building ~aspector: Due to his diligence, they
got s. 5~ ft. setback on the main part of the house. The deed
specified a 50 ft. setback. No part was to be constructed
within ~0 ft.
THE C~L~2.~2~, How bzo is the property?
~o P~O: 100 ft. x 200 ft. There was a misunder2tanding
.helpzng him to stake it out.
on the part o~ the builder. I was ~
We thougb~ we had a ~ ft. cushion. ~. ~e could have gone back
60 ft. I am sorry we did not.
THE CHA~' Does anyone else wish to speak £or this applica-
tion?
(The_~e was no response.)
~Lq~ RAO: ~ne reason why we have a 55 ft. average ~s that one
home is 5~ ft. and another home on the block is ?~ Ftc
THE CH~IR~I~2~: ~is makes for am unreasonable situation.
They have had this problem on Shelter Island. ~ome homes are
100 ft. back sad some are 70 Ft. back°
~fter investigation and inspection the Board finds that the
applicant requests permission to build new one family dwelling
with reduced front yard setback. The property is located east
side of ~alt Airs Way, Mattituck, New York. The Board agrees
with the reasoning of the applicant. The 18 inch extension on
the northerly part of this house will not harm or change the
ne ig~hb orho od.
The Board finds that strict application of the Ordinance
will produce practical difficulties or wunecessary hardship~
the hardship created is unique and would be share~ by all
properties alike in the immediate vicinity of this property
end in the same use district; ~ud the variance does observe
the spirit of tlme Ordinance and will not change the character
of the neig~hborhood, and will observe the spirit of the Ordinence.
On motion by Mr. Bergen, seconded by ~. Grigonis, it was
RE~0LVED Matthew J. Rao, 1~55 Madison ~.venue, ~est Islip,
New York,-be GR~'I~-~D permission to build new one family dwelling
with reduced Front yard setback~
Vote of the Board:
Grig on is.
Ayes:- Messrs. Gi!lispie~ Bergen~ Hu!se,
PUBLIC HE~RI~G: Appeal No. 1360 - 9:30 P~M. (~oS.T.), upon
application of ~m~a ~nterprises~ Inc., Main Road, P. Oo Box 786,
Mattituck, New York, for a special exception in accordance with
the ~oning Ordinance, Article III, Section 300, Subsection 9, for
permission to erect an on premises s~2odivision identification
sign with reduced setback. Location of property: southwest corne~·
of Peconic Bay Blvd. and Delmar Drive, Map of Laurel Co~uty
Estates, Laurel-~ New York.
The Chairman read affidavit of Stanley Siedjeski disclosing
his interest in the above mentioned application in accordance
with the General Municipal ~aw of the State of New York~
The Chairm~u opened the hes~ing by reading the application
for a special exception, legal notice of hearing, aF_zd~v~t
attesting to its publication in the official newspapers, and
notice to the applic~ut.
THE CY~IRM~N: _Ts there ~uyone present ~d~o wishes to speak
For this application?
~T~2~ SI~DJ~SKI: Yes~ I ar~ President of E~a 'Enterprise-s.
I just put the-sign there and had it photographed. I would like
to beautify it with shrubbery to make it look nice. .We only have
2 or 3 feet. ~
THE OHAIR~: How wide is the entrance?
l~, BIEDJ~EEKI: (Referring to map) T~nere is no room... %0 ft.
there. ~Ye have a.curb coming in 7 ft. from the side line.
would be approximately l0 ft. from the curb line in~ %0 Ft..would
be deeded to the to~ but where the sig~u is, would not.
~iE CPL~i~: ~o will own the property where the sign is?
1~. ~DEDJESi~I: ~e o~n it but someone o~s tb~e p~operty in
back of it. ~e have permission to go back another foot fro~ ~.
Cecil Yoong. He has given permission.
T~ C~I~: i~e can't gr~t a si~u permission on what is
go~mg to become a O~o!io road~
~. S~~ ~s is private
TP~ C~I~i~'~tT~ ~e can't grant on 50 fi.
I~o ~RY: Building Inspector: It,s outside o~ %0
~ Ci~,~: You must own more tha~ ~0 ft,
iv~. S~SKI: 2 or 3 ft. It's kind of a wedge-shaped piece,
~ CP~I~: Tou have to get a varia~c~ From us to come
closer to the road - 3%
~. S~Si~: ~ don~t os~ that 35
~ CPL~: I think the Board generally agrees that
is too much. Tour Fence will hays to bs on your own property.
_There is a split rail fence on the other side,
~. H~g~, You are not going to deed this _zttle piece of
property to the town?
~. ~D~S~: No.
I~. P~JI~E: 'There Isn't going to be anything next to this
little piece?
~. S~JESKI: ~aat was just left there for identification
purpose s.
THE dr~A~: Do you have to buy that wedge-shape piece?
~. SIED~ESE-i: It's the same ownership.
t~R. TERRT, Building inspector: Zt was an old right-of-way.
They bought the whole thing.
THE CHAIP. Ir~N: I can_:t see any problem as long as you have
the split rail fence. I think we are agreed that it is perfectly
agreeable to hang the sign on the fence. Ton have a foot°
~. SKED~E~KI: ~fe have 2 or 3 feet.
THE CP~%L~£~N: How close to the road?
FR. ~LEDJESKI: Approximately 30 to 40 feet.
1,~. TERaRY, Building Inspector: There is quite an angle
between the private road they are building sm~.d the boulevard.
1~i~. AXt~E: It should be no closer than 20 ft.
~R. ~,iEDJESI~I,-. You can only see it one way.
After investigation and Im. spection the Board finds that the
applicant requests permission to erect ~n on premises subdivision
identification sig~ with reduced setback at property locate8
southwest corner of Peconic Bay Blvd. The special exception is
requested because of insufficient side line.. The ~pp!~c~n~
wishes to erect a ~10~ x 6~ si~ with z split ~ll fence in
back of sign and evergreen shrubs on e~ch side.
The Board finds that the public convenience and welfare and
justice will be served and the legally established o~ permitted
use of neighborhood property and adjoining use districts will not
be permanently or substantially injured and the spirit of the
Ordinance will be observed.
On motion by l~te. Bergen, seconded by Yin. Grigonis~ it was
,RESOLVED Emma Enterprises, Inc. be GPJ~WTED permission to
erect on premises subdivision identification sign with reduced
setback on p~operty located southwest corner of Peconic Bay Blvd.
and Delmar Drive, Laumel, New York, with the following conditions:
!. ~ign shall not be closem than 20 ft. to the north property
line from Peconic Bay Blvd.
2. ~ign sbmil be 2 ft. from the 1Lne on new road being constructed
in Laurel Country Estates.
Vote of the Board: Ayes:- Messrs. Gillispie, Bergen, Hulse,
Gr igon ~s.
On motion by I~o Gillispie; seconded by Mir. Bergen, it was
ITESOLVED that the mtnutes of the Southold Town Board of
Appeals dated July 9, 1970, be approved as submitted, subject
to m~uor oorrectfonso
Vote of the Board: Ayes:- Messrs. Gillispie, Bergen, Hulse,
Grigonis.
I~. Terry read letter from Greenport United Methodist Church
requesting temporary si~s~
On motion by ~. Bergen, seconded by Mr. Gillispie, it was
RES0L%~ED that signs for Greenport United Methodist Church
be permitted ss requested.
Vote of the Board: Ayes:- Messrs~ Gillispie~ Bergen~ Hu!se,
Grigonis.
I~o Terry read request from the Cutchogue Fire Department
for use of signs.
motion by Mm. erigonis, seconded by l~ir. Hu!se, it was
RES0L~ that signs for Cutchogue Fire Department be
permitted as requested with the condition that they be removed
a week after necessary use.
Vote of the Board:
Gr igon is.
Ayes:- Messrs. eiliispfe, Bergen, Huise,
On motion by Fro. Git!~spie~ seconded by I¢~. B~rgen, it was
RE~OLVF~D that the next regular
mee~g of the Southold To~¢n
Board of Appeals will be held at 7:30 P.M., Thursday~ August 20~
1970, at the To~en 0ffice~ Main Road, Southold~ New York.
Vote of the Board:
igon is.
Ayes:- MeSSrS. Gil!ispie, Bergen, ttuise~
On motion by ~. Hulse, seconded by ~o Bergen, it was
RESOL~ that the Southold Town Board of Appeals set 7:30 P.M.,
(EoS.T.) Thursday, August 20, 1970, at the Town Office, Main Road~
Southold,.New ~ork, as the time and place of hearing upon applica-
tion of Virginia 2. Fu!cher, 7 Hatless Place~ ~est Hempstead, l~ew
York, for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance,
~rticle III~ Section 303, and ~rticle X, Eection 1000Y~, for per-
mission to set off lot with less than 100 ft. frontage. Location
of property: private road off south side of Peconic Bay Blvd.,
Subdivision Map o£ Edgemere Park, Map No. 742, part of lot ~ 14, Laurel,
New York.
Vote of the Board: Ayes:- Messrs. Gitlispie, Bergen, Hulse,
igonis.
On ~otion by I~. Bergen, seconded by ~. C-rigonis, it was
RESOLVED that the Southold~Town-Board of ~.ppeals set 7:4% P.M.,
(E.SoT.)~Thursday, August 20, 1970, at the Town Office, as the time
and place of hearing upon application of Harrontine Realty Corpora-
rich, 8~ Sunrise Highway~ Lynbrook, New York, for approval of
access over private right-o£-way in accordance with the State o£
New York Town ?_~w, Section 280~.. Location of property: private
right-of-way off southwest side of Hickory ~venue (private road),
~.~ap of Goose Bay Estates, Southold, I~ew York.
Vote of the Board: Ayes~- Messrs. Giiiispie, Bergen, Hulse,
Grigonis.
On motion by l~Lv. Gillispie, secolnded by Mr~ Hulse, it was
RESOL-VED~ that the Southold Town Board of Appeals set 8:00 P.M.,
(~.S.T.) ~nursday~ August 20, 1970~ at the Town 0£fice~, as the time
and place of hearing upon application of Peter T. Neyland, ll%
Broadway, Rockville Centre~ New York, For a variance in accordance
with the Zoning Ordinance, Article III~ Section 303, 305, 308,
Section 300, $~fosection 6, and Sectien 309, for permission to
build new one family dwelling on lot with less than 12,%00 sq. ft.
of area with insufficient setback ~nd insufficient rear yard a~ea,
~ud construct accessory building in front yard area. Location
of property: east side of Cedar Lane (private road), ~ast Marion,
New York, boo,untied north by Lot ~ 126 of Gardiners Bay Sub.,
Sec. ii, and Spring Pond east by Spring Pond, south by Lot ~ 127
of Gardiners Bay Sub., Sec. II, s~ud Spring Road, west by Cedar
Lane (private road).
Vote of the Board: Ayes:- Messrs. Giltispie, Bergen, Hulse~
GHigonis.
-20-
On motion by ~o Grigonis, seconded by ~l~. Bergen, it was
REEOLVED that the Bouthoid'To~ Board of .~ppeals set 8:20 P.M.
(E.S.T.) Thursday, August 20, 1970, at the To~a Office, as the
time an~ place of hearing upon applics, tion of ~ne Fried, 47 Pine
Tree Road, Cutchogue, New York, for a varis~mce in accordance
with the ~ ~' ~
~on~no 0rdlnance,-Article III, Section 306, for permission
to construct addition to existing dwelling with reduced front yard
setback. Location of property; east side of Pine Tree Road,
Nassau Farms, Map No. 1179, Lot # 19, Cutchogue, New York.
Vote Of the Board: gyes:- Messrs. Gillispie, Bergen, Hulse,
Grigonls.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:20 P.Mo
APPROVED
~.z~__.,,~Ohairman Board of Appeals
Re spe ct fully submitted,
>~arjorie McDermott' Secretary
Southold Town Board of ~ppeals
~ ~ Ch~.irman