Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-06/15/1978Southold Town Board ppeals SOUTHOLD, L. I., N. Y. TELEPHONE 765-~;:i~ APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS ROBERT W. GILLISPIE, JR., CHAIRMAN ROBERT BERGEN CHARLES GR I~GONIS, JR. SERGE DOYEN; JR. 1802 MINUTES Southold Town Board of Appeals June 15, 1978 A red, liar meet~.g of the Southold Town Board of Appeals ~as ~e~d June 15, , at the Town Hall,~M~in at 7:30 ~ii.~. i~.iS.T.)~ilT~ursday, 1978 Road, So~hold~ New York. ~e~e ~re pr~S~t: Messrs: Robert W. Gillispie, Jr., C~ai~man, Robert ~i":B~gle~, cha~ie.s ~r~gon~s, and Serge Do~en, Jr. ~sop~esent: ~oug Love, Long Island Traveler-Matti%~d.k Watchman, an~ ~,ete',!~am~lt~ Suf~' '.f~lk ~' ~TZme~. :~:~30 P.M. CD.~$.T.') ADDeai No. 2415 ~ Postponed deciSiO~ .~DOn ~p.p,l~~ !R~e~ i~e~n~,' ~/o ~re~er~ck J. Teaesch~, Esq'~r' ~O~!'~.!Street Gr~~. ~'~Y6~k, ~0r a SPec~a1 exception to ~he~ Zoning 0md~h~ce; ~ticle III, sed~on.~.~o~o B ~1). ~Or permxss±on to convert an d~e!~i~h~Oi~w°~f~[ly~idw~lling. Location~.0~ property: K~p G~e~n~; ~ie~y~rk, bOun~ed on the=o~th by Knapp'Place; east Begle ~y sout~ ~D~.~S~tra~sner;~ and wes~ ~y Ma~n Street. Wer.e.an~ke dilap cond±tlon~ Acting ~e. th~, 'of pub sa£ety~and welfare of the To~n, in order~ to facil: te the improvement of that property. , not f~ e ~ ~ Lyons constitutes a precedent for granting ~i re~s ~f theTown. Another d~fference-was that in Orient the ~ge ofthe lot wasbetter than 30,000 squarel~ee%'~ was a l~ttle over i3,000, square feet. The fact that a.house may or 'may not have existed on the vacant lot to the north is not, in our opinion, sUffic~ent reason for creating a two-dwelling unit remaining on the property. SOUTHOL TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -2- June 15, 1978 The Board finds the proposed Heins application for conversion of a single family residence with public water, without public sewage, on a 13,800 square foot lot (requirement 80,000 square feet) to a two-family residence in the densely populated area on Route 25, Main Street, a few hundred yards north of the Greenport Village line unacceptable. The present ordinance requires a 80,000 square foot lot for two-family use even though the lot is served by public water and public sewage in ~he residential zone. The Malcolm Pirnie water study of June, 1967, as well as Board of Health regu- lations on water and sewage are an important part of the basis of planning in the Town of Southold with particular refernce to the size of lots as presently established and as related to population density. The May, 1978 Nassau Suffolk Regional Planning Board study under Section 208, Federal Water Pollution Control Act stresses among other things, the importance of waste and water management and emphasizes the importance of population density in the shallow aquifers of the shoreline towns and villages with a view to avoiding unacceptably costly sewering to avoid pollution. The applicant's attorney states that there were two houses on the lot in the past. Our investigation includes a statement by a local resident that only one house existed on the lot as far back as the late 1930's. The fact that two houses may h-ave existed on the lot many years ago is irrelevant under present conditions. The applicant's lot is less than 20 percent of today's requirement. The 80,000 square feet requirement obtains even if the lot is served b~ both public water and/or sewage. The applicant refers to an alleged precedent for two-family use set by the Board on an approximately 32,000 square, foot lot in Orient - Patrick and Linda Lyons, Appeal No. 2396 - Public Hearing March 23, 1978 - granted subject to conditions. The Lyons application concerned two separate houses of more than 1000 square feet each, joined by a porch, unoccupied for 17 years, and virtually unusable. The two houses were extremely deteriorated and open to continuous vandalism, the weather, a public safety hazard to children and the neighbors. A considerable economic hardship in attempting to use the premises under present zoning was shown. The Lyons houses used a common cesspool system and are located in a prime aquifer region in Orient in an area where lots to the north are zoned one and two acres, and partially developed. The right-of-way to property to the north passes on the easterly lawn of the Lyons property, a highly undesirable feature. Four unique aspects of this situation supported the Board's decision to vary the 80,000 square foot requirement: (1) Existence of two separate residences joined by a porch and used separately in the past. (2} Public safety and welfare required a solution to the dangerous condition of the buildings in the absence of a condemnation ordinance. ~ Extreme economic hardship would obtain if one family attempted to use the property without a rental assist from a second family. ~ A public right-of-way to properties to the north exists immediately to the east of these buildings. SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -3- June 15, 1978 On denying the Heins application the Board supports a continuing policy which requires that a two-family use may be permitted by Special Exception where the lot size is twice the minimum lot size required for a single family. In the past this size has increased from 25,000 square feet to 40,000 to 80,000 square feet (present requirement) for two-family use. F~nancial hardship is not considered an unusual hardship and in the Heins application financial hardship would be considered self-imposed. We agree that there is a scarcity of reasonably priced housing, here and countrywide however, solution of the problem~is not a function of the Board of Appeals. on ~O~io~ ky Mr. Gillispie, seconded by Mr. Bergen, it was RESOLVED that Robert Reins, c/o Frederick J. Tedeschi, Esq., 403 Main Street, Greenport, New York, be DENIED permission to convert existing one- family dwelling into a two~family dwelling. Location of property: Knapp Place, Greenport, New York, bounded on the north by Knapp Place; east by Clarence Begley; south by M. Straussner; and west by Main Street. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Gillispie, Bergen, Grigonis, and Doyen. PUBLIC HEARINg: Appeal No. 2428 - Upon application of J. C. Cornell Construction Corp., 935 Watersview Drive, Southold, New York, for a variance in acCordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article VII, Section 100-70 for permissio~ to construct a new business building with a dwelling above. Location Of property: County Road (Route 27), Peconic, New York, bounded on the no~th by North Road; east by Suffolk County; south by Suffolk County; wes~ by Gralton. T~e Chairman opened the hearing by reading the application for a variance, legal no~ice of hearing, affidavits attesting to its publication in the official newspapers, and d±sapproval from the Building Inspector. The Chairman also read a statement from the Town Clerk that notification by certified mail had been made to: Southold Flooring Covering and Suffolk County. Fee paid $15.00 THE CHAIRMAN: The County Tax Map indicates that this location is in fact surrounded by Suffolk County property on two sides and on the third Side to the west b~ bus,ness zoned property. Is there anyone who wishes to speak for this application? ~OHEPE CORNELL: I think you already mentioned the fact that it is in conformity with %h~ surrounding area,, including the Southold Flooring with the apartment abo~e as %he County garage on the east side. I don't think it would deter from the neighborhood, in fact I think it would enhance it, if I get rid of those shacks and other stuff that is there. THE CHAIRMAN: You applied for a zone change here, didn't you. The land we are talking about is 1t0 feet by 200 feet. Is %hat correct? Who is there now. It used to be Charl~e Hubbard, if I am not mistaken. SOUT~OLD' TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -4- June 15, 1978 MR. CORNELL: It was Hubbard, and he died. He left it to Hingle, and Hingle sold it to me. That's right. THE CHAIRMAN: Are you living there now? Is anyone living there now? MR. CORNELL: I do not live there. I am allowing three young bachelors to live there now. But I would like to build'a~building there. THE CHAIRMAN: What do you propose to do with all those buildings that are there now? MR. CORNELL: I hope to remove them all. THE CHAIRMAN: Ail including the concrete block building? MR. CQRNELL: I may possibly try and use the small concrete foundation. I can't use the building itself. Even the ceiling is too low. All those shacks and things, I want out. Possibly I can use part of the foundation that is already in for the new building. I want something similar to what there is next door. THE CHAIRMAN: Would you want to stipulate that you would remove all those shacks before the Certificate of Occupancy. MR. CORNELL: I will tell you that I will, move them now. Without a doubt. THE CHAIRMAN: The proposal is to demolish the existing stone, block building whick has a trailer built into it? MR. CORNELL: The trailer comes out as well. THE CHAIRMAN: I am just trying to clarify this in our minds. What you want is a building with an apartment overhead. Perhaps a garage or some- thing? Or an out building? MR. CORNELL: No garage. It will be like next door. A building with either 2 or 3 businessses and an apartment upstairs. Everything else comes out. THE CHAIRMAN: One apartment above it? MR. CORNELL: George Fisher already told me that it was it. THE CHAI ~RMAN: understand this? was no response). Two or three retail stores? Any questions? Does everyone Does anyone wish to speak against this application? (there After investigation and inspection the Board finds that the applicant requests permission to construct a new business building where ~wo or three retail businesses on the first floor with an apartment on the second floor. The property is abutted by the Suffolk County garage on one side and a commercial building on the other side. The Board agrees with the reasoning of the applicant that the construction of this new building will enhance the neighborhood. S~UT~O~D' TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -5- June 15, 1978 The Board finds that strict application of the Ordinance will produce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship; the hardship created is 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 will not change the character of the neighborhood, and will observe the spirit of the Ordinance. RESOLVED that J. C. Cornell Construction Corp., 935 Watersview Drive, Southold, New York, be GRANTED permission to construct a new business building with a dwelling above, s~b~e~O~he-~fallewin~¢onditi~n~fc~k Approval of Suffolk County Department of Planning Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Gillispie, Bergen, Grigonis, and Doyen. PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2429 - Upon application of Joan A. Bayley, 55 ~st 16th. Street, New York, (Rudolph H. Buuer, Esq.) for a variance ~ accordance w~tk t~e Zen~n~ 0rd~nance, Article III, Section 100-31 and Bulk and Parking Schedule for permission to divide property on a private r±ght-of-way. Location of property: Right-of-way on the soutk side of Sound View Avenue, Southold, New York, bounded on the north by Sound View Avenue; east by Vilar~ Jacobi, and Schur; south by Morris and Lombardi; and west by Town of Southold and Jarosz. The C~irman opened the hearing by reading the application for a variance, legal no~ice of hearing, affidavits attesting to its publication in the official newspapers, and disapproval from the Building Inspector. The Chairman also read a statement from the Town Clerk that notification by mail had been made to: Mr. and Mrs. Robert Schur, Mr. and Mrs. Henry R. Jacobi, Sr., Michael J. Morris and Arthur Spurway. Fee Paid $15.00. THE CHAIRMAN: The County Tax Map indicates that the area under considera- tion is 2,3 acres and has a northerly dimenSion of 195 feet, southerly dimen- sion of li70 feet, an easterly dimention of 585 feet and westerly dimension of 5~5 f~et and it ~s located on a 50 foot, private right-of-way from Sound View Avenue. It is 200 to 300 feet off Sound View Avenue. Is there anyone who wiskes to speak for this application? RUDOLPH BRIER, ESQ.: Basically just to repeat what has been said with respect to the application. The sketches and survey that have been submitted to you shows that the property is ideal to be divided. There are some properties to the east that are slightly larger and some of the property around it is slightly smaller. It lends itself to a division and would other than the access variance is required, which I understand is before the Board tonight. THE CHAIRMAN: I am just trying to find here how they want this divided. Its 585 feet long. Are they going to divide it in half? MR. BRIER: No quite. Because the property does not exactly lend itself to be cut in half, in terms of area. ~he property areawise is cut in half. ~OU~OLD' TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -6- . June 15, 1978 THE CHAIRMAN: The proposed division would be as described in Van Tuyl's survey of April 4, 1978, indicating the proposed division would have 259 and a fraction feet on the private right-of-way and would produce an area of 1.168 acres and be in comPlete accord with all rules and regulations of the Zoning Ordinance. MR~ BRUER: The remaining piece would be about the same in area as the Kowalski's lot. THE CHAIRMAN: The remaining area will be the same in appearance and shape. Is there anyone 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 a parcel of land co~taining 2.3 acres which is located On a private right-of-way off Sound/A~e, S~uthold, New York. The findings of the Board are that the divison of the land will create two building lots, similar in area of 1.168 acres, which more than meets the zoning requirements of the Town of Southold Zoning Ordinance. The division of the parcel will not change the character of the neighborhood due to the fact there are several smaller lots and larger lots in the surrounding area. The Board finds that strict application of the Ordinance will produce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship; the hardship created is unique and would not be shared by all properties alike zn the immediate vicinity of this property and in the same use district; and the variance will not change the character of the neighborhood, and will observe the spirit of the Ordinance. On motion by Mr. Doyen, seconded by Mr. Grigonis, it was RESOLVED that Joan A. Bayley, 55 West 16th Street, New York, New York, (Rudolph Bruer, Esq.), be GRANTED permission to divide property on a private right-of-way on the south side of Sound View Avenue, SoUthold, New York. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Gillispie, Bergen, Grigonis, and Doyen. Pos poned Deczslon - Appeal No.. 2408 - Upon application of John P. and Linda F. Kowalski, 404 Ati~ntic Avenue, Gree.np~rt, New York, f0r"~a variance in accordance wlt~ the ToWn Law, Section 280A for apProval of access. Location of prop'e~by: Right-of-way on the South s'£~e of Sound View Avenue, Southotd~ New'Y~rk, bounded on the north by Sound View Avenue; east b~ Vilar, Jacobi, and Schur; south by Morris and Lombardi; and west by Town of Southold and Jarosz. This application was postponed from an earlier hearing to provide for the division of the property which had not been d0~e at the time the application for access was heard. At that time no one was sure about the access because the Town Highway ~epartment had a fence across the right-of-way extending from the northwesterly corner of the lot under consideration. ~This:uright-of- SOUT~OLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -7- June 15, 1978 way is black topped and in pretty good condition. The purpose of the fence was to prevent people from using the disposal area as a garbage dump. The Town still uses it for brush, logs, and branches. In the other file, Joan A. Bayley, there was a letter which reads as follows: Board of Appeals, Dear Ladies and/or Gentlemen: In the matter of the petition of Joan A. Bayley to the Board of Appeals of the Town Of Southold regarding a variance application to divide property on a private right-of-way off Soundview Avenue, scheduled to be heard on June 15, 1978, please be advised of the following: We, as owners of residential land adjoining to said property and upon which we are presently building our future home, having serious concerns regarding the effect of said requested division, do respectfully request a postponement of said hearing for a period of at least thirty (30) days to enable us to gather pertinent data for the purpose of making a presentation at said kear±ng. Tkank you. Sincerely, Robert and Shelia Schur. In %he office here we have learned that the right-of-way is in fact owned by Arthur Spurway, and that access was given to Joan A. Bayley by deed, and she in turn will be entitled to deed this access to the Kowalski's. The other point, I believe they made over the telephone, was that they thought i~ could nat b~ fu~i~e~ subdivided. This was further checked out with the Planning Board and is not covered by any subdivision regulations. Is there anyone who wishes to speak against this application? (there was no response.) I feel it is in order to grant this application. After investigation and inspection the Board finds that the applicants request~ recognition of access over a private right-of-way off Sound View Avenue, Southold, New York. The applicants are presently contract purchasers of %he northerly portion of property presently owned by Joan A. Bayley. Mrs. Bayley has received ~c~s~over this right-of-way from Arthur Spurway, the present oWr~ of the right-of-way. Mrs. Bayley will deed said access to Mr. and Mrs. Kowalski. The findings of the Board are that this access is superior to most we encounter and the application should be granted. The Board finds that strict application of the Ordinance will produce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship; the hardship created is unique and would not be shared by all properties ai~ke in the immediate vicinity of this property and in the same use district, and the variance will not change the character of the neighborhood, and will observe the spirit of the Ordinance. On motion by Mr. Bergen, seconded by Mr. Grigonis, it was RESOLVED. that John P. and Linda F. Kowalski, 404 Atlantic Avenue, Greenport, New York, be GRANTED recognition of access. Location of property: Right-of-way on the south side of Sound View Avenue, Southold, New York, bounded on the north by Sound View Avenue~ east by Vilar, Jacobi, and Schur; south by Morris and Lombardi; and west by Town of Southold and Jarosz. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Gillispie, Bergen, Grigonis and Doyen. TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -8- June 15, 1978 PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2425 - Upon Application of Incorporated Long Island Chapter of the New York Archaeological Association for a special exception in accordance with %he Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-30 C 6 f for permission to erect an off-premises directional sign on the corner of Ackerly Pond Lane and Route 25, Southold, New York, bounded on the north by Ackerly Pond Lane; east by Main Roadr south by Frieda Ruppel; and west by Ackerly Pond Lane. The Chairman opened the hearing by reading the application for a'~sp~ciala exception, legal notice of hearing, affidavits attesting to its publication in the official newspapers, and disapproval from the Building Inspector. The Chairman also read a statement from the Town Clerk that notification by certified mail had been made to: Frieda Ruppel. Fee paid $15.00. THE CHAI~: This sign will be 2-1/2 feet above the ground, and will be 2 feet by 2-1~2 feet in size, facing west with an arrow pointing to the south; facing east With a reverse arrow. I think we are reguired to have signs 4 feet above the ground. The location of the sign as indicated on the Suffolk County Tax Map is as we described it. The corner of Ackerly Pond Lane and Main Road, just west of Southold. Is there anyone present who wishes to speak for this application? MRS. MARGARET SEPENOSKI: I would like to give you a letter from the Board of Directors of the Association. THE CHAIRMAN: This is a letter from Incorporated Long Island Chapter of the New York Archaeological Association, which reads as follows: Board of ~peals, Dear Sirs: The Long Lsland Chapter of the New York S~aite ArChaeological Association situs%ed ~on BayView~ROad!~/i South~ld hereby reqh~s~s that the Appeals Board grant a special variance covering the installation of a sign on the nor~hws~st corner of the Ackerly pond Road and New York State Route 25~, in Southold. The Chap%er has one of the best, if not the best, Indian Museums on 5ong Island. Primarily, its Indian exhibits relate %o the Indian tribes of eastern LOng Island. The building, grounds, museum and other items are a valuable asset to the township of Southold. All represents the work of voluntary membership over many years. At considerable cost, the Chapter opens the museum to the p~blic during the months of July and August on a set schedule. At other times, appointments Can be arranged by organizations, teachers, and others. To a large extent th~s is all made possible through donations received from visitors. Attracting visitors therefore has a beneficial effect upon not only helping to defray costs, but in time to make improvements that are more appealing to ot~ers. In time, the Town of Sou%hold directly b~nefits from our activities. The sign represents a valuable directional and i~ormation guide. Your acceptance will be deeply appreciated~. Signed by the Board of directors. This is a very nice letter, thank you. MR. BERGEN: Is %his sign going to be double faced? MRS. ~EPEN©SKI~ Yes, from both sides. MR. BERGEN: It should be. SOUl'OLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -9- June 15, 1978 THE CHAIRMAN: Do you have permission from the owner there to place the sign on the property? MRS. SEPENOSKI: Yes, we do. And also from the adjoining property owners. THE CHAIRMAN: You do not have the written permission in here? MRS. SEPENOSKI: Yes, I believe we do MRS. CONROY: The letter from Mr. Senko is the permission. THE CHAIRMAN: What confused me is that he says, "We should not have any difficulty witk the present tenant. WhO is the tenant? This looks like a vacant lot? MRS. SEPENOSKI: George Saland rented it. Now there is a new real estate agent there. They have nothing against it. THE CHAIRMAN: He rented the whole lot? Saland did, but he didn't use it? MRS. SEPENOSKI: That is right. MR. BERGEN: Well, he had a sign on it. THE CHAIRMAN: Does anyone wish to speak against this application? MRS. JODY ADAMS: I have nothing against this, but how will this effect visibility? MR. BERGEN: We see that this is set back far enough. T~E C~AIRMAN: Tkey have to be set back at least 5 feet from a property l~ne and at least 30 feet from an intersection. In this case 30 feet is to accommodate anyone who stops to drive into the Main Road, and they can look back and not be blocked by a sign. There is one thing it should have and that is that it should be 4 feet above ground level. This enables people to mow under the sign and prevents weeds from overwhelming the sign. MRS. SEPENOSKI: That can be arranged. THE CHAIRMAN: Does that answer your concern about visibility? MRS. ADAMS: I think that is a fine organization and they should have their sign. But I do see signs proliferating, and they don't wear well. THE CHAIRMAN: The Board is aware of this. But we have made an effort over the years to provide directional signs for places of public interest. Also restaurants, places to ~eat, places to sleep for the travelling public. Although we do not permit proliferation of signs for ordinary business. MRS. ADAMS: Are thence any restrictions for size, lettering, color, etc.? THE CHAIRMAN: It is difficult to tell someone what to put on a sign. The more you put on a sign, the less people read them. Some of these visiting hours on here ....... D6U~O~ TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -10- June 15, 1978 MRS. SEPENOSKI: That got changed. It's just Archaeological Museum, open July and August or by appointment and a phone number. In the arrow, there will be Bay View Road. THE CHAIRMAN: That is alot. MRS. SEPENOSKI: The rest got cut off because it was too much. THE CHAIRMAN: The less you put on it the better. The larger you make the letters to designate the main points ...... you have to remember that cars on that curve are not really looking for a sign. Any other questions? MRS. ADAMS: Are these signs checked out by traffic authorities? THE CHAIRMAN: They generally go along with our location of these signs. We make an effort to make sure that the people who erect them place them in safe positions. Yes, in some cases, they are particularly noted by traffic experts. MRS. ADAMS: They will not be noted before they are erected? THE CHAIRMAN: Yes, all signs are reviewed at the County level. On state, County and Town roads. ¥~S. ADAMS: This application now goes to the County for approval? THE CHAIRMAN: Yes, if they disapprove it, we would have to reinstate it. We would have to have a vote of the majority plus one. But if they saw fit to disput:e something about this, we would probably ....... Are there anyother questions? Does anyone have anything to say against this applica- tion? There was no response. After investigation and inspection the Board finds that the applicant requests permission to construct an off-premises directional sign on the corner of Ackerly Pond Lane and Main Road, Southold, New York. The Board agrees with the reasoning of the applican~ that the organization has one of the best Indian Museums on Long Island. An appealing sign will be beneficial to attracting the visiting public to our area. The Board finds that strict application of the Ordinance will produce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship; the hardship created ls unique and would not be shared by all properties alike in the immediate vicinity of this property and in the same use district. This special exception will not change the character of the neighborhood and will observe the spirit of the Ordinance. On motion by Mr. Grigonis, seconded by Mr. Bergen, it was P~ESOLVED that the Incorporated Long Island Chapter of the New York Archaeological Association~.~y~ia~ad, Southold, New York, be GRANTED permission to erect an off-premises, double faced, directional sign, at the intersection of Ackerly Pond Lane and Ro~te 25 (Main Road), Southold, New York, subject to the following conditions: ~OU~OLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -11- June 15, 1978 (1) Subject to the appro~a~S~ffolk County Planning Commission. (2) The sign shall be at least four (4) feet above the ground. (3) The sign shall be at least 30 feet from the intersection of Ackerly Pond Lane and Route 25 (Main R6ad) line. (4) The sign must be at least five (5) feet from any property Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Gillispie, Bergen, Grigonis, and Doyen. PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2427 - Upon application of Willow Point Assocation, Bay Home Road, Southold, New York, for a special exception to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-30 C 6 f for permission to erect an identification sign. Location of property: Lot No. 1, Map of Willow Point, Southold, New York. The Chairman opened the hearing by reading the application for a special exception, legal notice of hearing, affidavits attesting to its publication in the official newspapers, and disapproval from the Building Inspector. The Chairman also read a statement ~rom the Town Clerk that notification by certified mail had been made to: Mr. and Mrs. Giovani Mattesich and Mr. and Mrs. Nat Panto. Fee paid: $15.00. THE CHAIRMAN: We have no description of the size of the sign. We have the County Tax Map which indicates the lot on which the applicant proposes to place the sign. It is on the southeast corner of the intersectiQn of Bay Home Road and Route 25 (Main Road). Is there anyone who wishes to speak for this application? (there was no response) ~ there anyone who wishes to speak against this application? (there was no response). After investigation and inspection the Board finds that the applicant requests permission to construct an on-premises identification sign on the southeast corner of the intersection of Bay Home Road and Route 25 (Main Road~, Southold, New York. The Board is in agreement with the reasoning of the applicant. It is in the public interest to identify neighborhoods and developments in the Town to assist in the delivery of packages, mail the visiting and travelling public. The Board finds that strict application of the Ordinance will produce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship; the hardship crc~ed~ is unique and would not be shared by all properties alike in the immediate vicinity of this property and in the same use district; and that the special exception will not change the character of the neighborhood and will observe the spirit of the Ordinance. On motion by Mr.. Gillispie, seconded by Mr. Grigonis, it was RESOLVED that Willow Point Association, Bay Home Road, Southold, New York, be GRANTED permission to erect an on-premises identification sign. Location of property: Lot No. 1, Willow Point Subdivision, Bay Home Road, Soutkold, Ne~ York, ~b~ect to the f@!!o~ing condition~: ~OU~OL~ TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -12- June 15, 1978 (1) The sign shall be located at least five (5) feet from any property line. (2) The sign shall be at least thirty (30) feet from the inter- section of Bay Home Road and Route 25 (Main Road), Southold, New York. (3) The sign shall be no larger than ten (10) square feet. [4) The sign shall be at least four (4) feet above ground level to facilitate the removal of grass and weeds from under the sign. (5) This shall be subject to the approval of the Suffolk County Planning Commision. Vote of the Board: Doyen. Ayes: Messrs: Gillispie, Bergen, Grigonis, and PUBLIC HEARING; Appeal No. 2426 Upon application of Michael ~. Lo- Grande, 63 Pinedale Road, Hauppauge, New York, for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-30 and Bulk and Parking Schedule, for permission to construct a dwelling with insufficient front and rear yards. Location of property: Lots 28 and 29, and part of 30 and 31, on Map No. 1097, Map of Bailey Park, Peconic, New York. The Chairman opened the hearing by reading the application for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, legal notice of hearing, affidavits attesting to its publication in the official newspapers, and disapproval from the Building Inspector. The Chairman also read a statement from the Town Clerk that notification by certified mail had been made to: Frank Lonigro. Fee Paid $15.00. THE CHAIRMAN: The application is accompanied by a survey by Young and Young. The property is between Goldsmith Inlet and Mill Road at a paper street, which is literally a paper street. You cannot see it. The lot is roughly 73 feet on the northerly boundary; 130~'feet along Mill Road; and 100 feet plus on the southerly boundary toward Goldsmith i~let. The southerly mn their narrowness, and not much depth. It appeared that there were marsh grasses growing there, but the Board of Health has checked~ the water. I guess we do not have~ a r~port on it, but I assume it is because they have not as yet gotten the report. We~do not have anything from the DEC in the file either. Is there anyone present who wishes to speak for this application? MRS. MICP~AEL LOGRANDE: We do not have the County Health approval for the water. It has not been completed at this time. In fact they requested we have a test well done. THE C~AIRMAN: We were down there, and it is a little hard to find any- thing because it is an overgrown area. ~O~UT~O~'.D' TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -13- June 15, 1978 MRS. LOGRANDE: Yes, I believe the property had been filled at least 10 years ago. MR. BERGEN: Somebody dug a hole. A test well. MRS. LOGRANDE: Yes, we were working there. THE CHAIRMAN: Mr. Bergen found the hole and assumed it was a test hole. MRS. LOGRANDE: I don't believe so. I think Michael dug down. THE CHAIRMAN: Are you going to fill this some more? MRS. LOGRANDE: If necessary, yes. THE CHAIRMAN: Does Michael consider this wetlands? MRS. LOGRANDE: No, I think he went through the DEC. We did get a permit. I have it here with me. THE CHAIP~W~N: Has this been to the Planning Board yet? I think that the DEC is one of your most important hurdles. MRS. LOGRANDE: That has the stipulation that the County Health Department approves the water. The two special conditions were complied with. THE CHAIRMAN: I am going to read this. We seldom get to read anything from the DEC. Mr. ~ichael O. LoGrande, April 19, 1978, Dear Mr. Lo~rande: I have reviewed your application for the above permit which was referred to me by our regional affice in Stonybrook. I am enclosing your permit with two special Conditions which must be satisfied before work can be commenced. Also enclosed is a psrmit s±gn which must be conspicuously posted on the project site protected from the weather. Description of project: Construct one single family dwelling. Replace approximately 400 yards of fill on lots 28 to 30. I think you might need it there. MR. BERGEN: I think so too. In order to get grass at all. THE CHAIRMAN: Approval from Suffolk County Department of Health for placement of sePtic systems must be obtained before commencing work on the project. Approval from Town of Southold Department of Public Works concerning possible drainage problems cn Mill Road as a result of fill necessary to the project must be obtained before commencing work on the project. MRS. LOGHANDE: We have a letter from Mr. Dean. THE CHAIRMAN: It is okay witk-~r. Dean? I think you have more permits and conditions than anyone who has ever come before the Board. Are there any other questions anyone would like to ask Mrs. LoGrande? When do you plan to go aSead with this? As soon as you can? Does anyone wish to speak in oppos±~ion to this application (there was no response) SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -14- June 15, 1978 After investigation and inspection the Board f±nds that the applicant requests permission to construct a dwelling on Mill Road, Peconic, New York, with insufficient front and rear yards. The findings of the Board are that the applicant's property abuts a paper street on the northerly side and Mill Road on the westerly side. On the southerly side are several lots similar in the fact they are all narrow. Consequently, the Board agrees with the reasoning of the applicant, who has acquired more permits than any other applicant the Board has encountered. The Board finds that strict application of the Ordinance will produce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship; the hardship~created is 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 will not change the character of the neighborhood and will observe the spirit of the Ordinance. motion by Mr. Gillispie, seconded by Mr. Doyen, it was RESOLVED that Michael O. LoGrande, 63 Pinedale Road, Hauppauge, New York, be GRANTED permission to construct a dwelling with insufficient front and rear yards. L~cation of property: Lots 28 and 29 and part of 30 and 31 on Map No. 1097, Map of Bailey Park, Pe¢onic, New York, subject to the following condition: Subject to the approval of the Suffolk County Planning on%m~sslon. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Gillispie, Bergen, Grigonis, and DO~h. PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2424 ~ Upon application of Henry P. Wickham, c/o Abigail A. Wickham, Esq., Main Road, Mattituck, New York, for a varianc in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-30 and Bulk Schedule for permission to set off a lot with insufficient widHh and area. Location of property: east side of New SuffOlk Lane, New Suffolk, New York, bounded on the north by Henry P. Wickham; east by Cutchogue Harbor; south by William Wickham; and west by Henry P. Wickham. The Chairman opened the hearing by reading the application for a variance, leg~aI notice Of h~a~ing, affidavits attesting to i~s publication in the official newspapers, and disapproval from th~ Building :Inspector. The Ckairman also read a statement from the Town Clerk that notification by certified mail had been made to: Mr. and Mrs. William Wickham, Mr. James P. Wickham; Mr. Laurence C. Breaker; Mrs. Mary Benbow; Dr. and Mrs. James Bartley Given, III. Fee paid $15.00 THE CHAIRMAN: The original lot was 90 feet? Did the Wickham's build the house? Or who built the house? ABIGAIL WICKHAM, ESQ: It was built by the Wickhams. It was built by Mr. Wickham's mother. THE CHAIRMAN: So this is his mother's house? Is that both the 90 feet and the 30 feet that was added later? ~U~O~D~ TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -15- June 15, 1.978 MS. WICKHAM: She later added a 30 foot strip on the north. That was intended to be the residence lot. Then he acquired the surrounding land as a part of a separate transaction. He received it when they cut up the estate. THE CHAIRMAN: This strip forms an integral part of the residence lot. It was intended to complete it. What does that mean? "intended to complete It? MS. WICKHAM: It means that there was only about 10 feet between the house and the boundary line of the property. At that time it was owned by James Wickham. So that they felt it would be appropriate to add a 30 foot strip to provide a buffer between that. TH~ CHAIRMAN: To buffer a possible development of the 17 acres. The lot is irregularly shaped now. I do not think the addition of this strip will change anything. Who came up with this 25 feet? MS. WICKHAM: That is the additional amount that would be required to make a 150 foot width. THE CHAIRMAN: It would take a little more than that. That is what is Confusing. ~t is a 121 foot width. You would need 29 feet. MS. WICKHAM: It is 127 feet on the bay~ THE CHAIRMAN: It does not say that here. It says 121 feet. This is on the County TAx Map. MS. WIC~/4AM: The tax map is not accurate. THE CHAIRMAN: Why add 25 feet? If you are going to make it 150 feet, you would need 29 feet. That is not the purpose of this, is it? MR. BERGEN: The purpose is to make a 150 foot front. MS. WICKHAM: The problem is that he owns all of this property. The residence lot is only 121 feet wide. He wants to convey this to his wife for tax purposes. In order to do that he doesn't want to get hung up on the 150 foot requirement. He would like to get a variance to conform the 121 foot lot although he does own the large 17 acre parcel. MR. BERGEN: He wants a variance? THE CHAIRMAN: This lot, its an odd situation. The residence is on 1.2 acres. It is 121 feet wide on the Bay, and the length of the lot is 420 feet. The house is approximately in the center of it. Surrounding this to the west and north, Mr. Wickham has inherited 17.5 acres. Part of the problem seems to be that if this is ever sold, you would want to maximize the water- front. I don't personally quarrel with that. I do not know if this has come to your attention or not. If you were going to create ...... Mr. Wickham owns approximately 456 feet of waterfront, 121 feet of which comprises his present residence, where he always has lived. He owns that by separate deed. In going to the Building Inspector to convey this to his wife, the Building Inspector has said he thinks Mr. Wickham should bring the lot up to zoning standards, which arbitrarily states, the lot should be 150 feet wide by whatever length is required. This is an unnecessary conveyance of property. It is already an oversized lot. To whose advantage would it be to convey the ~UT~O~D' TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -16- June 15, 1978 the additional footage? It would have to be 29 feet. MS. WICKHAM: It is to no~.one's advantage. THE CHAIRMAN: What will remain to Mr. Wickham after the 121 feet is 335 feet. In order to assure the Town that this remaining 335 is not maximized.. You see it cohld be done by clustering. It was done at Pebble Beach down in East Marion. I do not think it serves any point in adding 25 to 30 feet to Mr. Wickham's property. Even though Counsel, Town Counsel, disagrees with me. I think what we could stipulate is that if the remaining waterfront is subdivided that there be no more than 2 lots obtained from the 335 feet, which seems to me would satisfy the Town's requirement unless the Planning Board stipulates this is not the proper way to develope it. Then we would take back that stipulation. That could be developed on a curve with 4, 90 foot lots. MS. WICKHAM: My lot is not very clear. I thought it was more like 360 feet. THE CHAIRMAN: Does everyone understand this? It zs important that everyone on the Board understands this because I am disagreeing with Counsel. MR. BERGEN: I think I do now, I didn't. has THE CHAIRMAN: The Building Inspector /S arbitrarily stated that if Mr. Wickham is going to convey his house lot Which is now part of 20 acres to Mrs. Wickham for tax purposes, that it has to be enlarged by 25 feet. First of all 25 feet is not enough to make it 150 feet. It seeems to me it serves no purpose. MS. WICKHAM: The whole point of the situation historically is that the residence lot has always been this size. THE CHAIRMAN: That provided the background for this application. Could we put a proviso in the decision ...... MR. BERGEN: If he wanted it, I would go along with it. But if he does not want it ...... THE CHAIRMAN: MS. WICKHAM: the property. THE CHAIRMAN: slice it up. Who is this going to help if it is 150 feet? No one. The problem is the house is on the south side of You will only get 2 more lots out of it no matter how you MR. GRIGONIS: moze difficult. THE CHAIRMAN: MS. WICKHAM: THE CHAIRMAN: was no response) Thau job created by the additional 29 feet would make it It would not help. This will put the burden on the Planning Board. This will not be done within the next year or so. Does anyone wish to speak against this application? (there SOUTEO~D' TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -17- June 15, ~78 After investigation and inspection, the Board finds that the application requests permission to set off a lot as accumulated in several deeds of 1.2 acres. Said lot is 420 feet in length and 121 feet in width. The reasoning of the Board is that the additional 29 feet needed to conform this lot due to current Zoning requirements has no bearing on this matter due to the fact that the lot consists of 1.2 acres. The Board finds that strict application of the Ordinance will produce practical hardship; the hardship created is 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 will not change the character of the neighborhood and will observe the spirit of the Ordinance. On motion by Mr. Gillispie, seconded by Mr. Grigonis, it was RESOLVED that Henry P. Wickham, 100 Wolver Hollow Road, Upper Brookville, Glenhead, New York, (Abigail Wickham, Esq.) be GRANTED permission to set off residence lot with a depth of 420 feet, width of 121 feet, containing 1.2 acres. Location of property: East side of New Suffolk Lane, New Suffolk, New York,bounded on the north by Henry P. Wickham; east by Cutchogue Harbor; south by William Wickham; and west by Henry P. Wickham, subject to the following: %-c App~o~ ~kf~e S~fslk ~8~:pl~i~qp~®~/nlss~on. ~ - 2~%e of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Gillispie Bergen, Grigonis Doyen. ~BLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2430 - Upon application of Margery D. Burns, Main Road, Southold, New York, for a variance in accordance with ~he Zoning Ordinance, Article VII, Section 100-70 and Bulk Schedule for permission to have residential homes~in a business district. Locatio~ of property: Road, Southold, New York, bounded on the north by A. Bender; east by A. Bender; south by Main Road; and west by L. Edson. The Chairman opened the hearing by reading the application for a ~ariance to the Zonin~ 0rd~nance, legal notice of hearing, affidavits attesting to its publication in tke official newspapers, and disapproval from the Building Inspector. The Chairman also read a statement from the Town Clerk that noti- fication by certified mail had been made to: A. Bender; and L. Edson. Fee paid $15.00. THE CHAIRMAN: The property we are talking about is just 2 or 3 doors d~wn to the east of us, consists of 25, 000 to 26,000 square feet. Part of it is oblong in shape. 215 feet by 85 feet. On the front portion of the property is a shinqled residence, 2 story house and the property has a large carr.la~e house in %he rear in the northeast corner. Add±ti~nal property w~ich goes over to an area behind the present lot in which we are sitting. Is there anyone who wishes to speak for this application? MARGERY D. BURNS: There is an additional hardship. My husband is very ill and is paralyzed. My son wishes to live in the proximity of his father. THE CHAIRMAN: You might have added that there is a municipal parking field adjoining you to the north. Is there anyone else who wishes to speak for thie application? I think the application speaks for itself. I might SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -18- June 15, 1.978 say that there is no prohibition in our Ordinance as it reads today for more than one residence in a business zone. The original zoning of the Town was A residential; B business; and C industrial, and anything that was multi- family was placed in B. This is a B-1 and always has been. Another way of looking at this is that if this were developed to its full business potentiaL, could vastly change the density on this parcel. You are not asking to separate this property out. You are going to continue to own it? Is there anyone who wishes to speak against this application? (there was no respnse) The dwelling to be created will have at least 850 square feet, the minimum ~'Town requirement? The two dwellings will alway~c~sidered as one property. There will be no effort to separate them? MRS. BURNS: The building has a mansard roof as well as a partial cellar so we will be able to get more than 850 square feet. There will be no ~fort to separate the two. After investigation and inspection the Board finds that the applicant requests permission to have a second residence on a B-1 business property. If the property were developed its full business potential, it would vastly increase the density of the property. The Board finds %hat strict application of the Ordinance will produce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship; the hardship created is 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 will not change the character of the neighborhood and will observe the spirit of the Ordinance. On motion of Mr. Grigonis, seconded by Mr. Giltispie, it was RESOLVED, Ma~g~y~ D. Burns~, Main Road, Southold, New York, be GRANTED permission to have a second residential home on a business zoned lot. Location of property: Main Road, Southold, New York, bounded on the north by A. Bender; east by A. Bender; south by Main Road and west by L. Edson, subject to the following condition: Approval of the Suffolk County Planning Commission. Tote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Gillispie, Bergen, Grigonis, and Do~en. PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2431 - Upon application of Margery D. Burns, Main Road, SoUthold, New York, for a special exception in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-30 for permission to have residential homes in a business district. Location of property: Main Road, Southold, New York, bounded on the north by A. Bender; east by A. Bender; south by Main Road; and west by L. Edson. Tbs Chairman opened the hear±ng by reading the application for a variance, to the Zoning Ordinance, legal not~ce of hearing, affidavits attesting to its publication in the official newspapers, and disapproval from the ~UT~O~D TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -19- June 15, 1978 Building Inspector. The Chairman also read a statement from the Town Clerk that notification by certified mail had been made to A. Bender; and L. Edson. Fee paid $15.00. THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone who wishes to speak for this application? (there was~no response). Is there anyone who wishes to speak against this application? (there was no response). I really think that this application is just a formality. After investigation and inspection the Board finds that the applicant requests permission to have a second residential home on a B-1 business property. If the property were developed to its fullest potential business- wise, the density would be greatly increased. The Board finds that strict application of the Ordinance will produce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship~ the hardship created is 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 ~d_fa~xception will not change the character of the neighborhood and will observe the spirit of the Ordinance. On motion by Mr. Gillispie, seconded by Mr. Bergen, it was RESOLVED that Margery D. Burns, Main Road, Southold, New York, be GRANTED permission to have a second residential home on a business zoned parcel. Location of property: Main Road, Southold, New York, bounded on the north by A. Bender; east by A. Bender; south by Main~%Road; and west by L. Edson. subject to the following condition: Approval of the Suffolk County Planning Commission Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Gillispie, Bergen, Grigonis, and Doyen. PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal NOo 2423 - Upon application of Catherine N. Moor-Jankowski, (Donald E. Mahoney, Attorney), Village Lane, Orient, New York, for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-31 and Bulk Schedule for permission to set off lot with insuf- ficient area and width. Location of property: Village Lane, Orient, New York, bounded on the north by W. Schriever; east by W. Schriever; south by Lionetti and Kripinski; and west by Village Lane. T~ke C~airman opened the hearing by reading the application for~'~.variance, to the Zoning Ordinance, legal notice of hearinq, affidavits atte~ing to its publication in the official newspapers, and disapproval from the Building Inspector. The Chairman also read a statement from the Town Clerk that notification by certified mail had been made to: William W. Schriever, Louis Lionetti, and Joseph C. Kripinski. Fee paid $15.00 THE CHAIRMAN: In the file is a letter dated today from the Planning Board, John Wickham, Chairman: Board of Appeals - In regard to the Moor- Jankowski petition, please be advised that the Planning Board requested SOUTHOL~ TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -20- June 15, 1978 the former owner of this property, William Schriever, to dispose of this and other odd-shaped pieces of property as part of his subdivision pre- liminary negotiations. In addition, the Southold Town Board suggested to Mr. Schriever that he likewise divest himself of these small parcels. It is for this reason that this petition comes before you. It is the feeling of the Planning Board that this is a reasonable solution. The prope~ty3is on Village Lane, Orient, New York. Dr. Moor-Jankowski, prior to this latest acquisition from Mr. Schriever, owned a lot 100 feet feet by 145 feet, upon which his house exists. To the south of that he has acquired an area slightly larger than that and slightly deeper than the original lot plus an additional 50 feet on the northerly side of his house. The area consists, at one time we found 30 odd undersized lots. Directly across the street there are a number of lots 59 feet, 56 feet, 85 feet, 60 feet in width. Is there anyone present who wishes to speak for this application? DONALD E. MAHONEY: I represent the applicant. Her husband is also present tonight with me to answer any questions the Board might have. I would just like to confirm the comments of the Chairman and %he contents of Mr. Wickham's letter from the Planning Board. Two other lots that the prior owner, Mr. Schriever, owned front on Orchard Street have been before this board, and I understand variances have been granted on each of these lots. Those lots were also what Mr. Wickham referred to as off-shaped lots. Again, I would confirm the Chairman's designation of the area. Directly across the street there are numerous lots, some as small as 48 feet With an area of 6,250 square feet. There are no undeveloped lots on the west side of the~treet. The character of the neighborhood is that in granting this variance would not alter said character and would be in keeping of harmony in the overall area. _ -~. ~"~s ~_~ wi~:~ -~:' ~an~ ~2~ *~'~ ~iL~a- SAMUEL J. GLICKMAN: I represent Mr. Lionetti and the Kripinski's who live directly south of said property. Here we have a vacant lot, and we have a letter from the Planning Board asking Mr. Schriever to divest himself of this piece of property on Village Lane, prior to obtaining a subdivision. THE CHAIRMAN: I would like to straighten that point out with Mr. Schriever. I do not ~really understand what Mr. Wickham said here. Why did the Planning Board require you to divest yourself of these properties. Is this a condition of ...... MR: W~LLIA~ SCHR/EVER: These little properties have cost me more money and time and headaches than you can possibly imagine. Le~ me ~say this. There was a law s~it which we filed against the Town f~r this Cluster business. We had the ~pproval of the Planning Boardf basically, but the Town Board, would not g~ve us the Cluster. At that t~me, the T~n Board ec~slon they had made. They settled the law suit by saying the perimeter p~eces, that is what we have been calling them outside the subdivison ..... The understanding was they would go to the adjoining property owners so that no new lots would be created. With three exceptions. THE CHA!~NLAN: The understanding that they would go to the adjoining property owners? ~UT~O~D TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -21- June 15, 1978 MR. SCHRIEVER: In the settlement of the lawsuit ........ THE CHAIRMAN: You had some sort of arrangement with Dr. Moor-Jankowski? MR. SCHRIEVER: That is what Dr. Moor-Jankowski claims. Let me continus. What happened was the attorneys got together and the Town Board reversed their earlier decision, which was all these pieces had to be stuck in the subdivision and covenanted so that they could not be developed. Of course, in the Subdivision were the two lots on Orchard Street THE CHAIRMAN: Which would have wiped out two perfectly good lots. MR. SCHRIEVER: This particular lot in the original plan was not a lot. This would have been open space. Now, when the pieces were cut loose from the subdivision in the settlement of the law suit, this was then--- there was no point in having the open space. Since, I owned and it and had no adjoining property to stick it to, it had no purpose at all. So the under- standing was I would get the variances on two lots on Orchard Street, which were granted. That was just an even trade. This lot here ..... THE CHAIRMAN: Those lots would have been lots in the subdivision? MR. SCHRIEVER: It is a cluster subdivision and there were over a~half acre and were therefore acceptable lots under the cluster zone. They were listed as lots in the original plans. THE CHAIRMAN: There was no reason why you couldn't sell them off then? MR. SCHRIEVER: Right. The way the thing was settled, the lots were cuu off from the subdivison. Once you cut it loose from the subdivision, it has no purpose to be a lot. So the agreement was that I would get a variance on that lot. Now what actually happened was that Dr. Moor-Jankowski tied up the lot in a suit claiming a 20 foot strip along the lot, on what basis I have no idea. We asked his premission to release the lot at least for the purpose of getting a variance without discussing the merits of his case, just so we could get the variance. He refused to do that. So when the application was made for the two lots on Orchard Street this lot was not included. ' THE CHAIRMAN: I remember Dr. Moor-Jankowski objected to that. MR. SCHRIEVER: In fact he objected to the other two lots. Eventually the law suit that he filed against me was settled. Recently, very recently. THE CHAIRMAN: What was the decision? SimPly put. MR. SCHRIEVER: He asked last year to have the lot sold to him as a separate parcel from what we call the "L-shaped" lot on the north. THE CHAIRMAN: He asked the court? MR. SCHRIEVER: No, he asked me. I said that it would put me in the position of subdividing property without the approval of the Planning Board. So I asked some opportunity to apply for permission to make the subdivision. SOUTHOL TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -22- June 15, 1978 Either as a variance to set it off as a lot or to the Planning Board and get permission t~ subdivide it. THE CHAIRMAN: I do not remember anybody ever telling us here in the 20 odd years that we have been here, that we had to grant anyone a variance. I guess I misundersto6d your language. That the variance was a trade off for something. That is not what you meant? The understanding was .... The variances we granted to you here we thought were MR. SCHRIEVER: THE CHAIP~4AN: deserved. MR. SCHRIEVER: I do not want to debate that, it is a legal point, and I do not understand that particular point. I thought I was making an application of merit. The fact is that Dr. Moor-Jankowski filed a suit to obtain the property around his house. In fact the lawsuit asked that he take 20 feet out of the lot which is the subject tonight. That would have made the lot useless. Take 20 feet off that and then it would have been so small, it would have been useless. THE CHAIRMAN: You are talking about the lot to the south? One of the oddities of the situation is this~small strip that he acquired behind his house. Can you explain that? MR. SCHHIEVER: Yes, I can. THE CHAIRMAN: I do not think it matters, but it is just peculiar. DR. MOOR-JANKOWSKI: The simpliest thing to say is that my cesspool is on that strip of property. THE CHAIRMAN: Okay, don't say anything more. MR. SCHRIEVER: The cesspool is on the north side of his house. talking about the strip of land to the rear? THE CHAIRMAN: You have a 50 foot strip that runs past his lot. deeper than his home lot. parcel. You are It's It runs across the back. You sold him a U-shaped MR. SCHRIEVER: That is right. MR. MAHONEY: If I might interject, Mr. Chairman~ There were 2 contracts of sale entered into between Mr. Schriever and Dr. Moor-Jankowski. One contract covered the "L~shaped" parcel. The 50 foot strip to the north of the residence parcel and the 30 foot strip to the rear. Dr. Moor-Jankowski says the cesspool that services his original house is located on that s~tzip. He wanted to acq. uire that strip so he would not have a future problem, cess- pool wise. When they were doing that, they also bought a 30 foot strip in the back yard to add a little property to their existing home. MR. SCHRIEVER: The 30 foot strip was created when the subidivision was laid out. It made the subdivision lines more uniform. ~OU~O~D TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -23- June 15, 1978 MR. MAHONEY: There was a separate contract of sale on the subject premises. The two contracts were contingent upon each other. THE CHAIRMAN: I hope this helps Mr. Glickman, too. I had to be updated on this. MR. GLICKMAN: Can I ask a question? The 20 feet involved in the law suit had to do with the fact that Dr. Moor-Jankowski claimed he owned, was that settled? MR. SCHRIEVER: It was settled. MR. GLICKMAN: Didn't you offer to S~el} Dr. Moor-Jankowski that 20 feet prior to that? MR. SCHRIEVER: No, never. MR. GLIC~dAN: You have a good memory. Here we have an undersized lot. An acres is 40,000 squre feet. Here we have 17,000. Width, we have 104 compared to the required 150 feet. I agree that the loHs across the street are smaller than Mrs. Moor-Jankowski's lot. It wasn't too long ago, in 1974, when both Mr. Schriever and Dr. Moor-Jankowski and the neighbors came down, including the Kripinski's when Mr. Vail wanted to subdivide a piece. They all said no, no, you can't do that. It's less than an acre. THE CHAIRMAN: I remember that. DR. MOOR-JANKOWSKI: I did not oppose that. MR. GLICKMAN: They opposed the subdivision of land by Mr. Vail for a house in ~2~k. THE CHAIRMAN: The Kripinski's had already carved out a lot .... MR. GLICKMAN: That was already there. The house is over 100 years old. THE CHAIRMAN: To my mind there is no comparison to what they were doing. It had two residences on the lot. Well, who owns it now, Lionetti? MR. GLICKMA~: There were 2 houses on it. Lionetti owns one. Kripinski owns the other. THE CHAIRMAN: The time we are talking about, I forget, Mr. Luce, Pete Luce wanted to build a house out in the back and take care of Mr. Vail from the house. Wasn't that the point of the application? MR. GLtCKMAN: No, he just wanted to build a home there. THE CHAIRMAN: He was the grandson. That property had only about 30,000 square feet and already had 2 houses on it. We disagreed with putting a third house on it. If you are comparing it. We have a situation here with a lot with frontage on the road, 191 feet in depth and 104 feet on the road. Approximately 20,000 square feet. MR. GLICKMAN: 174 feet, Mr. Chairman. THE CHAIRMAN: Then this is not accurate, the County Tax Map. SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -24- June 15, 1978 MR. MAHONEY: If you look at the survey, it shows the 191 goes from the street to the rear. Our parcel does not go that far. MR. GLICKMAN: It is a little over 17,000 square feet. MR. MAHONEY: Could someone explain to me the application you are referring to? That covered this whole parcel? THE CHAIRMAN: They were going to carve out 7,000 or 8,000 square feet in the southeast corner. MR.MAHONEY: There were already two residences there? THE CHAIRMAN: Yes, two substantial residences. Go ahead, Mr. Glickman. MR. GLICK~AN: Mr. ~chriever said that the Planning Board made him dispose of it. I cannot understand where the 20 feet comes in. When the Maps show that the lot is 104 feet. Mr. Schriever claims that Dr. Moor-Jankowski had the 20 feet. That would make the lot only 87 feet wide. I say that the applicant here would like to put up a house. The applicant and his wife own the house just to the north of this. THE CHAIRMAN: I think the applicant wants permission to sell this as a lo%, don't you? MR. MAHONEY: We want permission to build a house there at a later date. HHE CHAIRMAN: And divide the lots. MA. MAHONEY: The applicant has no intention of selling the parcel or building on it. MR. GLICKMAN: I misunderstood too. I thought the application was for the building of a house. Why would you need a variance ...... THE CHAIRMAN: To set off a lot. It might be for property reasons, inheri- tance, or any number of reasons. MR. GLICKMAN: Just to set off a lot? Not for a building permit? THE CHAIRMAN: I do not know where that leaves you? MR. GLICKMAN: No where at the present moment. Even if the setting off ~ of a lot. It is in separate ownership. THE CHAIRMAN: It won't be will it? MR. MAHONEY: Yes it will. Let me make this perfectly clear. The original parcel is owned by Dr. and Mrs. Moor-Jankowski. The "L-shaped~' parcel acquired from Mr. Schriever ~as~so~in the name of Dr. and Mrs. Moor- Jankowski. So they have increased the size of their non-conforming lot. They ,ad~ed approximately 11,000 square feet. Mrs. Moor-Jankowski, separately obtained the subject premises. MR. SCHRIEVER: That is the point I was making when ..... ~O~T~O~D TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -25- June 15, 1978 THE CHAIRMAN: Actually, now we need not have had this hearing. I may be wrong. MR. MAHONEY: I do not believe that is correct. subject premises, and the ..... THE CHAIRMAN: MR. MAHONEY: Is in Mrs. Moor-Jankowski's name. Prior to the purchase ..... The ownership of the THE CHAIRMAN: This has come up and I have been over this with our Counsel where joint ownership of husband of wife exists. The Board Of Appeals cannot hold or the Town Zoning Authority cannot hold that lots are separately owned lots. they are not merged. So if Mrs. Moor-Jankowski elects to buy this piece of land. MR. MAHONEY: The purchase has already taken place. THE CHAIRMAN: This is over with. Now you say we need to hold this hearing. MR. MAHONEY: The reason for the application is that Mr. Schriever, the prior owner of subject premises is also the owner of contiguous property, to wit: The 30 foot strip or the L-shaped parcel. This lot 8i~ not pre-exist the effective date of the present zoning ordinanc~ ~?~_._P ~u±~es ~ THE CHAIRMAN: It appears to me that Mr. Schriever should have applied for this variance. MR. MAHONEY: Mr. Schriever mentioned that. MR. SCHRIEVER: That is the reason I am here tonight because I tried to make this application for a variance to set this lot off and I was prevented from doing so. I was asked to deliver the property as two separate parcels In fact, I delivered it, and ~ subdivided it. Now the question is, can I do that? THE CHAIRMAN: Anybody can buy or sell anything. MR. SCHRIEVER: It is usable as a separate parcel to build a house on, right? I think thab is the issue to be d&cided .on tonight. .T, ME CHAIRMAN: That is not what you said, Mr. Mahoney, is it? MR. MAHONEY: No, it isn't. I will aqree with Mr. Schriever. We would ~ike the right ~t a future date to build-a house on it. We haven't any intention of building t~morrow or next week. THE CHAIRMAN: I do not think I could put this whole matter in a few words or not. DR. MOOR-JANKOWSKI: When ~e bought our house, there were vacant lots on both side of the house. When we acquired the house, we acquired options on both ~ O~ the noth~rn lot and the southern lot. Not as deep as we have DO~O~'.D TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -26- June 15, 1.978 no~. THE CHAIRMAN: Who did you acquire the options from? DR. MOOR-JANKOWSKI: ~rom~he Thomas estate. From the same people we bought the house from. THE CHAIRMAN: Who did you acquire the property from Bill? MR. SCHRIEVER: I bought land from the Thomas estate. DR. MOOR-JANKOWSKI: Mr. Schriever first bought the land in the back of us. Because the Thomas' told him I had the options on the two lots. Then Mr. Schriever came to me and asked me Would you sell me the options? If you do not exercise the options~ then I will buy the lots and we will make arrangements. That is how the 20 feet came into being. I agreed to this. Then I had a disagreement with Mr. Schriever. Basically in 1968 I acquired options on the two lots before there was 1 acre zoning. When we~ere almost ready to buy the lots from Mr. Schriever, I found out that in case something kappened to me and my family sold the lot. I paid $15,000.00. for this land and it would have an additional value of $2,000.00. In order to protect my family I would have to obtain an approval of the lot, in the name of my wife. I did not want Mr. Schr~ever to do it as we have had litigation for 6 years. I do not want to come to Orient for litigation. I want to come for peace and to do my writing,. We are now asking the Board to approve it as a separate piece of property. I have a statement from the local real estate agent, Mr. King, that if I do not obtain the approval, I would not have tha benefit of the additional value. MR. MAHONEY: I would like to submit to you a letter from Floyd F. King, Jr. dated May 16, 1978. The lot on the south, if sold separately it would be valued at $12,000.00. THE CHAIRMAN: The question remains, in my mind, if we still have the right applicant here. We are acting on a parcel .... we had a case here a couple of weeks ago, where someone asked for access to a piece of property they were buying, and the property had not yet been divided. Here it seems we have someone who has bought property from someone who didn't have the zoning. I am not saying this will be denied or anything. Technically, he did not having zoning approval to sell it to you. MR..MAHONEY: That is correct. THE CHAIRMAN: You may have done it by decision of the court or the Planning Board. MR. SCHRIEVER: There was a stipulation that I insisted on in the contract of sale for this particular parcel of-property. THE CHAIRMAN: Who is buying, who is selling? MR. MAHONEY: Mr., Schriever is selling, Mrs. Moor-Jankowski is ....... MR. SCHRIEVER: In the contract it was provided that Dr. Moor-Jankowski could take title any way he wished. He took title in the name of his wife. ~0~T~O~D TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -27- June 15, 1978 THE CHAIRMAN: That is customary though, isn't it? This has nothing to do with zoning. This is the contract of sale. MR. SCHRIEVER: Well it has something to do with it. You stated I sub- divided the property without the permission of the Planning Board or of the Board of Appeals. I am saying that I realize that I did, and I put a provision in the contract that if this matter is resolved in 6 monthes, if I have done something wrong, tke property will be merged with his property. So in fact the subdivision will be done. That is my point. It's the cart before the horse as you have pointed out. MR. MAHONEY: I do not think that has any bearing on this application. THE CHAIRMAN: You don't. I still think it is the wrong person applying. One step in the whole thing has been omitted. That is the division of the property_ around Mr. Moor~Jankowski's house, which should have been done b~ tD3/s Board, I presume. The Planning Board cannot create undersized parcels. In the discussion, Mr. Glickman is concerned with someone building a house there. MR. MAHONEY: It is the intent of the application to build a house on this lot at some time in the future. I did make representation that the applicant at'this time d±d not intend to sell or come to the Building Department and ask for a permit. MR. GLICKMAN: Does this Board have the power to do that. I can buy an undersized lot if I want to throw my money away. Anybody can do that. MR. MAHONEY: That is why we are here Mr. Glickman. MR. GLICKMAN: I do not think you have any right here. The Board cannot say to this man we are going to give you a permit in the future if the Building Inspector denies it. That is what you are asking for. MR. MAHONEY: We are asking to build on this lot. MR. BERGEN: We are asking permission to have a right to build on the lot. THE CHAIRMAN: ~hsn did you buy this property Dr. Moor~Jankowski? DR. MOOR-JANKOW$IfI~: A few months ago. A month ago. Then we immediately applied for this variance. THE CHAIRMAN: The only authority we have is this s~atement~from the Planning Board. They say they have asked Mr. Schriever to dispose of this and other odd shaped parcels. The Planning Board has a§ked him to dispose of the property. I did not know a Planning Board can do that. MR. GLICEMAN: Mr. Schriever when he had that property intended to use it as an ingress and egress. That was thrown out. MR. MAHONEY: That was the property to the north, noth this property. MR. BERGEN: That was to the north of the house. Not this 50 feet, the next 50 feet. SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -28- July 15, 1978 MR. MAHONEY: I might make a suggestion that any decision that you make for us here, have it contingent upon the Planning Board. THE CHAIRMAN: Mr. Schriever sold this property on good advice of the Planning Board, but before he ~e~hically had the right to split this off. I am sure we would have given it %o him. MR. MAHONEY: This has already been done, now we are trying to rectify it. THE CHAIRMAN: You have ~o permission from this Board? MR. i~AHONEY: No, I am trying to rectify the situation where the application was not presented prior to the sale. THE CHAIRM3~N: Does that satisfy you Mr. Glickman? MR. GLICKMAN: He is going to have to come back, if he is able to set off the lot. He is going to be able to say he has a separate estate lot. When he comes in for a building permit, is this Board's decision going to hold fast? MR. MAHONEY: If he meets the other requirements, the Town must grant him a building permit. It becomes a legal lot. That is what I am asking for. TEE CHAIRMAN: I tell you, I am going to have to check this with our Town Counsel. MR. GLICKMAN: I have letters written to Mr. Kripinski from Mr. Schriever where he has offered to sell Dr. Moor~Jankowski 20 feet by his house and the remainder of the property to the Kripinskis. That was in 1973. If I may read from this letter. Mr. Schrlever is going to go against the Luce application. MR. MAHONEY: If I might say, that is from Mr. Schriever. Dr. Moor- Jankowski would like to go on the record as not opposing the Luce application. THE CHAIRMAN: I do not think that is relevant. MR. MAHONEY: Mr. Glickman, if I may interrupt. I don't see the point of these letters~referring to transactions that did not take place. MR. GLICKMAN: It just shows there was bickering between Mr. Schriever, Dr. Moor-Jankowski and the Kripinskis over this parcel of land. As I come before you now, and I see where the Board stands and the Planning Board stands, THE CHAIRMAN: I think the implication is that there Would be a variance granted on it. ~he instruction from the Planning Board was a strong enough indication from Dr. Moor-Jankowski that he could buy it. He would not buy it if he could not use it. Of course, the Planning Board does not speak for us anymore than we speak for them. We try to respect each other. MR. GLICKMAN: I don't see how the Planning Board can tell us this is going to be a good lot. ~O~O~D TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -29- June 15, 1978 THE CHAIRMAN: They don't tell us, they suggest. MR. GLIC~MAN: Does this Board say they are going to take their suggestion, because Mr. Schriever had a piece of land knocked off his subdivision? Or anybody else for that matter. ~R!~©~E~ I bel!eve the Planning Board had a reason for doing what hey d~d~ They w~re trying ~o create a subdivison of Mr. Schriever's property that would be uniform. These three parcels did not fit into the overall good planning of the Town of Southold. THE CHAIRMAN: Let's draw a circle which represents the land that Mr. Schriever bought. Then he acquired a group of small lots, odds and ends that went with it. You then ran into opposition from everyone from Orient, telling you what to do with it. At one point I thought I understood it at the end I'm not so sure I did. The Cluster concept was approved, right? As a part of the Cluster concept approval, the Planning Board said to divest these parcels. MR. SCHRIEVER: That letter says that Mr. Kripinski was offered the property. MR. GLICKMAN: Excuse me, offered? The letter says that 20 feet to Dr. Moor-Jankowski and the rest to the Kripinskis. MR. SCHRIEVER: He was offered it in a number of ways. MR. GLICKMAN: If the Board is in the frame of mind to issue this v · arlance, I would like to ask them .... THE CHAIRMAN: I don't know if we ~an legally..~ ......... ~.~ .......... MR. GLICKMAN: If the Board does grants the variance, I would ask that a feW stipulations be placed on the lot. I would like to have a 25 foot side yard. THE CHAIRMAN: It is now 35. Whatever it is, you would like more? MR. GLICKMAN: I am asking that Moor-Jankowski put a 25 side yard on the south side of this property and the 10 foot sideyard toward his own house. The Board is not here to help him make an estate. The Board is here to issue a variance. THE CHAIRMAN: The Board is here to serve the public sir. I think the Board is very sympathetic to granting, this. M~.. GLICKMAN: I can see that. If you want to have an opinion from your Town Attorney~ I can see that too. But, 1 would like to have a stipulation about25 feet between the K~ipinski property and the Moor-Jankowski property. You have walked those streets more than I have and you know that if you put a new house along there it is going to stick out like a sore thumb. THE CHAIRMAN: I don't understand your point, Sam. ~O~O~'.D TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -30- June 15, 1978 THE CHAIRMAN: Unless someone else has something they would like to say .... MR. SCHRIEVER: I would just like to say for the record, I did not speak for or against this application. MR. MAHONEY: Just as a point of information, I understand you are just going to reserve decision this ~V~ning? THE CHAIRMAN: That's right. I just want to be sure that you have made the application in the right manner. We f~eqUently act on things that have already occurred. But it seems to me that the application should come from the person who is divesting himself of %he property. You are asking us to handle something that has already occurred. I do not think you can force Mr. Schriever to do anything about it. On motion made by Mr. Gillispie, seconded by Mr. Bergen, it was resolved to postpone a~decision on this application until 7:30 o~ July 6, 1978. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs:~ Gillispie, Bergen, Grigonis, and Doyen. On Appeal No. 2347, Raymond Kirsch, 1551 Williams Brige Road, Bronx, New York, whereby the applicant was granted Permission to construct an accessory building in the front yard area upon the condition that the building shall be located no closer than 15 feet to the property lines. On motion~of Mr. Gillispie, seconded by Mr. Bergen it was RESOLVED that the Southold Town Board of Appeals RESCIND the action of the Board on Appeal No. 2347, Mr. Raymond Kirsch, without prejudice. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Gillispie, Bergen, Grigonis, and Doyen. On motion by Mr. Gillispie, seconded by Mr. Bergen, it was RESOLVED that the $outhold Town Board of Appeals approve minutes dated June 1, 1978. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Gillispie, Bergen, Grigonis, and Doyen. On motion by Mr. Bergen, seconded by Mr. Grigonis, it was RESOLVED that %he next meeting of the Sou%hold Town Board of Appeals will be held at 7:30 P.M. (D.S.T.), Thursday, July 6, 1978, at the Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, New York. Vote of the Board: Doyen. Ayes: Messrs: Gillispie, Bergen, Grigonis and ~O~T~O~D TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -31- June 15, 1978 On motion by Mr. Grigonis, seconded by Mr. Doyen, it was RESOLVED that the Board of Appeals set 7:30 P.M. Thursday, July 6, 1978, Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, New York, as time and place for postponed decision on Appeal No. 2423, Catherine MoormJankowski, Village Lane, Orient, New York, for permission to set off lot with insufficient area and frontage. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Gillispie, Bergen, Grigonis, and Doyen. On motion by Mr. Doyen, seconded by Mr. Bergen, it was RESOLVED that the Board of Appeals set 7:35 P.M. Thursday, July 6, 1978, Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, New York, as time and place for postponed decision on Appeal No. 2322, Virginia W. Suter, Beachwood Road, Cutchogue, New York, for permission to construct accessory building with insufficient setback. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Gillispie, Bergen, Grigonls, and Doyen. On motion by Mr. Bergen, seconded by Mr. Gillispie, it was RESOLVED ~hat the Board of Appeal set 7:45 P.M. (D.S.T.) Thursday, July 6, 1978, Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, New York, as time and place for hearing upon application of Rhumb Line, Inc., 36 Front Street, Greenport, New York, for a special exception to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-30 C 6 f for permission to erect an off-premises directional sign. Location of property: Southwest corner of Shipyard Lane and Main Road (S. R 25), East Marion, New York, bounded on the north by Main Road, (S. R. 25); east by Shipyard Lane; south by Dawn Estates; west by Dawn Estates. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Gillispie, Bergen, Grigonis, and Doyen. On motion by Mr. Gill~spie, seconded by Mr. Grigonis, it was R~SOLVED that the Board of Appeals set 7:50 P.M. (D~.S.T.) Thursday, July ~', 1978, Town Halt, Main' Road, Southold, New Yo~k~ as time and place for ~arin~ upon application of Rhumb Line, Inc., ~61"i~r°nt Street, ~re~nport, New York, for a special exception to the Zoninq Ordinance, Article~III, Section 100-30 C 6 f for permission to erect an off-premises directional sign. Location of property: Southwest corner of Sills Road and Main Road (S. R. 25), Greenport, New York, bounded on the north by Main Road (S. R. 25k; east by' H. Reese, Jr.; south by Herman; and west by Ciacia. ~ote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Gill~spie, Bergen, Grigonis, and Doyen. SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -32- June 15, 1978 On motion by Mr. Grigonis, seconded by Mr. Gitlispie, it was RESOLVED that the Board of Appeals set 8:00 P.M. (D.S.T.) Thursday, July 6, 1978, Town Hall, Main Road! Southold, New York, as time and place for hearing upon application of Kei~h ~.New York, ~for a variance in accordance with ~he Town Law, Section 2~0A~f'or approval of access. Location of property: Right-of-way off Sound View Avenue, Southold, New York, bounded on the north by Lombardi; east by Bayley and Schur; south by Morris; and west by Spurway. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Gillispie, Bergen, Grigonis, and Doyen. On motion by Mr. Gillispie, seconded by Mr. Doyen, it was RESOLVED that the Board of Appeals set 8:10 P.M. (D.S.T.) Thursday, July 6, 1978, Town Hall, Main Road, Southotd, New York, as time and place for hearing upon application of Stephen Tsontakis, d/b/a~?Captain Kidd Water Company, Middle Road, Mattituck, New York, for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-30 B 5 and Bulk Schedule for permission to erect a pump house. Location of property: Lot No. 36 Map of Captain Kidd Estates, Mattituck, New York. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Gillispie, Bergen, Grigonis and Doyen. On motion by Mr. Doyen, seconded by Mr. Bergen, it was RESOLVED that the Board of Appeals set 8:25 P.M. (D.S.T.) Thursday, July 6, 1978, Town Hall, Main Road, Sou%hold, New York, as time and place for hearing upon application of Stanley Sledjeski (Richard F. Lark, Esq.), 2760 Ruth Road, Mattituck, New York, for a variance in accordance with the Town Law, Section 280 A for approval of access. Location of property: Map No. 90, Stanley Sledjeski dated April 30, 1974. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Gillispie, Bergen, Grigonis and Doyen. ~n motion by Mr. Bergen, seconded by Mr. Gillispie, it was RESOLVED that the Board of Appeals set 8:35 P.M. (D.S.T.) Thursday, July 6, 1978, Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, New York~ as time and place for hearing upon application of Glenn and Ann T. Moon, Main Road, Orient, New Yo k, for a variance ~n accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Sec%ion 100-30 and Bulk Schedule for permission t6 divide property. Location of property: Main Road, Orient, New York, bounded on the north bY Main Road; ~O~O~'.D TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -33- Jun3 15, 1978 east by Ellwood, Zarzecki, Jimenez and Kavazanjian; south by Tabor; and west by Private Road. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Gillispie, Bergen, Grigonis, and Doyen. On motion by Mr. Gillispie, seconded by Mr. Grigonis, it was RESOLVED that the Board of Appeals set 8:50 P.M. (D.S.T.) Thursday, July 6, 1978, TOwn Hall, Main Road, Southold, New York, as time and place for hearing upon application of Burris and Vivian Jester, Beebe Drive, Cutchogue, New York, for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-35 for permission to erect a six (6) foot fence in the front yard. Location of property: Lot No. 10, Map of Moose Cove, Cutchogue, New York. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Gillispie, Bergen, Grigonis, and Doyen. On motion by F~r. Grigonis, seconded by Mr. Doyen, it was RESOLVED that the Board of Appeals set 9:00 P.M. (D.S.T.) Thursday, July 6, 1978, Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, New York, as time and place for hearing upon application of John A. POtywoda, Bay View Road, Southold, New York, for a special exception in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article VI, Section 100-60 C 2 for permission to erect a second ground sign. Location of property: Southwest corner of Main Road (S. R. 25) and Hobart Road, Southold, New York, bounded on the north by Main Road (S.R. 25);east by Hobart Road; south by J. Lehman and west by Warnaka and Ross. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Gillispie, Bergen, Grigonis, and Doyen. On motion by Mr. Doyen, seconded by Mr. Bergen, it was RESOLVED that the B~ard of Appeals set 9:15 P.M. (D.S.T.) Thursday, July 6, 1978, Town Hall, Mai~ Road,' Southold, New York, as time and place for hearing upon application of Bradford B. Green, 101 Bard Avenue, Staten Island, New York, for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-31 and Bulk and Parking Schedule for permission to divide property with insufficient area. Location of property: Lots No. 18R and 190 Nassau Point~ Cutcho~ue, New York. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Gillispie, Bergen, Grigonis, and Doyen. SOO~HOLU TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -34- June 15, 1978 On motion by Mr. Bergen, seconded by Mr. Gillispie, it was RESOLVED that the Board of Appeals set 9:25 P.M. (D.S.T.) upon application of Donald G. King, Rocky Point Road, East Marion, New York, for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article II, Section 100-30 and Bulk Schedule for permission to divide lot with insufficient area. Location of property: Lot No. 16, Map of Jackson's Landing, Mattituck, New York. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Gillispie, Bergen, Grigonis, and Doyen. The meeting was ajourned at 11:00 P.M. ^PPR ED Respectfully submitted Babette C. Conroy Secretary