Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-12/13/2001 Hearing SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS TRANSCRIPT OF HEARINGS HELD DECEMBER 13, 2001 (Prepared by Paula Quintieri) Present were: Chairman Goehringer Member Dinizio – arrived at 6:43 p.m. Member Tortora Member Horning Board Secretary Kowalski Secretary Quintieri DRAFT COPY dated 1/23/02; 2/8/02 6:36 p.m. – Appl. No. 5031 – MARGARET TRAVIS RADACINSKI – A variance is requested under Section 100-30A.3, based on the Building Inspector's October 1, 2001 Notice of Disapproval, to locate a shed in an area other than the required rear yard at 55 Sound Road, Greenport; Parcel 1000-35-1-8. CHAIRMAN: This is a nature of a shed on Sound Road in Greenport. Is there anybody present that would like to speak regarding this application? Anybody like to speak against the application? The applicant is not going to be present tonight. We are going to hold this over to another meeting, so I'll make a motion. The purpose is, there were some notices that were not sent out, so we told this nice lady that she didn't have to come since she was coming from the west end. So I'll make a Resolution holding this off to the next regularly scheduled meeting. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: Could you give a date with that? th CHAIRMAN: January 10, 2002. SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION * * * 6:37 p.m. – Appl. No. 5037 – KEVIN AND KATHERINE LEAVAY – Applicant-Owner is requesting a Special Exception under Article III, Section 100-31A.2B and 100-31B, sub-sections 14a-d of the Southold Town Zoning Code for approval of an Accessory Use as a Bed and Breakfast for transient use of three bedrooms for lodging and serving of breakfast to not more than (6) casual transient roomers, in conjunction with owner- applicant's residence. Location of Property: 95 Harper Road West, Harvest Homes Estates Lot 6; Southold; Parcel 63-7-6. Page 2, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold CHAIRMAN: The next appeal is Kevin and Katherine Leavay, 95 Harbor Road West, who is present for this? Who is the applicant? Who would like to speak? Would you like to come up and speak at the microphone? KEVIN LEAVAY: Yes, sure. CHAIRMAN: I'm just going to make a statement before you speak if you don't mind sir? You have to excuse me very nice people, these lights have been bothering my eyes and by the time we get to about 9:00 so I have decided to wear this hat and see if it helps the situation. I just wanted to mention the group that may be coming in concerning this, because we've had some letters and some concerns regarding Bed and Breakfast applications before us. The Town Board, in their inevitable wisdom, have put this legislation on the books. Some of us have different opinions on the Board regarding it. I'm not going to voice my opinion. There are certain steps and certain criteria in the Code that a person has to meet. This is a Special Permit. We have this by original jurisdiction. Which means that we don't need any denial from the Building Department to be to this particular point. We have in the past granted the majority of these applications. We also have the right, if there is a particular problem, to take that right away. I can tell you we've only done that once in one Special Permit; and that was in Mattituck a couple of years ago, not necessarily on a Bed and Breakfast. So I would like everybody to keep in mind that the Bed and Breakfast application is an application that, in my opinion, is a matter of right as long as you meet the criteria in the Code for Special Exception use. With that in mind, we are ready for your presentation sir. KEVIN LEAVAY: It's not really a presentation. My name is Kevin Leavay and my wife Kathy. We've just completed this house on Harper Road West in August or so when I retire this June. Our plan has always been to offer a Bed and Breakfast in our home. We paid particular attention the construction of the house and the criteria when we had it built, so that we would meet all the stipulations that the Town had given us and I believe we have done that. That's what I have to say. CHAIRMAN: Well, in looking at your plan, you're utilizing how many bedrooms? KEVIN LEAVAY: Two. CHAIRMAN: Two, okay. I do see a parking plan in the file. I've been over to see the house from the exterior. It is a stately and a very beautiful house. I don't particularly forsee any problem with this, at this time. But we are going to go through each Board Member and ask them if they have questions regarding your application. I would start with Mr. Dinizio who is not presently here, he sits right down at the other end of Ms. Collins, but he's having a little trouble with his truck tonight. He'll be here shortly. So we'll start with Ms. Collins. MEMBER COLLINS: I just wanted to echo the Chairman's comment on, I think it's important for the public and the neighbors to realize that the Town Board which enacts our Zoning Code has enacted provisions in it that authorize B & Bs. They are authorized Page 3, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold in residential neighborhoods. We are not being asked tonight to do anything in the nature of change the law, amend the law, bypass the law, that is not the nature of this proceeding. As the Chairman said, for certain types of uses the Town says yes, you can have one but the Zoning Board of Appeals has to look at it specifically. And that's what we are doing here. Mr. Leavay my only concern is parking. You're lot is a shallow one, so you're setback from the street is shallow and you have the handsome curved driveway. As you know, the Zoning Code requires, for a Bed and Breakfast, that you have two parking spaces for the family use, and one for each guest room. Since you're proposing two guest rooms, that means you are required under the law to have four off street parking places. People come in and they say, well holly cow, when my three grown children are living at home and they each have a car and then my wife and I have a car, we got five or six cars on our place and they're all over the place, and that's true, but that doesn't come under the terms of our Zoning Code. Our Zoning Code says for a B & B specifically, that you need two parking places off street for the family and one for each room and those are "required". My concern is this, I know you have a two car garage and I presume you and your wife probably each have a car, that being the nature of life. And the plan that you put into our files showed, as I understood it, a proposal to park the guest cars essentially in the driveway in front of the garage doors. I personally think that that is not in agreement with our Code; because our Code say that a driveway can be used to supply only one, if there are required parking places on a parcel, only one of them can be in a driveway. Another provision in our Code, this is in Section 191 our Zoning Code that deals with parking, a very exciting Section; says that the parking spaces must have unobstructed access to the street. I personally am concerned that parking spots in front of garage doors conclude unobstructed access to the street from the vehicles in the garage. So I'm personally concerned about the parking, I'm concerned about it from an esthetic point of view of having the, I'm concerned about it from a point of view of compliance with the law because I think in a B & B Special Exception you really do have to comply with the law. I'm concerned with it from an esthetic point of view and personally I think if I were you, I would think about giving up some of your grass to park in, and that's my comment Mr. Chairman. KEVIN LEAVAY: Currently we have a double wide driveway leading to the garage. I don't know who asked Kathy to draw in the proposed guest parking spots? CHAIRMAN: One of the ladies in the office. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: We asked for a parking plan. We didn't say put it there, we asked for a plan and that was your plan that was proposed. KEVIN LEAVAY: And when we did that we proposed, if I have it right, the guest spots are in the circle drive which is off the double wide drive. Our cars would be parking in the double wide drive; the guests would be in the circle. I don't know if Ms. Collins has that picture, but we never proposed to park the guests in the driveway. We realize that we could cause a problem for access to and from the driveway. CHAIRMAN: That's mainly the reason why I didn't question the parking. Page 4, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold MEMBER COLLINS: Yes, here it is. It's the amended application and one and two, to me, look like they're right in front of the garage doors. CHAIRMAN: Those are his cars. Three and four are the Bed and Breakfast. MEMBER COLLINS: Oh, here are three and four. Okay. So, but you would contemplate your own cars being in the garage wouldn't you? KEVIN LEAVAY: Yes, MEMBER COLLINS: I'm sorry, I did misread this and I apologize. KEVIN LEAVAY: We misinterpreted it in the beginning too. We assumed that the garage, the double car garage would be for our cars, but we were informed that we had to have access to and from the garage, we drew them in front of the garage and the guest cars in the circle. We didn't understand that either. MEMBER COLLINS: Okay, I do apologize for misreading the drawing and I therefore have taken up more time that I should have. I guess I'm still a little concerned with, assuming you have a full house and two guests, with the two guests cars in your rather small curved drive, even you put your own cars away in the garage, I'm just concerned about it from a visual clutter. But I'm not as concerned as I was when I was misreading the drawing and I apologize. CHAIRMAN: Mrs. Tortora? MEMBER TORTORA: What's the maximum number of people that you anticipate of the Bed & Breakfast to accommodate? KEVIN LEAVAY: Two rooms, and two people in each room, four people. MEMBER TORTORA: A total of four people? KEVIN LEAVAY: That's what we applied for yes. This form, and I should've brought this up, we went up and told them that this wasn't three it was two; so if you're reading this, this is incorrect. MEMBER TORTORA: I have the revised one. I'm just curious. I don't have any other questions at this time. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Horning? MEMBER HORNING: Back to the parking arrangement, spaces three and four that you have off to the side of the circular driveway, is that going to allow a vehicle to pull into Page 5, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold the driveway and completely circle around in there while those two cars are parked there or not? KEVIN LEAVAY: Are you speaking about our cars? MEMBER HORNING: No, the guests. KEVIN LEAVAY: The guests in the circle we put there so the guests cars could come in and go out. MEMBER HORNING: If one of the guest is there, can the other one pull in and use the entire circular aspect of the driveway or is it going to be partially blocked? KEVIN LEAVAY: Well if there's a car in front of them, they would have to back up and go out the other way. It's not wide enough to have two cars go by in the circle. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: We were told, originally, by Mrs. Leavay that it was wide enough. KEVIN LEAVAY: For one car to pass by another car? BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: Yes. KATHY LEAVAY: I would come in through the driveway. KEVIN LEAVAY: Are you talking about the double wide driveway? It's a circle ma'am. KATHY LEAVAY: The circle is for the B & B cars. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: (To clarify information in the file, a question was raised regarding whether the width was enough for two cars to go side by side. This was a concern in the ZBA office asked about by neighbors reviewing the file in previous weeks.) KATHY LEAVAY: For two cars to park. But we have the garage, and our driveway itself is 35 feet wide. So if there's one car in the lane, another one could certainly come in. CHAIRMAN: The middle car would have to back out, if the other car was there. Right, is that correct? KEVIN LEAVAY: Yes, if the first car couldn't move, the car behind it would have to back up. (Member Dinizio arrived at 6:43 p.m.) Page 6, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold CHAIRMAN: Mr. Dinizio, we did miss you, but we're on the second hearing and we're ready for your pros. MEMBER DINIZIO: Well other than the fact that I think he answered the parking because I did go by the house and my driveway's about the same width, two cars, and the second car the one that would be stuck at the first car could back out very easily. It wouldn't have to back out onto the road either as I see it, it could back to the edge of their driveway and pull to turn around. It's only two, there would be no third car that would block, there's only two rooms. That's all I have. CHAIRMAN: We thank you for the presentation, we'll see what develops throughout the hearing. We may have you back up. Anybody else like to speak in favor of the application? Anybody else like to speak against the application? Either one of you gentlemen, whichever would like. I need you to use the microphone, sir if you are a spokesperson. DICK BISHOP: My name is Dick Bishop. I'm the neighbor of Mr. Leavay. I live across the street directly. My bedroom faces his particular residence. We became quite concerned when we heard early on the initial proceedings for Mr. Leavay to put a house up when he very quickly announced to the community that he was going be putting up a B & B and that was his hopes. More recently when this petition for acceptance of a B & B was promoted, we organized ourselves into various groups, neighbors most of whom were opposed to the B & B under several grounds. We have, by the way, a petition that that is acceptable to the Board? CHAIRMAN: Sure. DICK BISHOP: It is comprised of some 74 respondents, of which 68 were negative and 6 were positive. I would point out before, there was no cherry picking here. We didn't go down to the IGA and stand out and say we were opposed to B & B's please sign here. This was done within that two block area of Harvest Point of which is the development. It also included the area that is just east, a little cul-de-sac and there were some petitions also in Cows Neck. CHAIRMAN: Pardon me, you must address the Board, the audience they must keep quiet. You have the floor sir. DICK BISHOP: My son is with the fire house, he is a member of the Volunteer Fire Department of Southold and solicited several particular petitions there. May I give that to you now? MEMBER TORTORA: Could you read it out for us, so that we can all? DICK BISHOP: I'm sorry? Page 7, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold MEMBER TORTORA: Could you read the petition for us? DICK BISHOP: Yes, of course. The petition was quite _______ at one point, we decided to cut it down a little bit because it kind of rambled. It says, "This petition is signed by residents of the Southold Town Sub-division known as Harvest Homes and it's bordering neighbors. Kevin and Katherine Leavay have constructed a residence on Harper Road West, and requested a variance to open a Bed and Breakfast. We the undersigned petition the Southold Town Board of Appeals to deny that request, in part, because of the following: 1. Devaluation of property; 2. Traffic will increase; 3. Late night arrivals and early departures are an event of all hospitality facilities; 4. and off- street for parking for at least five vehicles? This will be revisited before the Town, of course later, and by some of our other neighbors." These are the petitions. CHAIRMAN: Is there anybody else that would like to speak against this application? DICK BISHOP: May I speak further sir? CHAIRMAN: Surely. DICK BISHOP: Being in the quiet little arena of Southold, I have lived for twenty years, and I have much experience as a teacher and I served in the service twice; and as most of our residents, we feel that this particular type of facility is an economic one. It is very definitely a business. It is not a casual sort of thing where you have a little rental for a local school teacher or something like that. This is an enterprise which is going to attract people from the city. As a result of this, we consider them an impediment for our lifestyle. We live on an L-shaped road. In other words, the inter-section of Harper Road West and Grigonis is very ________. We have, by the way, either present or will be fourteen kids. They use this facility for biking, triking and skating. There are not street lights on this. If I may come forward sir, I have a photograph of some children on bikes. CHAIRMAN: Sure. DICK BISHOP: I have two granddaughters, two and seven one on a trike the other one on a bike; and I go out there and have myself a time watching them go around. The lot is small and sub-standard in the sense that it's about a third of an acre. It isn't the half-acre that all of our other lots are. It's 35 feet, give or take a foot or two from the road; 35 or 37 feet from their nearest neighbor Rich over in the corner here. I think it's about 37 or 40 feet at to the cemetery or the burial ground. It's really too small, when we talk about parking. The people involved have children, they have friends, they have a community in which they have a number of vehicles that come. In a matter of fact, they're in construction for a period of time, my mailbox, which as you know you may only put your mailbox on one side of the road. We don't have that option of putting on both sides. Mine is on their side of the road. Now they've had numerous instances during the course of construction where I've had to go over and ask people to move their car or vehicle. In on instance I had to call the police. It has been a serious problem. I have also been, Page 8, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold beside twenty-four years teaching, I've been in the motel business for motels during my life. And you can't tell me that a hospitality facility isn't prone to tremendous amount of discontent. People who live in the city are going to leave there 7:00, stop for dinner 'til 8:00 and they're going to get out here until 11:00. In this lonely little stretch of area, with lights on, cars stalling, doors closing, we're going to have confusion and I don't think it is conducive to what we've been doing so far. If this is a typical thing, that we must have this thing, we have nothing we can do about it. But we do ask you to consider, if it's in your power, then indeed this be rectified by counsel of the request. One thing, as a history teacher, this is not Gettysburg the burying ground. But every person of every law, is buried in that particular cemetery. Now this particular house abuts the cemetery, the burying ground. Now is this what you want. Finally, if this B & B is passed by you people, this is going to put a lock on the area; a lock in which we're not going to be able to back away from. We can't change our minds. We can't say, no it doesn't work, but what are we going to do. Once it's a lock, it's there forever. If the place is sold I guess they would have to make an application for restructure into Zoning. CHAIRMAN: This Special Permit. DICK BISHOP: Pardon? CHAIRMAN: This is a Special Permit. DICK BISHOP: You need a Special Permit. CHAIRMAN: This is the Special Permit, this is what we would be granting if we granted it. DICK BISHOP: Do you all have any questions for me? CHAIRMAN: Only to the effect that we did grant a Special Permit to one of your neighbors regarding an accessory apartment a few years ago. DICK BISHOP: That does not exist at the present. He does not use it as an apartment. CHAIRMAN: I'm just telling you that we did. We've had some interesting applications for Bed and Breakfasts, one of which was in East Marion last year or the year before. We put some interesting restrictions on them, as well as, the situation that could exist here in reference to the going and coming of people. The one that I am, I find most interesting and I pass by every time I go through Cutchogue is the one just east of the North Fork Country Club. Which is of similar size lot, in fact, probably a little bit smaller and a little narrower. DICK BISHOP: On the same side of the road? CHAIRMAN: There's actually one on both sides of the road. The one on the north side of the road is a much larger piece of property and a newer house. In fact, these nice Page 9, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold people came in and asked for a little addition to their living room because they found that they needed a little place to stay during the entertainment period. We have heard not comment from any of the neighbors regarding their Bed and Breakfast. I find that one probably one of the smaller lots that we've granted one on. I have to tell you that, what I think that maybe you should be contemplating is reasonable restrictions for this Board to consider for these applicants. We would be very happy to look at those, and entertain those and deliberate on those. That is the issue that I think we should be looking at, at this point. But I'm not you, and you're a spokesperson, which we appreciate. I want you to know that, and that's just my opinion. DICK BISHOP: I would say this, B & B's are a viable enterprise, but as in most of Southold Town, they're right on 25. Well, not that they're all there, but most of them are, if you go down the road you can't go more than a quarter of a mile and you find one. This is an area which should attract them because they are viable in terms of accessability, noise all of the rest of it like the old rooming house years ago. To put one where we are, with the number of people that are opposed to this, and I would state one thing finally in conclusion because you must move on, if there were a referendum which there hasn't been and I don't understand the structure of this within Southold Town, and we did go down to the IGA I don't think the whole concept of a Bed and Breakfast would last ten minutes. May I come forward so I can hear you better. MEMBER TORTORA: Perhaps what you say is true what you say isn't true. The problem is this, we didn't create the legislation. Your complaint and your concerns are really concerns that go to the heart of the legislation and the legislation is whether or not Bed and Breakfasts should be permitted on small lots in residential communities. Is that correct? DICK BISHOP: That's right. MEMBER TORTORA: So here we are, we've been given this legislation to review these permits. As the Chairman said, we could review the factors in the Code. Factors like devalue of the property, it's not even a factor we could possibly evaluate. You'd have to go out and get all kinds of appraisals beyond perception. The root of your concerns lies with the legislation. We're just like the permitting Board, to review and make sure all those and make sure they the number of parking spaces; that it's not going to be against the 30 foot rule. Is it a commercial use? The Town Board in it's wisdom said, yes it's an appropriate use. That's why the legislation was passed. But I don't want you to think we're not sympathetic. Our powers are limited in this case. DICK BISHOP: I understand and I'm appreciative of it and I'm seeing something that I did not realize, that in a certain sense nothing is a stone wall. That's a sorry institution. The only recourse that we will have at this point, and I suspect as your Chairman has inferred, is that you will approve this particular petition with restrictions. CHAIRMAN: We will agonize over it, and I mean totally agonize over it. Because I will not grant this until I go back and re-investigate these nice people's piece of property. Page 10, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold MEMBER TORTORA: We'll look at the parking again, to make sure there's parking. As far as late night hours, generally people who offer a Bed and Breakfast don't want a parade in their late night, it's their home remember that. But if it takes a restriction to do that to bring some degree of security in the neighborhood, I think this Board is open to those kind of suggestions. DICK BISHOP: The practicality that I suggest of people that would use this are usually New York City folks coming out here. And they're going to leave Friday night and you could almost set your clock by the procedures that they will follow. And they're not going to get here before 11:00. And we're in bed by 10:00, I don't know about you all, but this is our particular time clock. MEMBER TORTORA: Well my next door neighbor comes out here from New York City and they don't even have a Bed and Breakfast they just live there. And yes they do arrive at 11:00 and my dog starts barking at 11:00. CHAIRMAN: Yes ma'am? Excuse me, you must use the microphone and you must give me your name. MARY REEGAN: My name is Mary Reagan. I'm a resident of Southold. I own two homes in town and I'm here in support of my friends Kevin and Kathy Leavay. Kevin and Kathy lived around the corner us until they recently moved. I've had the good fortune of enjoying a wonderful friendship with them for many years. They are wonderful people. They also had a Bed and Breakfast upstate which on many, many occasions we went up; our children went up. It was a wonderful experience for me. Kevin especially is a gracious host. He takes great pride in understanding the community where he lives. I have five children. They live in all different parts of this country. They come sometimes with their friends. Often times they go out to Bed and Breakfast in town. I think it's a wonderful asset to our community. The concerns I hear, I had five kids they come in and out in the summer when they're in high school and college. My experience with the Leavay's upstate, family people, people who utilize Bed and Breakfasts go with their children. They're not out there to party, to go to clubs. They're out here to enjoy our beautiful scenery and I feel it's their home, the people that run Bed and Breakfasts it would be a tremendous asset to our community. Thank you. CHAIRMAN: Sir? Thank you for your patience. RICH CRICIENDA: Good evening my name is Rich Cricienda. I live at 40 Gregonis Avenue, right next door. When my wife and I moved out to Southold seven years ago. We never dreamed that we would have to come before the Board and pit neighbor against neighbor and complain against a commercial venture opening right next door to us. Harper Road West, Gregonis Path, Peck Place, Jernyk Lane known as the Harvest Homes area and adjoining Calves Neck area is a very quiet, residential neighborhood. We have virtually no thru traffic. It was for those reasons that we purchased what would be our retirement home. When the Leavays purchased the property next door to us we learned Page 11, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold immediately that it was their intention to build a home which would include a B & B. My wife and I were very upset in learning about this news. In October of 2000 through March 2001, we placed our home up for sale. We had five couples who showed interest in purchasing our home and made an offer, one of which we accepted. We felt at this point and in good conscience we could not continue discussing the sale without informing the perspective buyers about the possibility of the B & B. As soon as we did mention the B & B, the offer was withdrawn. Any subsequent discussions with perspective buyers ended the same way when we brought up the issue of the B & B. It seemed that we would not be able to sell our home at market value with a B & B next door. We suspended the sale process to wait and see if the Leavays were actually going to go through with their plans for a B & B. The above I believe clearly demonstrates how our home has been devalued because of the possibility of the Leavays B & B. As is the case with many families the major portion of our estate is the value of our home. Perhaps if the Leavays had gone around to their neighbors and asked if they had any objection before they launched their plan for a B & B, they would have seen how unpopular their plan to open a B & B was and we wouldn't be here presenting petitions and pleading our cases against the present location. In closing it is my sincere hope that the Board waives the petition which clearly shows that the vast majority of the Leavay's immediate neighbors don't want a B & B in their neighborhood. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. RICH CRICIENDA: Any questions? CHAIRMAN: No. RICH CRICIENDA: We were low-balled on our house, by the way. We had people offer us $50, $60, $70,000 under the fair market value. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Yes sir? State your name for the record please. HENRY WASMER: My name is Henry Wasmer. I live in the immediate area on Jurnyk Lane. I am in favor of the Bed and Breakfast that Kathy and Kevin Leavay are proposing. I don't find it any type of a problem. I can't see, I can't agree with some of these people the way they're talking about all this excessive traffic that may be coming in. We're talking about two cars. That's all we're talking about is two cars. I also don't agree with the attitude of the people in saying that all these people are coming from the city. I don't believe, yes you'll have some from the city. You'll have people from traveling from all over the place. I don't find that to be a problem. I don't believe the traffic in the neighborhood is going to increase much more than we already have. We picked up a lot of excess traffic with the school and we're living with it. It's a community that's growing and we have to grow with it. I, for one, don't have a problem with the Leavay's construction of the Bed and Breakfast. I also want to take exception to something Mr. Bishop had mentioned before concerning small children playing in the area. I would like to refresh Mr. Bishop's memory a little bit going back a few years when his son had a little business, a window treatment business. He had a panel truck with a name on it. Page 12, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold His truck was parked on Harper Road West most all the time when the son wasn't working. I'm not sure, I can't stand here and tell you the business was conducted out of Mr. Bishop's home at the time. It may have been, but I'm not clear on that. However, I do know that Mr. Bishop's son, who he already said, was a member of the volunteer and is a member of the volunteer fire department. When that alarm used to go off, we had children in the neighborhood then, maybe not quite as many as we have now. But when the son used to respond to the alarm he used to fly down the street in that panel truck and, I being a resident of the area, I'm retired from the fire department from the City of New York myself and I'm home a lot during the day, and I used to see this fellow respond to the alarms with his truck and if there were children playing out there nobody was worrying about the children then. Now he's worried about the children. That's all I have to say. I'm not making a Gettysburg address, but I just believe that the Bed and Breakfast in our neighborhood I don't believe is going to cause any problem and I'm in favor of it and I wish them well. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. DICK BISHOP: May I respond to that sir. CHAIRMAN: Only as long as it's not counter-productive. DICK BISHOP: The community has two individuals who run small businesses. CHAIRMAN: They are now legal, and you can now run a business in your house. DICK BISHOP: And at that time, so was the case of my son. They have panel trucks. Nobody says anything, nobody says boo. CHAIRMAN: I would like to wrap this up as quickly as I could sir, and then we'll go back to the lady in the back sir. Yes, we're ready. I just need you to state your name. BARRY D. CHARLES: Good evening ladies and gentlemen. My name is Barry D. Charles. I live at 265 Peck Place in Southold. I'm here tonight to object the petition of Mr. and Mrs. Leavay for the Special Exemption to the Zoning Code to permit the operation of a business, namely, a Bed and Breakfast, a hotel and an eating establishment in their home on Harper Road West an exclusively residential community. My reasons for objecting are as follows. First the character of the location, a residential home. A residence is a quite enclave apart from where we derive our livelihood or obtain our material needs or supplies. It's an oasis, a retreat. When the Gregonis family decided in 1969 to sub-divide their farmland into what is known as Harvest Homes Estates, Section I, they put certain restrictions and covenants into the deed of the parcels. This was done to preserve the quality of the neighborhood. One of the restrictions prohibits the operation of a business from homes therein with the exception of members of the medical, dental and legal profession, while the owners reside within. These restrictions rd were recorded in the office of the County Clerk on July 23, 1969 in Rule 6620 page 278. As far as I can determine these covenants are still in effect. One of the functions of Page 13, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold a Zoning Code is to keep residential and commercial locations separate. If an old Victorian with lots of front and rear yard, front and side yard setbacks applies for a Special Exemption with the Zoning Board to operate a Bed and Breakfast, for example, or if someone up on North Road has a farmhouse and they desire to do the same, I don't think very many people would object. But the residence in question is located right in the middle of quiet, well-maintained private homes, quite a contrast. My second reason is traffic, parking and noise. My home's located about 250 feet from the petitioners. A hotel business, you have late arrivals, doors and trunks slamming, loud talking. These people do not live in the area. CHAIRMAN: Please you must direct your statements to the Board. BARRY D. CHARLES: These people do not live in the neighborhood, and as such, they have no responsibility to their neighbors. They pay their fee and the next day or two, they're gone. Off street parking: As you can see by the photos I gave you here, ladies and gentlemen of the Board, this is the smallest, correction this is one of the smallest if not the smallest lot in all of Harvest Homes Estates Section I. It measures 95 feet deep and 189 across. Originally we were told by the ZBA staff that circular driveways do not quality as parking spaces for an establishment of this type. It has now been re-qualified to "they qualify if two cars can pass abreast in that circular driveway. I believe Mr. Horning has asked that question. The driveway in question measures, at it narrowest point, 13 feet. My personal vehicle is a little over 6 feet wide. My wife's vehicle is 6 feet 8 inches wide. As a practical matter two vehicles would not be able to pass and, therefore, the vehicles will be parked in the street. Originally in this petition I was told that it was for three units of over-night lodging. I am now told that although the premises I understand was designed for three units, only two units are currently being applied for. Who will monitor this? When we have a busy night in the summertime, when Bed and Breakfasts are calling one another to find out if anybody has any room, who will be present to ensure that the extra unit not now applied for will in fact be utilized. Once again, as a practical matter, the possibility if not the probability exists that this extra room could be used, thus contributing to the amount of vehicles parked in the street of this residential area. In closing, I feel that if this request is approved not only will it be, #1 against the wishes of the largest majority of residents in close proximity to the applicant; #2 violate the restrictions of covenants mentioned previously; and #3 there will be a precedence setting erosion of the concept of zoning in Harvest Homes Estates. This, ladies and gentlemen, will be the legacy that we pass on to our children and will enhance only the financial capabilities of the petitioner. Therefore, I am implore you to vote no on this application. Thank you very much. ANN WASMER: My name is Ann Wasmer. I happen to know Kathy and Kevin for quite a long time. I went with Kevin to school. I also would like to bring something to the Board's attention. First of all, there were letters put in our mailboxes, which were against Federal Law, you do not put letters in boxes. Second of all, the majority of people that live in this area and surrounding streets did not sign that. The few people that did, were a lot of elderly people and they were told they were going to lose value on their homes. A lot of people on the other side are not aware exactly of what is going on and Page 14, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold there were quite a few lies told about it. I have no objection to this and neither do quite a few of my neighbors in the area. I just wanted you to know this. Thank you. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. DICK BISHOP: I would like to respond if I may? CHAIRMAN: Mr. Bishop you have to speed it up, because we have to get going. DICK BISHOP: I would like to know what people were not contacted. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Bishop, this is counter-productive. DICK BISHOP: In all fairness these questions have been placed by the two people we've just seen, Mr. and Mrs. Wasmer, have to be addressed in all honesty. CHAIRMAN: You can address that in writing. We will accept it in writing, sir. DICK BISHOP: Thank you sir. CHAIRMAN: We appreciate that. Yes ma'am. And also make it a permanent part of the record. CATHY ABELE: My name is Cathy Abele. CHAIRMAN: How do you do. CATHY ABELE: I have been a friend of Kathy and Kevin Leavay for over ten years. I have to say that their standards are the highest standards that you would ever want to have for a friend and a neighbor. If you walk into their house at any time, it's decorate impeccably, it's clean. They have wonderful standards. Their parties are in wonderful taste. They are just great people. I think to have them for your neighbor would be something that I would welcome. They're just wonderful people. If they have a business, it would be a top run business. That's all I have to say. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Yes ma'am in the back? Good evening. CAROLYN CRICIENDA: Hi, I'm Carolyn Cricienda and I live right next door to the Leavays. One thing I have been kind of listening to everyone's speech. I don't think this is anything personal. I don't even know the Leavays. I'm sure they have friends and people think and know that they're nice people. I don't think that's what we are, and we're not against B & Bs, I should speak for myself. I'm not against B & Bs either. I think the neighboring people who have talked about what concerns them, I think concerns B & Bs in general and where it is. Most B & Bs are on main roads and roads that get a lot more traffic. This is not at all like that and I think that's what we're concerned about. This is Page 15, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold not personal and I really don't want to make it personal at all. It's just about the location of the B & B, not the ones that own it. Nothing personal. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Quickly sir. BARRY D. CHARLES: Mr. Goehringer could I get up there and ask you a question about something that was said by the Board? CHAIRMAN: Sure. I'm not sure we can answer it. BARRY D. CHARLES: I'll only take a second. One thing that's really disturbing when I sit here tonight and listen to the comments especially what Mrs. Tortora and myself refer to that the Town has approved the concept of Bed and Breakfasts and therefore, do I understand it correctly, you're insinuating that your hands are pretty much tied? CHAIRMAN: To a certain degree, but let me just prefice something. BARRY D. CHARLES: Let me just say what I have to say and you can question me as much as you want. CHAIRMAN: No I'm not going to question you, I'm going to make a statement. BARRY D. CHARLES: I cannot agree with that at all sir. If the Town okayed Bed and Breakfasts if I understand it correctly, you're on the Zoning Board you have the power to say yes or to say no. So I don't see why that enters into this discussion at all. CHAIRMAN: Let me just back this up one second, where you're standing is exactly where I stood. What does the Code say Lora or Lydia when we put this law into effect? Was it in the early 90's? MEMBER COLLINS: The B & B rule? CHAIRMAN: I stood exactly where you are standing, so that's why, and I'm telling you that because that some seven years ago was a different Town Board, a different set of legislators. MEMBER COLLINS: I think it's 1989 Jerry. CHAIRMAN: 89? Okay. It was 1989 it was eleven or twelve years ago. A different set of legislators, a different set of people that we have today. We've lived with this law for that period of time, be it seven years, ten years, eleven years, whatever it is okay. We have never had my personal, and I get unbelievable phone calls. It's beyond the realm sometimes the amount of phone calls I get. It was so bad that my wife refused to have an answering machine in my house, in our house until last year and finally she said I guess I'm going to have to succumb and we're going to have to put one in. I do return all the telephone calls that people call me about and there are numerous ones and I don't want to Page 16, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold reflect on them any farther. But I'm going to tell you that I had asked that tribunal at that time to restrict this use, this is a Special Permit this is not a hotel, it is not a Tourist Home, it is nothing. It is the use of bedrooms for the sole purposes of a bed and a breakfast. If the people spend, intend to stay two days, then they get two breakfasts, if the innkeeper which is not the proper word, the patrons ask the owners if they'll supply that. But we ask them to exclude subdivisions, of which your pieces of property are in the nature of a subdivision, as opposed to described property which is cut off farmland. This is the way the legislation went. This is the way the legislation has continued. The interesting thing about this Board and my thorough colleagues are the word agonization is exactly the word I want you to understand, because we do agonize over every one of these applications. Everyone tonight will agonize over it. We will pay special attention to this one because of all the people that came in and voiced their opinions. If, through an agreement we so grant this application, there will be reasonable restrictions on these applicants; and these restrictions must be followed to the letter of the law. We have a Code Enforcement Officer and we have police. The way the permit was lifted on the place in Mattituck, which was not a Bed and Breakfast but it was the same Special Permit situation, was through police reports and through other means of neighbors contacting Code Enforcement in this Town and the Building Department. I assure you that is the way to do it, if there is a problem. But I don't want you to leave here thinking that this is an Inn. This is not an Inn. This is a casual and incidental use of two bedrooms. BARRY D. CHARLES: I most emphatically disagree with that. CHAIRMAN: Well I don't care if you disagree with me, I'm just telling you. BARRY D. CHARLES: Well, make sure that you understand that, with the symantics. We're not here discussing symantics. CHAIRMAN: I understand that. I am telling you we BARRY D. CHARLES: If you want to ____________ a hotel. CHAIRMAN: Excuse me sir, I'm telling you we didn't put the legislation in, just as Mrs. Tortora told you. This is legislation we have lived with for more than five years and we have been very successful in the granting of these permits and everybody has abided by them because they know if they don't abide by them they'll be back here. It doesn't take unanimous vote to lift that permit. I'm just telling you that right now. It only takes three members of this Board. Now I want to tell you the permit that was lifted in Mattituck was lifted with all five members present. And all five members voted to lift that permit. It cost this person, who operated that permit, a phenomenal amount of money at the loss of that permit. MEMBER TORTORA: We closed their business. CHAIRMAN: We closed their business, flat, just like that. So I'm just telling you. Page 17, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold BARRY D. CHARLES: May I also understand you, that you can operate a business out of your house? CHAIRMAN: Yes you can, one room. BARRY D. CHARLES: So therefore the things I mentioned are CHAIRMAN: A certain types of business. MEMBER TORTORA: Certain types of businesses. BARRY D. CHARLES: Does this qualify under that? CHAIRMAN: This is not a business sir, it is a Special Permit. BARRY D. CHARLES: Operating a Bed and Breakfast is not considered a business? CHAIRMAN: It is not a business. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: It's not defined as a business. BARRY D. CHARLES: I think there is where the big mistake is. Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN: You're welcome. UNKNOWN GENTLEMAN: I don't mean to be smart, but you know if it walks like a duck, it quacks like a duck. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: Excuse me, could you repeat your name again. EXCUSE ME, could you please repeat your name. RICHARD CRICIENDA: Richard Cricienda, I live right next door to them. You got two cars in their circular driveway, you go two cars in the driveway, what happens when friends and family come over, and there's cars parked in the street. What are we supposed to do? Who do we call? How do we know what's going on in the house, now that you got six cars parked there, or seven? CHAIRMAN: First of all, let me just tell you we have not approved the circular driveway as the parking. They have a phenomenal amount of room on both sides of the house. They may be required to put additional parking or to elongate something else. This is through the agonization and deliberation process. RICHARD CRICIENDA: So you're saying it going to be put right next door to me or Monica Grigonis. Page 18, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold CHAIRMAN: So, then we'll screen it. It will be screened with evergreens. All of these things that are done. I just want to tell you that the funeral home in Cutchogue was the nature of the Special Permit. We agonized six hours just over the planting on that, six hours on that Permit for Costas Funeral Home. RICHARD CRICIENDA: Just let me ask you a question, when there are six cars or seven cars there, what can we do, who do we call? CHAIRMAN: So far as I'm concerned sir, if a person has a casual guest or a party and people park in the street occasionally, there is nothing you can do about it, nor is the police going to do anything about it. We are concerned about the use of the Bed and Breakfast, okay, and we are going to mandate it. That this parking is on site and on site only, and I assure you it will be. Yes sir in the back, quickly. State your name for the record. PETE HUGHES: My name is Pete Hughes, I live in Southold. I had just a question of clarification. As I understand it what you're saying is that the B & B legislation overrides the covenants of subdivisions. CHAIRMAN: Let me just say this to you, we have the power, and we don't abuse this power, to override any covenant in any subdivision in the Town of Southold. But we don't normally override those covenants; however, this is special legislation put before us and mandated by the Town Board of the Town of Southold, not this Town Board, not the past Town Board and maybe not even the Town Board before that, that says if they meet the criteria which is mentioned in the Code you can grant a Bed and Breakfast with reasonable restrictions. PETE HUGHES: So what you're saying is you are, in fact, overriding the convenants. If you meet all the specifications, I want to clarify this it is very important. If you meet all the specifications of the legislation you, in fact, can override the convenant of a subdivision. MEMBER TORTORA: We do not enforce covenants and we don't override them. CHAIRMAN: Let me give you a quick situation. The same subdivision that you people live in PETE HUGHES: No, I'm not in that one, I'm in another one. CHAIRMAN: I'm talking about the one you're reflecting. Let me just give you an example. There is a subdivision in Mattituck called Mattituck Estates. It was built by Ed Alberts, it was produced in 1965, yours was in 1969. There was an application before us by a Southold resident and that specifically said within the confines of the covenants of that subdivision that no house shall be built closer than 50 feet to a lot line. They picked the lot that had the greatest problem environmentally. This Board granted a variance at Page 19, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold less than 50 feet and that question if you ask me tonight, yes we overrode so to speak those covenants. And I'm telling you that that's what we did and we don't normally do it. MEMBER COLLINS: Mr. Chairman, let your lawyer speak. The government doesn't enforce covenants. Covenants are a deed matter and they tend to be private agreements between deeding parties, that's how they usually get into deeds that when somebody subdivides they put covenants and restrictions in the deeds. The question of who can enforce them is usually a matter of what's in the deed and it is typically the subdivider, in fact it was Judge Hill on Hill Road as long as the covenants there survived, or it may be neighbors, but it is definitely not the government. The government is not in the covenant business. And Jerry's example is interesting, I wasn't on the Board then, but my mother happened to live in that subdivision so I know it and its covenants, and for the Board to hear a variance application that says we wish to put a house closer than 50 feet to the lot line because, look, it's wetlands and that's all we can do. Our Board is charged under New York Law with considering benefits to the applicant, detriment to the community, environmental issues and what Jerry's saying is the Board gave them the variance. Now, if the neighbors or whoever had the authority to enforce that covenant over there on the 50 feet was worked up enough about it to go to law and attempt to get a court to tell these people that they can't build their house there, they could do that. But, I think override is the wrong word. Because Mr. Hughes was quite concerned about the term override and that's not what we're doing. We're working two spheres and really his example is an excellent one. The Zoning Board of Appeals exercising its authority said to these property owners yes all things considered you can build this house where you want to build it. If the people, the developer or the neighbors with the authority to enforce the covenant and the covenant was still in effect, a lot of these die out after you have to read the fine print, they die after a few years. Care to enforce it they could go to law, they sue an equity and they try to get a judge to say no you can't do that. But it’s a different sphere. We are not undoing covenants. PETE HUGHES: Thank you very much. Yes I remember lots in that particular subdivision which are very interesting now that you know that people don't have to adhere necessarily to the covenants. MEMBER COLLINS: Mr. Hughes, furthermore the covenant as I understand it from what the gentleman said was a covenant against conducting a business in a house and a court would of course have to adjust the question whether the conduct of a Bed and Breakfast is a business, which is most assuredly not a question we're going to go into here tonight. PETE HUGHES: Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN: Last question sir. JOHN A. WILKE: My name is John A. Wilke. I'm a resident of Southold, I'm not a resident of the immediate area. I do know something about Bed and Breakfast however, and it seems to me that I've used them many times myself and I think why the people use Page 20, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold them is they want to go to a place where there is piece and quiet. They're not rowdy types. They may be in bed by ten o'clock if they can get there in time. I also know Kathy and Kevin Leavay very well and I know they run a very nice establishment. They're not going to run a rowdy place. I don't think this is going to be a detriment to the neighborhood at all. CHAIRMAN: I really said that that was the last. I will accept anything in writing for the next two weeks from anybody. I just want to give the applicants any last minute, two- second statement if you would like to, because I know you rose your, that your hand was up a couple of times Mr. Leavay. KEVIN LEAVAY: I would and I will be totally quick. We never ever wanted to get to this stage but it is. You can be assured that whatever stipulations you put on our home, we will adhere to. It was something that we, we had always gone to Bed and Breakfasts wherever we travel, and we did that primarily because we thought that the people we stayed with would give us the best information about the community we were in. And that's what we wanted to do for Southold Town for anyone that wanted to come here. That's why we entered into this. Thank you. CHAIRMAN: I just want to mention to you that there may be a modification in reference to the parking schedule. There may be some agreement, you may have to increase it or whatever. We'll be working on that through the deliberation process. Again I will accept any statements from anybody for the next two weeks and so therefore if you have any specific statements you would like to make for the Board to read we would be very happy to accept those. Hearing no further comment I'll make a motion closing the hearing pending the receipt of those. Thank you for coming in. SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION * * * 7:42 p.m. – Appl. No. 5035 – ROLAND AND KAREN GRANT. A variance is requested under Section 100-33, based on the Building Inspector's October 15, 2001 Notice of Disapproval to locate a cabana structure at less than twenty (20) feet from the side. (to be inserted) 8:12 p.m. – Appl. No. 5036 – PRIME GALLERY. A Variance is requested under Article XX, Section 100-205N(5), based on the Building Inspector's October 15, 2001 Notice of Disapproval to locate a cabana structure at less than twenty (20) feet from the side property line, at 1775 Indian Neck Lan., Peconic; Parcel 86-5-9.1. (to be inserted) Page 21, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold 8:17 p.m. – Appl. No. 5034 – HELEN RUST FAMILY PARTNERSHIP by Thomas E. Uhl, based on the Building Inspector's October 1, 2001 Notice of Disapproval. Applicant is requesting (1) an Interpretation of Section 100-31A.3 for an exception determining that the westerly yard area is a side yard rather than a front yard, or in the alternative, a variance under Section 100-30A.3 to allow an addition with a front yard at less than the code requirement of 50 feet, and (2) a Variance under Section 100-2394B to allow a portion of the proposed addition with a setback from the bulkhead at less than 75 feet. Location of Property: 4680 Wunneweta Road, Cutchogue; 111-14-34. Lark & Folts, Esqs. CHAIRMAN: I believe you've been waiting there very patiently Mr. Lark. We are indeed happy sir, that you have not brought before us a Special Permit. RICHARD LARK, ESQ.: However, this is somewhat of an oddball application that you don't get everyday. The application, hopefully, is to ------inaudible---------Building Permit in Southold Town. The Rust Family retained Flower Hill Building Corporation to go ahead and to put an addition on what they thought was their, onto their property there. And as you can see from the Building Permit's which I attached to the application dated back in February 2001, they actually _______of the Flower Hill went in and saw Mr. Forrester because he had a problem as to where to site the additions that the Rust Family wanted to put onto their already rather large one-story family house there. There was a question of the topography, and often in Nassau Point the setoffs from the front yard, side yards and so on and so forth. The head of the Building Department, at that time Mr. Forrester had put on a survey for the builder where he sited the house. I have Mr. Forrester's writing right here, which is identically with what your application is. The result of that, the builder then went to the D.E.C. and got a letter of non-jurisdiction which you have there, also went to the Trustees because of the rules of siteing the house so many feet from the tidal wetlands which ________. And got approvals from both agencies to go ahead, and then went back to the Building Department in August, finalized the Building Permit application (a copy of which you have) which conforms to everything and then received the illustrious Notice of Disapproval from the Building Department and there answer was there was a change of administration and that was a side yard the previous year now became a front yard. I'll hand up to the Board, if I may, the original thing that Mr. Uhl used when he went to the Building Department. This presented a problem because of the department fee and all of the expense and the permits that they've gotten what to do. Oddly enough the Building Department learned when they researched Nassau Point came upon it as I have it in the application where a 15 foot strip of land, a no mans strip, which was adjacent to the Rust Property and decided that that was a street. This problem has come apparently some time before because in 1996 the State Law 280A of the State Law which is really why we're here primarily was an interesting provision putting them in Sub-section 3. As I understand it the ZBA under 280A.3 has to decide that the circumstances of the case do not require the structure, in this case the proposed addition. If it doesn't relate to a proposed street, or a paper street, or something designated as a future street the Board can so do it. And in doing it the legislature when we amended the act which much have happened elsewhere throughout the State, can make reasonable an exception and issue a Building Permit subject to Page 22, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold conditions to protect any future street layout. Those, when I put in the history, so that's why I have the application for an Area Variance asking that this be, the comprised 15 foot, it doesn't make it as a side yard so effectively it's a front yard area variance to go down to 15 feet. One half of the application which the State Law allows the other half is to just have it declared no relationship to that street as the Building Department calls it and just allow it to go in that area with a proposed setback or any other requires that the Board did. In the application in the 280A portion, I gave you pretty much a history of how this appeared, this 15 foot strip. Those that have seen it, it’s now over the years been roughly landscaped by the neighbor next door and to my knowledge no one has used as it a means of ingress and egress from Wunneweta Road to Wunneweta Pond due to the steepness of the topography goes straight down to the water. It's has a great view you can see its never been used as a road due to the caliber of the trees on there, they're huge. And as I say it's been beautifully landscaped and maintained by the neighbor next th door. It's not on the tax rolls and the tax service agency in Riverhead calls it LA 15, they designate it as a paper street. You know from your applications in the past you've had several applications especially near Nassau Point Road where it has been designated as a paper street so they do have access to the ______ up there. This thing has just sat that way and I'm sure Mr. Forrester when he did it, never thought that that would ever be classified as a street by somebody, in fact the Building Department has and so hence the application before you. I don't want to _______because of the lateness of the hour I think the application contains everything you need to know with all of the detail in it as to that 280A portion and I think that this is such a case where the Board can make a determination that this proposed addition has no relationship to the street and, in effect, designated which everybody thought it was, a side yard to begin with not a front yard. Or the Board has the power and the uniqueness under this application to grant an area variance and say yes, that is a street that could be used as a street and grant an area variance and call it a front yard down even though it’s a side yard down to 15 feet. So you can go either way on it. The law 280A fearlessly provides for that by saying it can and/or you either go the area variance or you can go if you say this has no relationship to that due to the distance of that particular piece of land. So if you have any questions on the application I think I've given you everything we need. You have, now on the site plan of it, you have detailed building plans which shows what the proposed to be constructed there with roof lines and everything else. If you have any questions and I can answer it I'd be glad to. CHAIRMAN: Do you want to start with Mr. Dinizio? MEMBER DINIZIO: This is just not a street. CHAIRMAN: There's nothing there Jim. MEMBER DINIZIO: No designation there on any map or any sign, other than drawn on the map. CHAIRMAN: It's on the Tax Map because it was on the official map of Nassau Point Properties. Page 23, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold MEMBER DINIZIO: At not point of them saying that this is a public place. No covenant anywhere that says this is a right-of-way for people to go down to a beach. RICHARD LARK, ESQ.: When they did the Tax Map they basically drew it and then they copied it wherever they had a filed map, they filed the filed map this showed on the originally 223 filed map, so they just kept it there. Its always been no mans land. No one's attempted to buy it, its not taxed; no ones every attempted to use it. The neighbor next door, in effect maintains it so it doesn't grow wild or anything, he mows it and fertilizes it and keeps it attractively landscaped and there it sits. I was flabbergasted then he says its on some map someplace they're going to call it a street or a right-of-way. Here we are. MEMBER DINIZIO: By the building not the neighbor. RICHARD LARK, ESQ.: No. The neighbor wouldn't want it a street, nobody wants access to Wunneweta Pond. CHAIRMAN: _________doesn't even know it was something or is something. RICHARD LARK, ESQ.: Probably not. Its just been there for ages. I know for myself, I guess I've represented the family on and off since the 70's and that's been just the way it is. MEMBER DINIZIO: I guess you don't even have to ask if the neighbor's meets and bounds. RICHARD LARK, ESQ.: No, not legally. But who cares, not legally not according to the tax survey and not if you check the deeds no. The actual meets and bounds description. MEMBER DINIZIO: Yes, that's what I'm saying. CHAIRMAN: Miss Collins? MEMBER COLLINS: Yes, I'm very sympathetic to the applicants and, in fact, in the R40 this is a more than conforming lot in the R40 Zone. A 15 foot side yard is adequate, they've got the 20 on the other side. RICHARD LARK, ESQ.: That's why Mr. Forrester sited it the way he did. MEMBER COLLINS: I think that on that basis I certainly would be willing to give them the variance. I should also point out that we had a much more complex and weighty case of lanes that were or were not streets that did or did not create front yards. Because you have to have a "street" that meets the definition of a street in the Code to have a front yard. We issued language on that about a year, a year and a half ago which I neglected to Page 24, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold look up tonight. And I suspect, I don't know what your theory is Lydia, I suspect that this thing is not a street under that and, therefore, we have already said that that's a side yard. MEMBER TORTORA: We've already made an Interpretation, I'm trying to remember the name of the case. MEMBER COLLINS: It begins with an M and it's up on the bluff in Mattituck. CHAIRMAN: Mescouris. MEMBER TORTORA: Mescouris in Mattituck and we already made a very lengthy, detailed Interpretation and, in fact, the wording, frankly I would reverse the Building Department's Determination it doesn't conform to the bulk schedule because because the proposed addition is located 15 feet from the front yard property line. A front yard property line has to be measured from a right-of-way or an official street. This is neither, its not a right-of-way and its not a street, but by definition. RICHARD LARK, ESQ.: As you know I did point that out, not for Mescouris per say, to him he's got extensive experience there especially up in the Gold Coast Nassau County, so they're very familiar with all this and we pointed that out to him. With this administration so that if you're detected on the Board of Appeals on denying it and you create the denial there and they just won't listen to any reason. That's how he ended up coming to me, he says I can't deal with it anymore. So I said okay, that's when I researched it and check the 280A out and said okay let's file the application and see where we go, it makes sense to me. That will have to be, maybe the new administration just does not have that whereas Mr. Forrester might have had, knew about that. I'm defending him in a way, but he did point out to me, I said that can't be that can't be defined as a street under the Zoning Code, under the State Code, under the Highway Law even. MEMBER TORTORA: We did an extensive Interpretation in which we went into all of the definitions in the Mescouris case. I thought it was very clear. MEMBER COLLINS: Yes, but memory is short. RICHARD LARK, ESQ.: Under the law it is clear, but I think this is where have it. MEMBER COLLINS: I think we definitely do not have to go anywhere near 280A. I realize that's your fall back position Page 25, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold 8:38 p.m. – Appl. No. 4998 – ELIZABETH SENTELL (continued at applicant's request). This is a request for a Variance under Article XXIV, Section 100-242A, and Section 100- 244, based on the Building Inspector's July 27, 2001 Notice of Disapproval. The applicant is proposing additions to existing dwelling with side yard setbacks at less than 10 feet on one side and less than 15 feet on the other. Location of Property: 220 Lakeview Terrace, East Marion; Parcel 1000-31-9-16. G. Strang, Architect CHAIRMAN: We're ready for you sir. Are you going to give us your presentation tonight? GARRETT STRANG: Yes, I think I'd like to do that for several reasons. One, obviously the last time we were together on this application back in October it was assumed at that time the Board would have time to deliberate and make a decision on a similar application which would impact this one which due to the complexity in Town it has not been able to happen. Rather than wait for that to go through and if a decision is such that it requires us to continue this action, we would need additional time. So I would rather make this presentation tonight and if your decision on the other application is such that it makes this moot then it can just go to the wayside. CHAIRMAN: Could I just hold you up at that point one second, Mr. Strang? I just want to mention to the Martins in back of you that we have not made a decision, nor are we making a decision on either one of those two applications that are adjacent to your house tonight. We only started deliberating last time about two words, and now we're moving forward with them at that point. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: Are you removing it from the agenda Jerry on Walz? CHAIRMAN: Yes, tonight we're removing it. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: No, right now are you? CHAIRMAN: I am removing it from the Agenda as a deliberation item tonight. Pardon me sir, go ahead. GARRETT STRANG: That's quite all right. As I was saying, after I make my presentation, I'm sure you won't be deliberating or making a decision on this until sometime in the future, so when your other decision comes down it may impact ________, but at least I'll have a copy of the information in front of you so that if you need to make a decision on this application you will have what you need. Specifically, the application is presented which is for an addition to an existing small cottage on a small parcel. The existing premise is a one-story single-family dwelling; it consists of a bedroom, a bathroom, a kitchen, a living room and a porch, which is approximately 560 square feet. It is about sixty years old. My client purchased it earlier this year with the intention of making it a vacation home for themselves and their family. They live out of the area, so when they come they come with their children, their grandchildren. Their Page 26, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold needs, they understand that the lot is small, the house is small and they are limited to what they can do. Their needs specifically include having a three bedroom, one and a half bath house to accommodate their needs for their family. We are proposing a five-foot addition on the waterside porch and that's pretty much the limitation on the waterside. But in addition, obviously, we're proposing to add a one and a half story addition to the roadside of the house, which would encompass the additional bedrooms and baths. The existing structure that's there presently will remain in its existing size and configuration, it will only receive cosmetic improvements, specifically the roof, the siding and windows, and things of that nature and whatever the Code requires to improve this ______structure. There will be a new septic system installed on the roadside and there will also be connected to the Suffolk County Water Authority duly installed water main. The setbacks to the proposed construction, which is slightly greater than those, that are consisting presently, which we know are non-conforming. The total size of this dwelling, completed with the proposed addition is to be approximately 1350 square feet, total. Which is from my research pretty much in keeping with the neighbor's parcels in the immediate area. We have presently in hand an approval from Southold Town Trustees, which I will submit to the Board. In meeting with the Trustees and meeting with them at the site, and making a presentation and listening to their concerns at a public hearing, they were in favor of the proposed one and a half story addition to the rear of the house and maintaining the existing one story structure on the waterside of the house. They felt that that was the right way to go. They felt that that would be preferable in putting a two- story structure there, or a second-story on the existing one story house. Which is also my and my client's feelings as well. They felt that the small addition on the waterside of the house is really a non-issue and made no impact on the neighbors or on the site. The belief that the installation of the new septic system is definitely an environmental asset and they definitely favor that; and they were obviously in favor of the application and granted the permit which I can submit to you. In fact I have several submissions if you'd like I could submit them all at once. CHAIRMAN: Sure, submit them all at once. GARRETT STRANG: We also have an application pending upon of the Environmental Department of New York State D.E.C. for freshwater wetlands since it counts on the lake. Initial meetings with them, as well, they were in favor or the addition being the roadside of the house as opposed to anything on the waterside with the exception of the porch addition. They also believe that the septic tank upgrade current standards are a definite environmental asset. They made a determination that the application is a minor project and they did indicate in a correspondence which I'll submit, that they expect a decision that we should've gotten by the third week of November, but in a conversation with them earlier this week, they have yet to make their final site inspection, and they expect that to happen before the end of the year and go through the paperwork. It sounded as if they were leaning in a favorable direction on this application. In reviewing the file of your record in your office, there is some correspondence that you received; I would like to respond to it if I may? CHAIRMAN: Certainly. Page 27, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold GARRETT STRANG: First, the Peterson/Nachmias neighbor which is immediately to our east, made some statements in his correspondence and I think they may be somewhat inaccurate or at least I would like to clarify. The proposed addition is one and a half stories not two. It will only impact on twenty feet of the fifty feet of the length of their house and that's the entire length of their house, which is again the original part of the structure. The proposed addition will not block any of the views as they face, since the addition is on the roadside, the views are to the waterside of the house, and so their views will not be impacted at all by what they're doing. There's a minimal of any impact on afternoon sunlight, inasmuch as the new ridge will only be approximately five to six feet higher than what's there now, approximately twenty-six feet from their original which is twenty-six feet at least from their building line. And any view they may have from the west side of their house in the area of our addition is presently blocked by an evergreen hedgerow, which will remain. There isn't anything from the viewpoint that I can say will be impacted. With respect to the correspondence from Heroy, they made reference to a permit being denied and my research has shown that there is no record of any permit previously having been denied by the prior owner by the name of Ferguson. In fact, I found Trustees permitted issued to the Ferguson's for an addition of the house, which they never instituted. There is no, also, there is no documentation in Town records that improvements to neighbors dwellings in the immediate vicinity has ever been limited to the confines of their existing footprints. That, my research has shown in some of these improvements do in fact, refer outside of the original footprint of the existing homes. And lastly Ms. Sentell was never made aware, at least to the best of my knowledge, on what she discussed with me that the Ferguson's received any denial for permits and again, as I said previously there aren't any records so I'm not sure exactly what Mr. Heroy was making reference to. And the last piece of correspondence was from the neighbor Mr. Woodcock who is immediately to our west who also makes reference to the ZBA action last year that was disapproved and can't find anything in reference to that. We made mention the fact that they think that it's a extreme or unfit proportionately ambitious project replaced in that size lot, and I sort of scratch my head as to how he can say that when I look at his which is on a piece of property basically about the same size as ours, and his house is considerably larger than ours. He also has a garage on his lot that's taller than the Sent ell house. So I'm not sure exactly what he's making reference to that, his allegation. I would like to make some of these submittals that I mentioned earlier before I close. I've got a few things to help maybe aid the Board in understanding the application and the situation. This submittal is a copy of the approval from the Trustees and a letter from the D.E.C. indicating what their determination was. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. GARRETT STRANG: I also took the time to research and do a little bit of a analysis if you would, which I have six copies of, I'll submit to the Board here, of the neighboring properties which I indicates their proximity to us, or their relationship to us, the size of their house, the number of bedrooms in their house, the number of stories and the approximate height of their house so that you can look at the relationships between the neighbors and us. I also have six copies of a very simple, and I emphasize simple, this Page 28, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold profile is two of them; the lower one shows as is, the upper one shows what the proposed addition we're submitting, so I have six copies of that for the Board as well. And lastly, some photographs that I've taken both from the road and of the Woodcock residence immediately adjacent and also _________the garage of the Woodcocks you can see that it is a relatively tall structure as well. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Strang are you done with your presentation? GARRETT STRANG: I would just like to make a few things in closing and then I can address any questions you have. In closing, I basically would like to address I know, most, not all, but some of the issues that the Board considers in entertaining these applications. One of them is, in my opinion, the character of the neighborhood, which basically is being unaltered. Inasmuch as our proposal is consistent in both size and scale to the existing homes in the immediate area as shown. In addition, there will be no detriment to the nearby properties, since the proposed addition is being the Woodcock house, which is in fact much more imposing than what we're proposing, and is also behind the majority of the Peterson house and is separated by the existing evergreen hedge. Generally, the proposal will have a positive impact on the neighborhood from an environmental view due to the fact that they are going to be installing new state of the art, if you will, but at least currently standardized and accepted by Suffolk County Health Department's septic system and will be connecting to the Public Water. Our proposal is the proposed addition is basically as I believe, a minimum necessary to reasonably expand the house while being sensitive to the property, the neighborhood, and the community and the neighbors. The proposed lot coverage is within the permitted 20%, and recently documented to the size and the scale in keeping with the immediate neighbors. Lastly, I would like to submit to the Board from a point of view from the perspective of similar applications or a similar application, which was approved by this Board recently. Some photographs of the residence in Greenport known as the Bradford residence, it was Appeal No. 4971, approved for a two-story house with a six and a half foot and seven and half foot side yard, 23 ½ % lot coverage and was approved this past July of 2001. As you can see, the massing of this house relative to the neighbors is considerably greater than what we're proposing. So I feel that we're less ambitious in our application than this one, which has already been approved. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. GARRETT STRANG: I apologize for the unusual length of my presentation tonight, but I will answer any questions the Board has. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Strang when you refer to one and a half stories, could you just tell the Board what your opinion is, your professional opinion as an architect, of one and a half stories as opposed to two stories? GARRETT STRANG: The definition typically that is accepted in this Town a one and a half story dwelling is primarily a one story dwelling with dormers that increase the usage Page 29, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold of the upper level as opposed to a full two eight foot or nine foot high walls and then a roof on top. CHAIRMAN: In your educated guess, this house presently stands, what do you think off the ground to maybe the ridge? GARRETT STRANG: It should be in that information that I submitted to you, but to the ridge the existing house to the ridge presently is. MEMBER COLLI NS: Here it is Jerry, on what he just gave us, 21. GARRETT STRANG: 21 is what is proposed. MEMBER COLLINS: Oh, I'm sorry. GARRETT STRANG: Presently what's there is about 14, or 15 actually. CHAIRMAN: So, what you're doing is you're taking off the peak roof that's on there now, and you're straightening that out and putting a new peaked roof above that which we refer to as a gable end? GARRETT STRANG: No truly. CHAIRMAN: Okay. What are we doing? GARRETT STRANG: Because the original house that's there now with the pitched roof in tact will remain. We're proposing an addition to the roadside of that in the back, which will be taller, which will accommodate with the dormers, will accommodate second floor usage. CHAIRMAN: Okay, so the, I'm sorry it would be to the rear of that. GARRETT STRANG: That's correct. CHAIRMAN: So we will have, what height ceiling on the main floor and what height ceiling on the second floor? GARRETT STRANG: The main floor will have an eight foot ceiling and the second floor will have, as we're projecting in that drawing, we'll start with a seven foot plan height at the dormer with a slight slope up to maybe nine feet, whatever we can fit into the confines of the, dormer roof is a low pitched roof. CHAIRMAN: Now you do have plans for this right? GARRETT STRANG: No, we haven't because if we can't get the Variance I can't in good conscience have my client incur the cost of developing final plans. Page 30, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold CHAIRMAN: I know you said that. GARRETT STRANG: If the Variance isn't granted. That's the diagrammatic aspect of what we propose to do without getting into formal plans. So I hope the Board hopefully understands our proposal. CHAIRMAN: And you said the addition is to be, the total square footage will be 1350 you said, but what did you say the addition is totally? GARRETT STRANG: The addition, I believe it should say on the site plan, I'll take a look and see what it says, its 528 square feet of addition. CHAIRMAN: On the main floor. GARRETT STRANG: Yes, on the main floor. Yes if you look at the site plan, so as not to confuse you or make it seem like I'm misstating here, the site plan data that shows on the site plan on the building area just this footprint area only for the purposes of calculating lot coverage doesn't take into account the square footage that will be up on that second level of the new addition. CHAIRMAN: So if it's 528 down it should be pretty much the 528 above except for the knee walls, minus whatever the knee walls. GARRETT STRANG: Actually it will be less, because the house is only 17 feet wide and we're not doing a full two story, the dormers won't be for the full depth of the addition because then that would be basically be deferred. CHAIRMAN: Okay, could you tell me, not today, but could you calculate for me what the actual square footage upstairs will be then? GARRETT STRANG: Yes, I can. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Dinizio, questions of Mr. Strang. MEMBER DINIZIO: No, I think what he handed us here is what we're looking for in the other application. It does tell a nice story. I'd like to know the square footage upstairs, what you're going to gain. There's not going to be a stairway on the outside is there? GARRETT STRANG: No, the stairway is going to be internal. MEMBER DINIZIO: Is there going to be a deck on the waterside of this, on the second floor? GARRETT STRANG: There can't be because you have the original structure. Page 31, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold MEMBER DINIZIO: Oh and the dormer doesn't carry the same pitch as the original roof, right, it's going to be a dormer. The pitch of the roof is going to be a lot flatter. GARRETT STRANG: The original roof pitch is a 7 on 12. The new addition main pitch is going to be 11 on 12. The dormer roof will be a 4 on 12. MEMBER DINIZIO: Thank you. CHAIRMAN: Miss Collins? MEMBER COLLINS: I get about 265 square feet of upstairs, based on your numbers. GARRETT STRANG: I would say that's probably pretty close without getting into particulars. I'll get you the numbers. MEMBER COLLINS: You gave us 1,085 of footprint in the new structure and you gave us 1350 square feet of total and the difference between those is 265. GARRETT STRANG: I will confirm that that's accurate. MEMBER COLLINS: What you get upstairs is very modest. GARRETT STRANG: Exactly. It's going to be a room and a bath. One bedroom and one bath, that's it, MEMBER COLLINS: Thank you. CHAIRMAN: Mrs. Tortora? MEMBER TORTORA: No. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Horning? MEMBER HORNING: No questions. CHAIRMAN: Just the last comment, the reason why I asked you that question is because, we do appreciate this picture on Bayshore Road. Fortunately, the house on the northeast side, the north side, it's a ranch and so is the case of the one on the opposite side. My concern, and it has been my concern on this application is that because we're 4.9 feet from the property line on the west side, that the second story or the 1 ½ stories of this house not touch visually the house to the west and therefore, I would like to see the addition start at that particular point. In other words, I have no objection to a one-story to the front of that house and then start from that point on. The reason and the concern that I have are basically fire concerns. If you are unclear on what I'm saying I'll rephrase it in some other way. Page 32, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold GARRETT STRANG: I think I understand what you're saying. You make reference to the house to the west. CHAIRMAN: I have no objection to a second, 1 ½ story structure, but my concern that it start only forward or in effect even with the Woodcock house. And again my concern is the very small lot that we're dealing with and honestly I don’t care if you increase it a little bit on the other side, toward the road, to include that but in my opinion from a health safety reference point of view that would be a situation that would be much more palatable in my opinion. GARRETT STRANG: I think I understand what you're saying. The one limitation that we have is that, and I'll just take a number because I'm not sure what it is at the moment, but if the Woodcock line extends 10 feet toward the roadside of our dwelling and then we start a 1 ½ story addition at that point, which could very well be the case, because the dormer again is not going to be the full width of the addition. Extending the house further toward the road, as you suggested as an alternate for this loft space if you will, would probably put us over lot coverage and we're not trying to do that. We’re trying to be sensitive to the smallness of the lot, in maximum lot coverage. CHAIRMAN: Well, maybe we could work the figures down, this is not a sarcastic th statement, not to a 100 place, but at least so that we could see where you could move it. GARRETT STRANG: We may be able to shift that dormer, as you said, we haven't designed it yet. So maybe we'll shift that dormer so that the dormer when it picks up is roadside of the Woodcock house and still do what we need to do as far as living space within the second floor. We could work within your concerns and address them. MEMBER HORNING: Where would the Peterson house come in with all that? CHAIRMAN: Well, I don't remember it and I know that we start to get a little more pie shaped on the lot as we move around the pond. I have to go back and look at that. GARRETT STRANG: One photograph sort of gives an idea of Peterson house relative to the Sentell house, and there is a greater distance from the Peterson house to the Sentell house. MEMBER HORNING: The Woodcock house is shown on this. GARRETT STRANG: That's right. MEMBER HORNING: Where the Peterson one isn't. GARRETT STRANG: The survey didn't have the Peterson house on it, but I was able to determine that the Peterson house is 14 feet give or take, 15 feet from the property line. Give or take a couple of inches from the town property line. So we're going to be close to 20 feet between structures on that side. Page 33, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold CHAIRMAN: So I guess the question I have of you before we take any testimony is, how long will it take you to work on this? Bearing in mind again, Mr. Strang, that will eventually make a decision on both Mr. Bressler's Interpretation and the Application before us which may again, or may not affect this. Is there a specific timetable that these people want to get going or is there? GARRETT STRANG: Well the last question I had from them, which was a tough one to answer was, will we have a house for the summer? CHAIRMAN: That is a tough question. GARRETT STRANG: And being where we are at the moment, I said the best I could do is to at least make a presentation tonight to the Board so that we won't loose another month before I bring the next presentation to the Board. th BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: Are you asking January 10 then for the time? It thth would be either the 10 or the 24. th CHAIRMAN: I think we'll put it on the 24; it's a Special Meeting. GARRETT STRANG: And what are you asking of us by then? Besides the square footage of the second floor. CHAIRMAN: The new plan, whatever new plan we can do. I want to go out and look at the other place and so on and so forth. And hopefully we'll have all the documentation. There may be further testimony we're going to take tonight that you may have to incorporate into that anyway. At least at that point you'll have a better shot also of getting a decision on our Interpretation. Of course, we don't know what the winter is going to bring anyway. We don't know if things are going to freeze up, if you're going to be able to excavate until March anyway. GARRETT STRANG: We don't know. But, obviously do have to prepare drawings if we know we have a variance in place. We don't know what the limitations might be. I will definitely have what you want to you prior to that, reasonably prior to that hearing so that you have time to review it. CHAIRMAN: It would also be great to be able to see that roof line so that we could interpret that roof line, at least visually and seeing that on the waterside. I don't think you have to draw an entire, and depict an entire set of plans with every element of that, but I've seen your expertise and I know that you can at least give us a little idea of the roofline aspect of it. GARRETT STRANG: You mean from the waterside? Page 34, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold CHAIRMAN: Yes, from the waterside yes. That would be great. We'll see what develops throughout the hearing, sir, we thank you for your presentation and we do appreciate the pictures there, they're worth a million dollars to us. GARRETT STRANG: I appreciate your patience CHAIRMAN: Is there anybody else that would like to speak in favor of this application? Anybody like to speak against this application? Seeing no hands I'll make a motion th reserving decision until, I'm sorry recessing until January 24 at 6:45 p.m. SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION * * * Page 35, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold 10:01 p.m. Public Hearing held regarding Appl. No. 4999 – LOUISE ADJEMIAN. Request for a lot waiver to unmerge property known as 1825 and 1715 McCann Lane, Greenport; 1000-33-3-23.2 and 40.1. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER opened the hearing and asked if anyone was present to speak in behalf of this application. PATRICIA C. MOORE, ESQ.: It's a waiver day. This one is a little more unusual. CHAIRMAN: You always come up with some real interesting ones. MRS. MOORE: Yes, I get them all. I liked Potorski, I think that was easier. This is very – it took me several times to figure out what had happened, but the Paula, Elise Yerganian and Louise Adjemian. The problem is the names are so similar. They own, at one time they owned three parcels. One parcel was sold off way back to Mr. Karavis I think in 1987, Karavis bought 23.1. He ultimately sold it to Schembri, who built a house that's on here. Now that's out of the picture. 40.1 had been a lot and a half. Both these properties were described in certain instances as a "lot on a filed map and a half a lot." Yerganian and Adjemian owned 40.1, a lot and a half. Louise Adjemian on the east side owned 23.2, which was the southerly half of the original lot lines, or lots on the Filed Map, and ultimately after the individual died, now Louise Adjemian owned 40.1 and 23.2. At this point in time the original, returning to the original lot lines, we would go back to the original lots on the filed map that would bring the house within its original lot, and permit 23.2 to develop normally with a house in the center of the lot. MEMBER COLLINS: Oh? MRS. MOORE: Are you following this? MEMBER COLLINS: Well, yes. But I'm surprised. 40.1 is in your terms a lot and a half or one-and a half size lot, and 23.2 is a half size lot. Half a lot. MRS. MOORE: Right. Which is the other half of the 23.1 that was taken away. MEMBER COLLINS: 23.2 abuts 40.1. MRS. MOORE: correct. MEMBER COLLINS: And the half that makes 40.1 a lot and a half is the other half that would have made 23.2 a full lot. Page 36, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold MRS. MOORE: Right. MEMBER COLLINS: Now, the denial, the notice from the Building Department is the 23.2 has merged with 40.1. And as I understood it, you were applying to unmerge. MRS. MOORE: Applying to unmerge the original lots from the original lines. MEMBER COLLINS: That's more than unmerging. You're proposing to unmerge and also to have 40.1 sell back the stub (sort of speak)? MEMBER TORTORA: She's trying to go back to the original lot lines. MRS. MOORE: Yes. In fact, yes. You've got, going back to the original lot lines of the filed map- MEMBER COLLINS: Of the subdivision. MRS. MOORE: Right, of the subdivision. MEMBER COLLINS: Right. MRS. MOORE: Actually 40.1, the house, is under contract and being sold to a family. 23.2 as a lot is under contract also, obviously subject to the waiver of merger, everybody understands what the situation is. 23.2 is under contract as a lot built on by the Russell Family, Mr. Russell, is here, that's the mother, and her son is – (interrupted) MEMBER COLLINS: That's more detail than, no more names. MRS. MOORE: She's probably going to speak to you, so Mrs. Russell is here. So 23.2 would go back to its original. MEMBER COLLINS: I don't know what you mean original lot lines. Going back to the subdivision. MRS. MOORE: Ok, lot on the subdivision. Lot 14 – excuse me, MEMBER COLLINS: Lot 14. CHAIRMAN: Was cut in half. MEMBER COLLINS: 14 was cut in half. MRS. MOORE: 14 had been cut in half. MEMBER COLLINS: And the northerly half of 14 was sold to 15. Page 37, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold MRS. MOORE: Sold to 15, right. MEMBER COLLINS: Right. And that now is 44.1 on the tax map. MRS. MOORE: Correct. CHAIRMAN: Correct. MEMBER COLLINS: Leaving a small 23.2, the southerly half of 14, which is merged. And you want to get it unmerged because people want to buy it and they want to build on it. MRS. MOORE: Yes, they want to make it a real lot. MEMBER COLLINS: But where do you get original lot lines? The original lot line of Lot 14 was split many, many years ago when Eastern Shores or Elizabeth Barren or somebody sold half a lot. MRS. MOORE: Well, I think that the original lot lines are this filed subdivision map, and that is Lot 15 and Lot 14. MEMBER COLLINS: Yes. But 14 does not now exist as a lot. It was split and the northerly half of what was subdivision 14 is now part and parcel of 15. MRS. MOORE: Remember, you're now, taking a pen and going around lot 15, the house, and going around 14 the entire original lot 14. MEMBER COLLINS: The two lots together. MRS. MOORE: The two lots together. MEMBER COLLINS: Yes? MRS. MOORE: You have Mrs. Adjemian, who now owns a lot, two lots on the subdivision, ok? So that's what she owns, the whole thing. We want to return to the original filed map, which is Lot 15 and Lot 14. I read the code that, you know, you go back to the original lot line. What they did is, they split the lots by deed and came up with all kind of contortions on half lots and dividing it out. MEMBER COLLINS: It's not that complicated. It took me two hours to read the deeds and the title search, I'll admit that. I'm sorry we're at loggerheads, but it seems to me that if we give you the waiver of merger you are asking for, you end up with a lot that is about 65 ft. wide and whatever the depth is up there, called 23.2, and it's now unmerged and people can now build a small house on it. CHAIRMAN: No, no. Page 38, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold MEMBER TORTORA: No, no. CHAIRMAN: You're adding it to the south of 15. MRS. MOORE: We're returning it to its original lot line. Here can I give this to her (survey). I just want to make sure everyone understands. What we did is – MEMBER COLLINS: I saw that. MRS. MOORE: You saw that, ok. The surveyor took the original Lot 15, that's the house, you can see the house sits on the original lot of the subdivision, lot 15. Lot 14 is the companion size MEMBER COLLINS: Yes, immediately south. MRS. MOORE: Immediately to the south, and now that is a more conforming lot than the original 23._what, what was that 23.2? That had originally created by deed. MEMBER DINIZIO: Now someone is going to own 15, and you're going to sell 14. MRS. MOORE: Yes. MEMBER COLLINS: That's what I'm getting at. You're going to sell that half. MRS. MOORE: Oh, yes! MEMBER COLLINS: I asked you that before and you said no. MRS. MOORE: No, no no. I said – I'm sorry I never read that question. MEMBER COLLINS: You are going to re-create the old 14. MRS. MOORE: Yes. MEMBER COLLINS: What you want us to do is, you want us to waive the merger so that you can free up that stub, and then sell the other half that made it a stub and re-create all of 14. And I thought I was asking that before, and I thought you said no, and I am sorry. MRS. MOORE: I did not understand that as a question. MEMBER COLLINS: Ok. We're all on the same note. MRS. MOORE: I thought you said am I selling it to someone other than the same person who is buying the other half of lot 14. That was my problem. Page 39, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold MEMBER COLLINS: I missed that whole part of the story. I did not see it anywhere in the paperwork, and I'm sorry. MRS. MOORE: No, that's ok. CHAIRMAN: Anybody else that is on the Board that would like to speak to counsel regarding this application. Seeing no hands, we'll be very happy to speak to (Mrs. Russell). MRS. MOORE: Mrs. Russell. What you want to do is, I did go to the Assessors Office and identified all the vacant lots in the area. They are all identical in size. The vacant lots, every time I look at the vacant lots I look to see if the adjacent – if there's a situation if there could be a merger, or could be a merger based on the Assessors record. Some times you don't know until obvious, but as to comparing the Assessors record there is no situation here similarly that would result in a merger of lots. So I have that for you, what I do is I put a little V for vacant and then name of the owner on this tax map. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. MRS. MOORE: Thank you. CHAIRMAN: It looks like little sea gulls flying on it. MRS. MOORE: I know. I'm sorry, some times I use highlighter. CHAIRMAN: As you can see I'm wearing my hat tonight, so that the light doesn't bother me, so that's the purpose of wearing the hat. MRS. MOORE: I thought you were having a bad hair day. CHAIRMAN: I always have a bad hair day, that's not a problem, ok. I mean, probably last time I would not have been able to read it because of the glare from the light. MRS. MOORE: Mrs. Russell just wants to say a few words. CHAIRMAN: We promise not to grill you, Mrs. Russell. MRS. RUSSELL: Excuse me, I have laryngitis. Just one thing other that might be relevant is that the new lot that is on, the old lot, is consistent with every other lot that's on that street. It's about the same size, the way I understand. It's not going to be some weird looking thing stuck in there, you know, too small, or whatever. CHAIRMAN: Now your son is going to build a house on it. Page 40, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold MRS. RUSSELL: Yes. Hopefully. And this may not be relevant but we have been on the North Fork, we have lived in Mattituck for 35 years now, and my son's house in Southold ( ) without being morbid about it, I really wouldn't even ask the Board for anything that I thought would not be appropriate. I mean it's yours to decide. I feel like the North Fork is an extension of my town, I really do, for what that's worth. And it would be wonderful for my son (inaudible) and I don't know the sellers at all, and I haven't even met them. But chances are she needs the money. For what it's worth, thank you. CHAIRMAN: Anybody else to speak on this, yes ma'am? MRS. LINDA TONYES: My name is Linda Tonyes and I live on the lot that's directly to the south of these two lots. And my husband and I went to contract in 1999 to purchase the lot and he also built. So a lot of what I'm going to present you today I researched back in 1999. And I took the liberty of making copies of some of the deeds that I thought were relevant, and if the Board would like to see them I will pass them out. CHAIRMAN: Sure. (Copies handed to Chairman.) MRS. TONYES. On the first deed, I think it's Mrs. Adjemian and Elisa Yerganian. They purchased Lot 15. That was from the original subdivision map. I think it's roughly 110 feet wide. They don't give any metes and bounds on the old deeds. And you'll see that 1969, the second deed, they only purchased half of Lot 14. That's the half that's abutting 15. The third deed is in 1970, they created a 155 ft. wide lot and they built a house on it. They owned it for two years now, it's 1972. Then they go back and they buy the other half of the lot. So at no time did they ever own two separate 110 ft. lots. So I think if the Board is going to consider an unmerger, you can really only unmerge to 165 and 55 for ( ) brother, than giving them something they never had to begin with. And the reason, like I said I did a lot of this research in 1999. My husband and I went into contract for Lot 13 and I looked on the Suffolk County Tax Map and saw this old 55 ft. strip, and I was a little intrigued by it, so I had gone to the tax office, and I had gone and gotten copies of everything and I did a lot of this research. And in my head, it looked to me as if they had created a buffer between the lots. They did it one time on my lot which they sold off and they still retained that 55 feet. It's not as if they had intended two 165 lots or anything like that, they still retained that 65 feet. So I was looking at it and my husband was looking at it as if it was a buffer. And, you know, my husband and I when we went into contract, we relied on that buffer there. We could have bought a bigger lot in East Marion, had a little more space, probably paid less taxes, but we didn't do that. We liked the area, we liked the buffer, and that's about it. I just think it's inappropriate now to give them two 110 ft. lots when that is not what they had. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Yes, ma'am. MRS. RUSSELL: Actually there was a mistake on the deed of 19__. Some of that is right. Page 41, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold MRS. MOORE: Yes, I'll explain that. There had been some kind of an error, a typographic error in one of the deeds going from Yerganian to Karavis. Yerganian to Karavis has a notation on a lot, half a lot, where the description was actually of the lot in the subdivision which Tonyes ended up purchasing, through the chambers. That error carried over and in fact, when we discovered it, we said, "hey, what is this. There is a discrepancy in the description" and we contracted Karavis and said, "Mr. Karavis, you know, what's the story," and he's like, you know, intentionally what we ended up doing is, Mr. Karavis is doing a correction deed because in the description that he had in his deed has a discrepancy between the lot on the filed map and the actual metes and bounds description that is in the actual portion that was sold. While Mr. Karavis hasn't paid the taxes, Mr. Adjemian had been paying the taxes on 23.2. It's still remained as in the Karavis deed, it's been shown in his chain of title. And discovered that and said this is a problem, our title company wants us to clean this up, and we're doing it as a correction deed. And Mr. Karavis is cooperating with that, and that's all being done and recorded simultaneously at the closing. So, there is no buffer here. It is the 23.2, Tonyes bought 23.1. Metes and bounds from Schembri. Schembri bought from Karavis a metes and bounds lot. 23.2 the description always was Adjemian, but somehow or another got misidentified into Karavis because Adjemian sold to Karavis, and that mistake, that typo clearly was not intended, but we ended up having to clean it up at this time. So there is no, no intention for a buffer. 23.2, that's intended at this point, it's certainly intended to be added part of 40.1 to create a normal size lot. 23.2 as a lot is sufficient, so we're trying to make everything conforming and we are correcting some discrepancies in the lot. I'm not sure that why she noticed – MRS. TONYES: I have the deed that Adjemian gave to Karavis, and in the preamble it does say half of Lot 14, all of Lot 13. CHAIRMAN: Use the mike, would you please dear. MRS. TONYES: All right, it does say in the preamble. I didn't make copies because I really didn't think this was relevant. They meted and bounded out my lot to Karavis. Karavis meted and bounded out my lot to Schembri, who then meted and bounded it out to me. Ok. The fact still remains they still only bought that half of a lot in 1972. And they never intended to convey it, I understand that. I have no claim on this property and I'm not saying I have a claim on the property. And they never intended to convey it. They intended to keep that 55 feet. They never intended to have it as a 110 ft. lot. CHAIRMAN: It's a very interesting point though. The point is that if that lot was recognized, you could end up with a house on that 55 ft. lot. MEMBER DINIZIO: That's exactly what I was going to say. MRS. TONYES: Yes, that's why I'm here. MRS. MOORE: But we're not trying to recognize that. I won't say that, that is incorrect. We're not trying to build on the 55 ft. lot. Page 42, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold MRS. TONYES: I understand. You're trying to – MEMBER COLLINS: Let's address the Board please. CHAIRMAN: Address the Board, would you? MRS. MOORE: I'm sorry. Adjemian owned the three – owned your parcel originally as well. MRS. TONYES: I understand that. MRS. MOORE: Ok, so they pieced it away. So whatever reason they took title screwy and it's 23.2 got created, and since everyone passed away at this point except Louise Adjemian, you know – MRS. TONYES: I understand by virtue of the merger. What the Town did was they merged the 165 ft. wide lot with a 55 ft. wide lot, and now the application is asking for the Town to unmerge it into two 110 ft. lots. CHAIRMAN: No. MEMBER COLLINS: No. MEMBER DINIZIO: Yes. MRS. MOORE: Yes. MEMBER COLLINS: This is the problem that I was having. MRS. TONYES: That's what they are asking for, I don't believe that's appropriate because that's not what they had. They're asking you to ignore what they did in the 70s. MEMBER DINIZIO: Let me ask you this question, and I understand what you are saying. Would you prefer a 25 ft. ranch sitting next to your house, or would you prefer a – I know your house, I walk by it every morning at 5:30, ok. And Karavis' dog comes out and barks at me every day. You will probably hear me coming. Would you prefer a 25 ft. house, this is probably what you would end up with. MRS. TONYES: Will a house be built on that 55 ft. lot without a variance or special exception? MEMBER TORTORA: Right now. CHAIRMAN: It can be done. Page 43, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold MEMBER DINIZIO: It can be built. Yes. SECRETARY: Well they would probably need to come back and apply for a variance. MEMBER DINIZIO: No, 55 is not merged. MEMBER TORTORA: It may not have to get a variance, but right now to answer your question. Yes, it's a legal lot. MEMBER COLLINS: Excuse me, which lot are we talking about? 23.2. CHAIRMAN: The 55 ft. lot. MEMBER COLLINS: 23.2. MEMBER TORTORA: Yes. MEMBER COLLINS: The whole application here is to unmerge 23.2 from 40.1. That's the whole issue. SECRETARY: Yes. That's the issue before the Board. CHAIRMAN: It stills needs a merger waiver. Or waiver of merger. MEMBER COLLINS: Can I respond to something Mrs. Tonyes said. What the applicants are asking us to do is to waive the merger of that little lot from the bigger lot. What the parties and were we to do it, the house that Mr. Dinizio was describing could be built – a little house – what the parties are separately doing, which I didn't get on to, is they are separately agreeing to buy back the other half of old Lot 14 creating a regulation size lot. It's a two-part deal. The Town is involved only in the question of the merger. The Town has nothing to do with whether this Mrs. Adjemian sells the old half of 14 to Mrs. Russell's son. And you were saying the Town is going to do this, the Town is going to create a 110—No. The Town is being asked, the Zoning Board of Appeals is being asked to waive the merger. I would go on and say though in all fairness that if we were purely being asked to waive the merger, and to legitimize that little lot, we'd have very serious doubts about doing it because it would be inconsistent with the neighborhood. But the merger we are being asked to waive will result in a lot that is consistent with the neighborhood. MRS. MOORE: Exactly conforming. Right. MEMBER COLLINS: In that sense they interrelate. But the Town has nothing to do directly with the creation of a lot upon which Mrs. Russell's son is going to build. MEMBER HORNING: Lora, could we put a stipulation if we were to agree to unmerge that in fact the proposed purchase did go through also that the proposed – Page 44, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold MEMBER COLLINS: Oh, sure. MRS. MOORE: We have to develop this in this way. God forbid your son doesn't get whatever funding or whatever he needs, and this particular deal, I hope not – we are under a contract – we have all under the assumption that this will follow through but you th know, we did not expect the September 11 and I had several deals that ended up. MEMBER TORTORA: We would have to create some kind of condition. MRS. MOORE: Yes, you can say it can only – it will return to its original – because that's what we're asking, that it be returned to its original lot sizes on the filed map, Lot 14 and 15 on the filed map. And that's the way it should be developed, absolutely. That's what they want. MEMBER HORNING: In other words, if the son could not buy it, they would sell it to someone else. MRS. MOORE: Absolutely. MEMBER DINIZIO: As Lot 14. MRS. MOORE: As Lot 14, yes. MEMBER DINIZIO: Then I'm a little unclear. I understood this to be a little bit different than what I'm reading. You have Lot 15, to the south of Lot 15 is a half a lot. What is the tax map number of that? MRS. MOORE: 13.2. MEMBER DINIZIO: 13.2. Who owns that? MRS. MOORE: Adjemian. MEMBER DINIZIO: Ok. Then there's another lot, the other half of 14. MRS. MOORE: No, no. I'm sorry. No. Then I misunderstood you. You have 40.1, I had to draw it out. Maybe you have it there, 40.1 is 15 and a half of 14. MEMBER DINIZIO: Right. Ok. 23.2 belongs to who? MRS. MOORE: Adjemian. MEMBER DINIZIO: Now, ok, who owns 15? So it's a separate person? MEMBER COLLINS: Mrs. Adjemian owns (interrupted)- Page 45, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold MRS. MOORE: Mrs. Adjemian owns that piece. MEMBER DINIZIO: She owned all of it. MRS. MOORE: Now she owns it because of death. It used to be Paul and Elise Yerganian and Louise Adjemian. On the half lot it is Louise Adjemian and Elise Yerganian. MEMBER DINIZIO: Then he died. MRS. MOORE: Yes, he died in '99. MEMBER DINIZIO: Then it wasn't just recently, like he's coming in now. MRS. MOORE: There's about 8 months difference. MEMBER DINIZIO: That's the wheels of government. What I was thinking conceivably that our Town, we wouldn't recognize that small lot, just because it was merger by death. I mean, we— MRS. MOORE: Yes, I mean they were separate. MEMBER DINIZIO: Not by death. Well I figured it's fairly unique and I could see a small house going there. I'd be tempted to buy one there myself. CHAIRMAN: Some how I think that's a conflict (jokingly). I'm sorry, Jim, I couldn't resist that. MEMBER DINZIO: I already have a house in the area. MRS. MOORE: Any way. We don't have any problem with that condition and certainly it's what we want. We don't want to build on 23.2. It's not a reasonable size. MEMBER DINIZIO: So the condition is you can sell it only as Lot 14. Right? MRS. MOORE: Only as to Lot 14 and 15 as described on the filed map. MEMBER COLLINS: We can come up with the language. MRS. MOORE: You come up with your language, whatever you like. MEMBER DINIZIO: What about this lady. She is still opposed. CHAIRMAN: You are still opposed? Page 46, December 13, 2001 Transcript of ZBA Public Hearings Town of Southold MRS. TONYES: Nodded yes. MRS. MOORE: Yes, ok. CHAIRMAN: We recognize your opposition. MRS. TONYES: Thank you. MRS. MOORE: So noted. CHAIRMAN: Any body else like to speak? Seeing no hands, I'll make a motion closing the hearing and reserving decision until later. End of hearings. SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION. Prepared by Paula Quintieri