The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About31335-Z FORM NO.4 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT Office of the Building Inspector Town Hall Southold, N.Y. CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY No: Z-32580 Date: 09/05/07 THIS CERTIFIES that the building INGROUND SWIMMING POOL Location of Property: 250 PINE (HOUSE NO.) County Tax Map No. 473889 Section 98 TREE CT (STREET) Block L- CUTCHOGUE (HAMLET) Lot 7.11 Subdivision Filed Map No. Lot No. conforms substantially to the Application for Building Permit heretofore filed in this office dated JULY 28, 20.05 pursuant to which Building Permit No. 31335-Z dated AUGUST 5, 2005 was issued, and conforms to all of the requirements of the applicable provisions of the law. The occupancy for which this certificate is issued is ACCESSORY INGROUND SWIMMING POOL WITH FENCE TO CODE IN THE FRONT YARD AS APPLIED FOR & AS PER CONDITIONS OF ZBA #5340 DATED 02/12/04. The certificate is issued to JOSEPH GULMI & SUSAN BRAVER (OWNER) of the aforesaid building. SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH APPROVAL N/A ELECTRICAL CERTIFICATE NO. 7751 07/24/07 PLUMBERS CERTIFICATION DATED N/A 4:z::e~ Rev. 1/81 7310/- );(d-..1 , ,~~- ~....~ n 'I!J rTS: APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY Form No.6 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN HALL 765-1802 This applicatiOn must be filled in by typewnter or ink and submitted to the Building Department with the following: A. For new building or new use: I. Final survey of property with accurate location of all buildings, property lines, streets, and unusual natural or topographic features. 2. Final Approval from Health Dept. of water supply and sewerage-disposal (S-9 form). 3. Approval of elechical installation from Board of Fire Underwriters. 4. Swom statement from plumber certifying that the solder used in system contains less than 2/10 of 1% lead. 5. Commercial building, induslIial building, multiple residences and similar buildings and installations, a certificate of Code Compliance from architect or engineer responsible for the building. 6. Submit Plamling Board Approval of completed site plan requirements. B. For existing buildings (prior to April 9, 1957) non-conforming uses, or buildings and "pre-existing" land uses: I. Accurate survey of property showing all property lines, streets, building and unusual natural or topographic features. 2. A properly completed application and consent to inspect signed by the applicant. If a Certificate of Occupancy is denied; the Building Inspector shall state the reasons therefor in writing to the applicant. C. Fees I. Certificate of Occupancy ~ New dwelling $25.00, Additions to dwelling $25.00, Alterations to dwelling $25.00, Swirruning pool $25.00, Accessory building $25.00, Additions to accessory building $25.00, Businesses $50.00. 2. Certificate of Occupancy on Pre-existing Building - $100.00 3. Copy of Certificate of Occupancy - $.25 4. Updated Certificate of Occupancy - $50.00 5. Temporary Celilficate ofOccllpancy - Residential $15.00, CommercIal $1500 f Date.Jj ~~sr doO~ New Construction: VeW Old or Pre-existing Building: Location ofPropeliy o._~ ?'()CC/f7FF C-t. House No. Street Owner or Owncrs of Propeliy: ~;,_.) llb\2.0-.\)f 'R Oq~ Suffolk County Tax Map No 1000, Section_ ( chcck one) CA.~d,-o~\^ f Hamlet '- \o::'e:' ~ H C'M.1\. I tJJ\ Block 000 I (lq3~ LotflOl. <..) II Subdivision Filed Map. Lot:~_ Date of Permit. SAudN()05ApPlicant:~S,CH\ W[A.'U(::-~s,e~l~ ~1.fJ\1 ____.__ Underwriters Approval: _..-. ~________ PennitNo. ?Jlj~S- Health Dept. Approval: Planning Board Approval: Fee Submitted $ Request for: Temporary Ccrtificate ___._______ Final Certificate: _ ~. 7,OO~ C~-c3)5'8'O FORM NO. 3 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT Town Hall Southold, N.Y. BUILDING PERMIT (THIS PERMIT MUST BE KEPT ON THE PREMISES UNTIL FULL COMPLETION OF THE WORK AUTHORIZED) PERMIT NO. 31335 Z Date AUGUST 5, 2005 permission is hereby granted to: JOSEPH GULMI 250 PINE TREE CT CUTCHOGUE,NY 11935 for "AS BUILT" INGROUND SWIMMING POOL IN THE FRONT YARD AS APPLIED FOR PER ZBA DECISION #5340 at premises located at 250 PINE TREE CT CUTCHOGUE County Tax Map No. 473889 Section 098 Block 0001 Lot No. 007.011 pursuant to application dated JULY 28, 2005 and approved by the Building Inspector to expire on FEBRUARY 5, 2007. Fee $ 300.00 L~ Aut orized Signature I ORIGINAL Rev. 5/8/02 Nassau Suffolk Electrical Inspections, Inc. P.O.Box 549 . Aquebogue, New York 11931 · Tel: 631-591"3097 · Fax: 631-$91-3098 Application: 7751 Date:7/24/07 Issued to: B~aver/Gulmi Address:250 Pine Ct "'N 0.'1', License#:2270-E Village: Cutchogue was examined and approved up to the above date and was in compliance with the NEC New I-bre 1st Floor lEI 2nd floor ResidenlicilEl Carrreltial R:ld Hd: Tub Del Gaage PdciIia1 Bos: lien! Switches Receptacles Fix.tures G.F.1. Range Hood Smoke Detectors 2 4 Fans Dishwasher Washer/Amps Dryer/Amps Oven Insta hot Range/Amps 1 Furnace Oil Gas Heat Zones Whirlpool Bell Transformers Meter Amps Phase Motors 3 Other Equipment: 1-Electric Pool Cover ut,Res ~~5~Vzo_&. . . ~ This certificate must not be altered ill any manner " Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 Tel. (631) 765-1809 Fax (631) 765-9064 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman Gerard P. Goehringer Lydia A. Tortora Vincent Orlando James Dinizio, Jr. htlp:/ /sou tholdtown.northfork. net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF FEBRUARY 12, 2004 Appl. No. 5340 - JOSEPH GULMI and SUSAN BRAVER GUlMI Property location: 250 Pine Tree Court, Cutchogue; Parcel 98-1-7.11. SEQRA DETERMINATION: The Zoning Board of Appeals has visited the property under consideration in this application and determines that this review falls under the Type II category of the State's List of Actions, without an adverse effect on the environment if the project is implemented as planned. PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: The applicants' 1.1324 acre parcel is situated at the end of Pine Tree Court in Cutchogue, with frontage along a 50-ft. wide right-of-way along the northerly and westerly lot lines. The property is improved with a one-story frame house with attached garage and deck areas, and a small shed structure, as shown on the December 20, 1989 survey prepared by Peconic Surveyors, P.C., amended March 7, 2001. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Building Department's March 4, 2003 Notice of Disapproval, citing Section 100-33 in its denial of a building permit application concerning a proposed accessory swimming pool, garage, and shed in a yard other than the code-required rear yard. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on July 24, 2003, October 9, 2003, and January 22, 2004, at which time written and oral evidence were presented. Based upon all testimony, documentation, personal inspection of the property, and other evidence, the Zoning Board finds the following facts to be true and relevant: AREA VARIANCE RELIEF REQUESTED: Applicants wish to construct accessory structures in the front yard area with setbacks as follows: (a) an in-ground swimming pool structure at a minimum of 30 feet from the northerly and westerly front lot lines; (b) an accessory frame garage and cabana structure at a minimum of 40'9" from the northerly front lot line and minimum of 53 feet from the westerly front lot line. The original locations were shown on hand-drawn alterations of the December 20, 1986, amended March 7, 2001 by Peconic Surveyors & Engineers, P.C. The setback on the initial hand-drawn sketch requested front yard setbacks at 25 feet. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:AMENDED RELIEF: On November 20, 2003, the applicants submitted a plot plan and elevation plan as requested by the Board prepared by John Macleod Riba, Inc. dated November 16, 2003. Page ~ - February 12, 2004 Appl. No. 5430 - J. Gulmi and S. Braver CTM 98-1-7.11 at Cutchogue REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: On the basis of testimony presented, materials submitted and personal inspections, the Board makes the following findings: 1. Grant of the relief requested will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The applicants indicate that they want to use to cabana and garage with installation of both water and electricity for their own private use related to the new pool, but not for habitable or sleeping. Several of the lots in the area are improved with accessory buildings in the front yard areas. 2. The benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance. There is limited rear yard available to place accessory buildings because the house is situated closer to the southeasterly corner section of the property, leaving two very large front yard areas and a large side yard area, also requiring relief from the code restrictions. 3. The variance granted herein is substantial. The accessory buildings are located entirely in a front yard area instead of the code-required rear yard, and the property is adjacent to wetlands on the easterly border. 4. The difficulty was self-created when the lot was created from a much larger parcel of property, resulting in two front yards, and the house became situated closer to the south/easterly border of the property. 5. No evidence has been submitted to suggest that a variance in this waterfront community will have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood. 6. Grant of the relief is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of accessory structures, while preserving and protecting the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community. RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD: In considering all of the above factors and applying the balancing test under New York Town law 267-B, motion was offered by Member Orlando, seconded by Member Tortora, and duly carried, to GRANT the variance as applied for, as shown on the John Macleod Riba, Inc. dated November 16, 2003, and SUBJECT TO THE FOllOWING CONDITIONS: 1. Only the utilities of water and electric will be permitted in the garage and cabana shed. 2. The pool shall remain open to the sky (not be enclosed or rOOfed). . 'Page "3" - February 12, 2004 Appl. No. 5430 - J. Gulmi and S. Braver CTM 98-1-7.11 at Cutchogue 3. The buildings and structures shall not be rented separately from the home. 4. No heat is permitted, and no living or sleeping is permitted in the accessory buildings. This action does not authorize or condone any current or future use, setback or other feature of the subject property that may violate the Zoning Code, other than such uses, setbacks and other features as are expressly addressed in this action. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Oliva (Chairwoman), Orlando, Tortora, and Dinizio. Absent was Member Goehringer. This Resolution ~ulY adopted (4-0). _ ~ LtiI. ) f.J C\J~ AA. n, Ruth D. Oliva. Chairwoman 2//1/04 Approved for Filing July 19.2007 . TOWN OF SOU'lllOlD Building DepllIUDeJlt Aneotion: George Gillen ~: Building Pennit 3l335Z Dear Mr. Oillen: The following summarizes my discussion and testimony before the Zoning Boanl of Appeals at public hearings on Man:!) 29 and April 26. 2007. in connection with the su~ect of me plant material we would install along.our property's west/northwest front property line bordering the unpaved right of way. in front of the fencing. We will incoi-porate the existing indigenous plants (predominately Oak trees) into the landscape. The new plantings we will install inclnde. among others: . Thuja Plicata (Oemson Tiger Arboruitae) . Carolina Rhododendron · Leucothoe · Pieris Japonica (andromeda) · Hydrangea The plants we chose are all tolenmt of the sun exposure in the area in question and are intended to compliment the existing ~ve plants and landsca . The plants will be grouped or massed when planted to maximiz the landscape des' cc: Zoning BoaJd of Appeals 1,-" - 'l L~ JP.,- ~ n w [~ IL~~~~6 , tkD~_ DEPT. \___I(\~~NN OF .sl""\t'THO'_~) ; . Apf>EALS BOARD MEMBERS James Dinizio. Jr.. Chairman Gerard P. Goehringer Ruth D. Oliva Michael A. Simon Leslie Kanes Weisman . . MaiJin~ Address: Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road' P.O. Box 1179 Southold. NY 11971-0959 Office Location: Town Annex IFirst floor. North Fork Bank 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) Southold. NY 11971 hllp:/Isoutholdtown.northfork.net ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809' Fax (631) 765.9064 RE(lIVET 4-' - ~ d.a"r-"'. YAY 3 0 'JIXfl ~llnu~L soii1iOidlownCicFk"" FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF MAY 1 0, 2007 ZB File No. 5994 - Joseph Gulmi and Susan Braver Property Location: 250 Pine Tree Court, Cutchogue CTM 98-1-7.11 SEQRA DETERMINATION: The Zoning Board of Appeals has visited the property under consideration in this application and determines that this review falls under the Type II category of the State's List of Actions, without further steps under SEQRA. PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: The applicants' 1.1324 acre parcel is situated at the end of Pine Tree Court in Cutchogue, with frontage along a 50-fl. wide right-of-way along the northerly and westerly lot lines. The property is improved with a single-story frame house with attached garage and deck areas, and a small shed structure, as shown on the December 20, 1986 survey, updated December 19, 2006 by Peconic Surveyors, P.C. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Request for Variances under Sections 280-13 (formerly 100-33) and 280-105, based on the Building Inspector's December 11, 2006 Notice of Disapproval concerning an as-built swimming pool in a location other than the code-required rear yard and fence height exceeding the code height limitation of four feet. SUFFOLK COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE CODE: This application has been referred as required under the Suffolk County Administrative Code Sections A 14-14 to 23, and the Suffolk County Department of Planning reply dated January 9, 2007 states that the application is considered a matter for local determination as there appears to be no significant county-wide or inter-community impact. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on March 29, 2007 and April 26, 2007, at which time written and oral evidence were presented. Based upon all testimony, documentation, personal inspection of the property, and other evidence, the Zoning Board finds the following facts to be true and relevant: AREA VARIANCE RELIEF REQUESTED: The area variances requested are related to the setback of the as-built swimming pool and the height of the as-built fence. The six ft. high fences are 176+/- total linear feet along both street boundaries shown on the survey last-updated December 19, 2006 by John T. Metzger, and the remaining portions at the driveway and pool (front yard areas). Page2-May10.2007 .- ZEt File No. 5994 - Joseph Gulmi. _n Braver CTM No. 98-1-7.11 . REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: On the basis of testimony presented, materials submitted and personal inspections, the Board makes the following findings: 1. Grant of the variance will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties if the fence and pool are properly screened. The grant of this variance will permit an increase in the height of the fence to a point where the fence height level is permitted for the greater part of the total fence. The fence itself consists of posts narrower than the distance between them. The pool is situated at an angle to the west front lot, and is situated well within the fence. The pool setback request pertains to one comer of the as-built pool, as it relates to the open (pending) building permit with variance conditions attached. 2. The benefit of keeping the deer away from the pool and the vegetation surrounding it cannot be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance. 3. The variances granted herein are not substantial. 4. The difficulty was not self-created but is a consequence of the shape of the property and the attractiveness of the premises to many deer. Evidence was presented that a six-foot high fence is significantly more of a barrier for wild deer than the code-required four feet. 5. No evidence has been submitted to suggest that a variance in this residential community will have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood. Testimony from a neighbor indicated that any objections he has will be satisfied by the applicants' providing sufficient screening of the pool and specific areas of the fence. 6. Grant of the requested relief is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of a new swimming pool and protection from wild deer, while preserving and protecting the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community. RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD: In considering all of the above factors and applying the balancing test under New York Town Law 267-B, motion was offered by Member Simon, seconded by Member Oliva, and duly carried, to GRANT the variances as applied for, as shown on the survey prepared by John T. Metzger, on December 20, 1986, last updated on December 19, 2006, subject to the following conditions: That the applicants provide adequate plantings related to screening of the fence and pool) as described in applicant's testimony during the April 26, 2007 public hearing, and That the plantings be continuously maintained. That these ZBA conditions be written into the Building Inspector's Certificate of Occupancy, when issued. . P311a3-May10.2007 . ZEt Fila No. 5994 - Joseph Gulmi, an Braver CTM No. 98-1.7.11 . Any deviation from the variance given such as extensions, or demolttions which are not shown on the applicanfs diagrams or survey site maps, are not authorized under this application when involving nonconformitles under the zoning code. This action does not authorize or condone any current or future use, setback or other feature of the subject property that may violate the Zoning Code, other than such uses, setbacks and other features as are expressly addressed in this action. The Board reserves the right to substitute a similar design that is de minimis in nature for an alteration that does not increasa the degree of nonconformity. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Oini io (Chairman) . a, Goehringer, Simon, and Weisman. This Resolution was duly adopted {5-0 . RECEIVED +~ ~:a'lp..". ~t2 2007 . - -........'d TO~ eo ~50 PINE' TREE CT. CU'fCHOGUE. N. Y. . . .'" , PROPERTY' .. co 00 ; ~\, . f\\l ' g\\ Ie-- c.. ri q" ~-\ ,0 '6 s~;~. {' (" ,'., .f ","~ ,<; ;. ,,)" ,.. \~s II () \" ,~ ?J.~r. ~.6 I '? '" o ~ N ~ .\!!. ",/ /./ /'" , ~\). '\~(,(, srI:: '~(?~'I ,:. ?~~\v ! , \ '-- _u C ~ '\-\'" I I . -/< '- , I ... <# .... ~I "20.1 " ~ COV.:n?' ~rONf: SfOO.;.s . /1 $.R.F. . ....."bf N rR.~';1 . 850 42' st", '. "', 50" w: 2 N/ O/F :: lJlZ n' :r.~ ~r ~~ o ~/ ~JfI" . ~J '" JOSEPH E. GL ~\'Ji~ v,rAt! . 'f/) ~~~~v~ 1 HJALMAR B l . ~ FJ.,OOD lONES FROMFlJRM ., MAF;# 36103{;0I64 G MA.Y 4, /998 . ."" .~ . , CONTOUR LINES ARE. REFERENCED TO NGVD l . APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS James Dinizio, Jr., Chairman Gerard P Goehringer Ruth D. Oliva Michael A. Simon Leslie Kanes Weisman http://southoldtown.northfork.net ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809. Fax (631) 765-9064 MEMO TO: Building Department Attn: Building Inspector George Gillen ZBA Office (it July 24, 2007 Inquiry - Gulmi Proposed Screening FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Mailin~ Address: Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road. PO. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 Office Location: Town Annex fFirs! Floor, North Fork Bank 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) Southold, NY 11971 Supplementing the copies, as requested, and previously furnished from ZBA File #5994, please find attached a copy of the court reporter transcript of discussions concerning the screening of the fence areas being proposed by Mr. and Mrs. Gulmi during the April 26, 2007 public hearing, for your information. Thank you. ~~ o. ~~ - D \'~~~;h ~ ) 1 Draft hearing April 26, 2007, Gulmi and Braver. 2 3 CHAIRMAN DINIZIO: This is a request for 4 variance under Zoning Code Section 280-105, based 5 on the Building Inspector's December 11, 2006 6 Notice of Disapproval concerning an as-built fence 7 exceeding the code limitation of four feet in 8 height when located in or along a front yard area, 9 and under former section 133 (now 280-15) for 10 relief from condition under ZBA number 5340 11 concerning the location of an as-built swimming 12 pool at less than 30 feet from the front lot 13 line. Location of the property: 250 Pine Tree 14 Court, Cutchogue. 15 Is there anybody here representing this 16 application? Yes, sir, can you state your name 17 and address? 18 MR. GULMI: Joseph Gulmi, 250 Pine Tree 19 Court in Cutchogue. 20 CHAIRMAN DINIZIO: Michael, is this yours? 21 It's a carryover hearing. 22 BOARD MEMBER SIMON: Briefly, since we 23 have already had sessions on this hearing before 24 now, we don't have to go over every1hing. The 25 notice of disapproval has to do with the as-buiit 1 2 fence, which exceeds the code limitation. We have 3 heard testimony regarding the need for that 4 exception and the deer and the leaping of the 5 fence and consideration of that. So I assume what 6 we are hearing today is further discussion of that 7 particular issue. 8 BOARD MEMBER WEISMAN: Well the neighbor 9 had something, and we wanted to give them an 10 opportunity. 11 BOARD MEMBER SIMON: From the applicant 12 and from the neighbors. 13 MR. GULMI: At the conclusion of the last 14 hearing, Mr. Simon, you asked if I could obtain 15 evidence of the deer population in our area. I 16 went ahead and tried to do that. I would like to 17 supplement the record that was developed at the 18 last hearing with photographs. May I approach? 19 These are photographs of the deer tracks 20 throughout the property. All of them are in the 21 front of the house and in the proximity of the 22 driveway and the pool area. Some are in the back 23 as well, but on the side of the house. I also, as 24 evidence of the deer population took photographs of 25 the various plant material that we have growing on 2 the property. The deer seem to really enjoy the 3 rhododendron. They have eaten just about 4 everything outside the pool area. All of that is 5 really circumstantial as to the size of the 6 population, but I believe you, Members of the 7 Board, actually visited the property and are aware 8 of how many deer frequent the area. We are right 9 next to the wetlands. 10 In furtherance of our application for a 11 variance we also are going to address again the 12 height of the fence, which is a six foot high 13 fence, both cedar spindle and it joins a black 14 chain link fence. What I did with the original 15 application, I made photographs of the fencing 16 from the right of way which is the area our 17 neighbors would see it from. There are three 18 photographs of the three photographs of the 19 spindle fence, the cedar spindle fence, which are 20 all shot along the right of way, the west side, 21 I'm sorry, there are four, and what I'd like to 22 call the members' of the board's attention to the 23 fact that I left in along that right of way the 24 oak trees that were growing in the area. You'll 25 notice that all of the oak trees that are growing , ' 1 2 in the area, their lower branch structure is 3 several feet below the top of the height of the 4 spindled fence. When these plants are in leaf, 5 the top of the fence is not visible, certainly not 6 visibie driving in a car riding by or standing out 7 on the right of way. My intention was to further 8 landscape the area at the time the fence was 9 completed was the latter part of the summer. I do 10 not intend on screening the fence with evergreens, 11 although I will use some of them selectively. I'd 12 like to give you now photographs of the property 13 opposite my property along the right of way where 14 there are the indigenous cedar. And what one can 15 observe in iooking at those photographs is that 16 the cedar have a tendency when they're in the 17 shade to die out on the bottom, so essentially, 18 I'd be planting an evergreen which would get 19 higher and higher, but wouldn't effectively screen 20 the fence. What my intentions are are to plant, 21 if I can find it, an evergreen that the deer don't 22 seem to like, I understand and know thatlicotia's 23 one of those plants; however, on my property they 24 eat it all the time. Andromeda is another; they 25 also seem to enjoy that. I intended on clustering 2 it. I don't think that I need to screen the 3 entire fence, but I do intend on front planting 4 it. At the last hearing -- let me just aiso hand 5 you a photograph of the northwest corner of the 6 right of way where there are indigenous, I think 7 Russian olives. Although I understand that this 8 is not an excuse or a justification to having a 9 fence that's six foot high, I did look at the 10 surrounding community in which there are a number 11 of fences right here on Pine Tree Road, which is 12 even with the front of the house. I understand 13 that that's different than my property. It shows 14 a six foot stockade or privacy fence. Here's one 15 that's five feet that's along I think it's Luken 16 Drive, there's the stockade fence that surrounds 17 I'm not sure what. 18 These applications I understand are dealt 19 with sui generous. So if you take a iook at my 20 property, I'm living on a corner lot. I live off 21 a right of way. I've tried to design the property 22 so that I could maximize its use. That's why we 23 requested a swimming pool which had to be placed 24 in our front yard because I don't seem to have a 25 rear yard. I don't believe that this fence 2 changes the character of the neighborhood. 3 think that the fence is tasteful. I think if it's 4 properly landscaped it's an asset to the area. 5 don't think it detracts from my neighbor's 6 property, and I don't think it detracts from the 7 character of the neighborhood. And it's essential 8 to have a fence at least as high as this one g because I have deer everywhere. They have not 10 gone into the pool area, and we discussed this the 11 last time, since I put the higher fence up. I had 12 a temporary fence around it, which was a four foot 13 vinyl fence during construction, and I had deer in 14 and around the pool on a continual basis. So I 15 think given the circumstances of where my property 16 is located, I don't have much of a choice. A four 17 foot fence is really not a deterrent to deer. I'm 18 not sure that a six foot fence is, but they seem 19 to be lazier. They graze around the pool area all 20 the time, and the tracks that I made photographs 21 of are the surrounding area. They're on the 22 driveway. They walk around the back of the pool. 23 They're in the front of the house all the time. 24 They're constantly looking for food. 25 So I think in order to preserve and 2 protect the property, especially now given the 3 fact that I have a pool there and I have a solar 4 cover which is solid, my concern is that If the 5 deer gets into the property, that it will wind up 6 in the pool, they're not the smartest of all 7 animals. 8 So, I think it's necessary. I don't think 9 that it's excessive. I certainly don't think It 10 changes the character of the area. I do intend on 11 landscaping more in front of the pool. I'd like 12 to do it with plant material that works with what 13 already exists. I left the oak trees there 14 purposely because the branches were lower than the 15 top of the pool so It -- top of the fence so it 16 does obscure it. And I think that the variance 17 should be granted. 18 CHAIRMAN DINIZIO: Anybody on the Board 19 have any questions? 20 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: No. 21 CHAIRMAN DINIZIO: All your questions have 22 been answered? Is there anyone In the audience 23 that would like to comment on this application? 24 MR. WALKER: Peter and Eileen Walker, 75 25 Pine Tree Street. We do find that the fence is 1 2 overpowering, and as far as the immediate area, 3 there are no fences in our immediate area that you 4 can see. I also took pictures and I agree, we do 5 have a deer proolem. I mean, I see could oe 10 or 6 20 at a time in our oackyard. We have a pool, we 7 have a four foot fence, and we have never had any 8 proolem with deer going in there. As far as 9 changing the character of the neighoorhood, you 10 know, when we drove down, I have an aeriai photo 11 oefore this went in (handing). You can see where 12 we drove in. This is where we put the tennis 13 court. This is where we ouffered that 14 (indicating). 15 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Pass that down, 16 please. 17 MR. WALKER: We have never oojected to any 18 of the variance requests that just driving down 19 every day in and out and seeing the fence and the 20 structures oeyond the fence we would have no 21 proolem if they were ouffered, and we did not see 22 it. That's the main reason we oought and ouilt 23 where we did when we did. It was very private. 24 You could hardly see any houses of any of 25 our neighoors and there are no fences that you can 2 see within our immediate area right there, the 3 Pine Tree extension, which is seven houses. 4 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Can I ask you a 5 question Mr. Walker? 6 MR. WALKER: Yes. 7 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Can it be 8 buffered in the original position or the position g it's in now, or would the fence have to be moved 10 back in your opinion? 11 MR. WALKER: I think it could be buffered 12 where it is, and you know, you have, fine the oak 13 trees are there, but the oak trees are deciduous, 14 so more than half of the year we're looking right 15 through it. And we have had no problem with 16 cedars. Or you know, something else, again, if we 17 don't see it, we have no objection to it. 18 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Would it only be 19 on that road area of what we refer to as the road 20 frontage coming in, if the Board was so inclined? 21 MR. WALKER: Pretty much. I've put cedars 22 on the other side and I plan to put more on the 23 other side. But that immediate area where you 24 come in and you look at it, it stands out. 25 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: That's with the 1 2 wood fence? 3 MR. WALKER: Yes. Yeah, I mean it stands 4 out, yeah. Then you're looking through the wood 5 fence and above the wood fence at the structures 6 that were put in. It's not the way it once was, 7 and I don't expect it will be. If we don't look 8 at it, that will be fine. Whatever we have done 9 we've buffered. 10 BOARD MEMBER WEISMAN: Well, your neighbor 11 has testified that his intention is to do that and 12 to mitigate; he probably doesn't want to see 13 through it either to the road? 14 MR. WALKER: I would hope so. 15 BOARD MEMBER WEISMAN: I suspect that you 16 are probably both on the same page in terms of 17 your mutual desires for privacy and screening, and 18 it's a matter of a landscape plan being developed. 19 You clearly understand plant materials; you are 20 familiar with various species and so on, and given 21 the current landscaping that you already have 22 included, I should think it would be tastefully 23 done and done in a way that doesn't have visual 24 impact from the road; is that fair to say? 25 MR. GULMI: It is. I don't want to 1 2 continue to debate this because I think that in 3 the end, Mr. Walker and I are both in the same 4 place. We live in a kind of unique area. We're 5 off the main road, and I think it's both our 6 intentions to enjoy the seclusion that the area 7 creates. But there is a logical inconsistency in 8 the position he's taken. I fuily intend on 9 landscaping by the pool area. But if you had me 10 reduce the height of the fence, you expose more of 11 the cabana and the garage. So a six foot high 12 fence if it's tastefuily iandscaped in front of 13 it, I guess creates the screen. But if I reduce 14 the height of the fence, that just opens up a 15 visual view into the property, which is -- the 16 reason that the fence is six foot high is both 17 aesthetic, and as I said, I'm not sure why the 18 deer don't go into the Walker's pool area, but 19 they're around mine ail the time. I do intend on 20 landscaping it, and I'd be more than happy to work 21 out some solution with regard to that. Not 22 because I needed to be pushed to it I intended to 23 do it in any event. If that's reaily what the 24 concern is, I can address that. 25 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Just so we're 2 close, and I apologize for jumping the gun, my 3 feelings have always been constructively, and this 4 sounds like we have a possible constructive 5 situation here. We are referring to between the 6 right of way and/or the road and the fence. 7 You're talking on the inside of the fencing or 8 your talking on the outside? 9 MR. GULMI: I'm talking about on the 10 outside of the fence. The inside of the fence is 11 right now landscaped. 12 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: I understand 13 that. 14 MR. GULMI: Yes, it's on the road side of 15 the right of way. I guess when they cut the right 16 of way, they created somewhat of a berm. So it 17 would be planting on the road side of the fence 18 along the berm. 19 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Now the next 20 issue is that of some sort of a drip system to 21 aiiow that to be -- or would you irrigate that? 22 MR. GULMI: I aiready have put -- because 23 my intention has always been to landscape that 24 area, I have already put the sprinkler heads or 25 line out there. I think the fence went in some 2 time, it was in the summer, the plant material 3 that I wanted wasn't available, and I didn't like 4 what was available. 5 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Let's then 6 discuss what you think the time constraint would 7 be to put this in or a timeline. 8 MR. GULMI: Well, now is the time. I have 9 already put some plant material, so it would be 10 this spring that I could get the plant material 11 that I want, and I should get it in the ground 12 within the next month, maybe five weeks, I don't 13 think it would be more than that. 14 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: And necessary, 15 not that this is not a court of law, but in a very 16 diplomatic manner in a way I'm presenting this, 17 but I know you both are gentleman, so it wouldn't 18 make any difference if there were two ladies 19 standing in the same situation, it's the same 20 situation, okay. 21 MR. GULMI: Okay. 22 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Could we expect 23 that you could give us some specifications of the 24 type of plant that you would be putting there so 25 we might couch that in the decision? 1 2 MR. GULMI: What I intended on doing I 3 would prefer for the most part to use evergreen 4 and groupings, but the deer eat most of the good 5 stuff, and the plant material that I could put in 6 there that they wouldn't eat would be the pines 7 and spruce, but it's just on the wrong side. It's 8 a western exposure; it's on the other side of the 9 fence. I gave him photographs of my neighbor's 10 property, where you have an indigenous stand of 11 cedars, and they're all dying out from the bottom, 12 which is somewhat what that plant does. I would 13 probably use some Licovey, which is a low growing 14 plant, which would be in the frontal part of the 15 slope. Some holly, which will withstand the shade 16 and the deer don't like. Andromeda, which I 17 bought some three and a half foot andromedas, I'm 18 not suggesting that I'm going to buy six foot high 19 rhododendrons, I was going to use some Leland 20 cypress. 21 BOARD MEMBER OLIVA: Don't buy 22 rhododendrons, they love them. 23 MR. GULMI: Oh, I know, I've got one in 24 the front of the house. Some Leland cypress, 25 which I would I was told the deer don't like. 2 BOARD MEMBER WEISMAN: Deer will eat 3 anything. 4 MR. GULMI: I have some choke cherry that 5 I planted in there. It's a deciduous plant. But 6 I was going to mix some deciduous and evergreen 7 plants. If there are areas that are most 8 offensive to the Walkers as they drive in, and I 9 can appreciate that, the fence in the corner, it 10 does kind of stick out, it is underplanted, but I 11 couid do that. Then I would address that with 12 them. I don't want to start planting spruce 13 plants, spruce trees under the -- 14 BOARD MEMBER WEISMAN: It's not going to 15 grow. 16 MR. GULMI: It's not going to grow but I 17 would put andromeda and evergreen and perhaps 18 Carolina rhododendrons. 19 BOARD MEMBER WEISMAN: Can I summarize 20 this because it's ciear that we can grant a 21 variance for the height of the fence with a 22 condition the landscaping scheme be developed that 23 camouflages the vast majority of that fence 24 seasonaiiy, throughout the season. We don't have 25 to specify the type of plant. 1 2 BOARD MEMBER SIMON: All year round? 3 BOARD MEMBER WEISMAN: All year round, 4 throughout the season, all year round. But they 5 may do it differently during different seasons. 6 BOARD MEMBER SIMON: Four seasons? 7 BOARD MEMBER WEISMAN: Right. That then 8 is up to you to go ahead and deveiop a 9 landscape -- I don't want to delay this any 10 longer, your goal is to make sure you're not 11 confronted with a naked fence all the time. Your 12 goal is to landscape for the same purpose. 13 MR. GUlMI: Exactly. 14 BOARD MEMBER WEISMAN: I think what we 15 need to do is decide whether we want to grant the 16 variance on the height with the condition that 17 that approval be met, that you agree that you will 18 camouflage the fence with a vegetative buffer that 19 will prevent its being visible throughout the 20 various seasons and work it out. 21 BOARD MEMBER SIMON: I'm not sure in 22 writing the opinion that we have to specify what 23 species. 24 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: But can always 25 specify minimal height. 1 2 MR. GULMI: Five foot high rhododendron is 3 a very large rhododendron. Five foot high red 4 cedar is not. So I'd like to use -- the last 5 thing I want to have is a wall in front of the 6 fence, J'd like to be able to cluster in group 7 plants. My idea and thinking was around and among 8 the oak trees, I would plant andromeda because 9 rhododendron the deer would eat, andromeda they 10 don't seem inclined to. I can buy those plants at 11 three and a half feet. I can't tell you that I 12 can buy them at six and seven feet. There are 13 stretches along the fence that are open, and I 14 have no problem putting a juniper or Leland 15 cypress plant there. Because those plants you can 16 get the six feet they're not terribly difficult to 17 locate. The rhododendrons and andromedas and 18 laurel and some of the more the broad-leafed 19 evergreens at six feet are not so easy to come 20 by. The conifers, the arborvitae and is the pines 21 and the Leland cypress, those at six feet, they're 22 pretty available. 23 BOARD MEMBER WEISMAN: Would you be 24 satisfied with that, knowing that any variance we 25 grant will be subject to a visual screening? 1 2 MR. WALKER: Yes, that would be fine, that 3 was our main concern. 4 BOARD MEMBER WEISMAN: And are you 5 satisfied with that? 6 MR. GULMI: I intended on doing that all 7 along. 8 BOARD MEMBER SIMON: So we'll just put it 9 in the document and we don't need to know the 10 list, the wonderful list of species that you gave 11 us. We need to limit it to the size and scope of 12 the project, number one; and we also need to use 13 the phrase "continuously maintained." 14 BOARD MEMBER WEISMAN: Which he's going to 15 do any way. 16 ASST. TOWN ATTY. CORCORAN: But the scope 17 of what you require is really I think the 18 important issue here because we all kind of agree 19 in general, but I think the neighbors are 20 saying -- and I may be wrong -- but we don't want 21 to see the fence at all. And I think the 22 applicant is saying, I will do some clustered 23 landscaping, in various areas, but what I'm ~ 24 hearing is that you're going to see the fencing, 25 but what I intend to do is soften it, camouflage .--- -- 1 2 the scale of it, but you will see landscaping and 3 fence. So, the Board's got to be clear what it's - 4 going to ask the applicant to do because at the 5 end of the day, the neighbors may still be unhappy 6 with that, not that that will rule your decision, 7 but I think we don't want to all walk away 8 thinking we all agree when we don't. 9 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: I understand 10 that, that's the reason we need to have a review 11 by the Board after most of the screening is done, 12 and we may need to have a further enhancement of 13 it. Secondiy, and again in a very diplomatic - 14 manner because we have definitely dealt with the 15 Walkers before, they have been before this Board 16 and there may be a little patience invoived here 17 in reference to the growing of these things to the 18 maximum height of the fence, just so you're aware 19 of that situation, and I think that's what I'm 20 reading in this particular case. And I'm just 21 throwing that out. 22 MR. WALKER: Maybe the solution wouid be 23 also if the fence were a continuous chain link and 24 light would be coming through and plantings would 25 be coming through and plantings could come on, 2 without worrying about anything, that's a 3 possibility also. 4 MR. GULMI: That's about $11 ,000 in cedar 5 fence that I've put up there and the idea that it 6 would be acceptable if it's black chain link fence 7 versus the cedar spindle fence, but if that's what 8 the Board is going to rule, I have no intention of 9 taking away the cedar fence, I'd rather lower it 10 to four feet, and then the landscaping would be 11 whatever it is. I am prepared to make 12 concessions, but there's only so far that I'm 13 prepared to go. I am not prepared to take that 14 fence down and put up a black chain link fence 15 because someone else thinks thaI's not as 16 offensive. To me the black chain link fence is 17 totally utilitarian in an area it wouldn't be 18 seen, but I have no intention of surrounding my 19 pool with it. So, I have every intention of 20 landscaping it; I have good taste; I have a design 21 eye; I know what I'm doing when it comes to the 22 planting, but if that's not acceptable, then make 23 your ruling and I'll deal with it. A four foot 24 fence will only expose more of the property, and I 25 would be disinclined to landscape it. , 2 CHAIRMAN DINIZIO: Okay, did you have 3 something else to add to this Kieran? 4 ASST. TOWN ATTY. CORCORAN: I don't think 5 so. I think the point that the applicant was 6 making was that, you know, if I decide I'd rather 7 go with the route of a four foot fence, I don't 8 have to landscape anything. 9 CHAIRMAN DINIZIO: Oh, and I thought there 10 was something about the pool and we would need to 11 be to be unanimous about that? 12 BOARD MEMBER WEISMAN: There was a 13 variance on that. 14 ASST. TOWN ATTY. CORCORAN: Oh, the pool, 15 thank you. The pool, if you're seeking relief or 16 modification of a prior condition on the pool. 17 this Board just needs to make sure it's 18 unanimous in its vote. 19 CHAIRMAN DINIZIO: We have to consider 20 that. Okay, so is there anybody eise, I mean, you 21 have said what you had to say and you're satisfied 22 with that. Do you have anything more to add to 23 this? 24 MR. WALKER: I have nothing else. 25 CHAIRMAN DINIZIO: Is there anyone else in 1 2 the audience that would like to comment on this 3 application? Hearing none, I would like to make a 4 motion that we close the hearing, and with such 5 time with deliberations on May 10th. 6 BOARD SECY. KOWALSKI: May 10th with a 7 meeting at 6:00 in the other building. 8 (See minutes for resolution.) 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 }/3JS Z-. TOWN OF SOUTH OLD BUILDING DEPT. 765.1802 INSPECTION [ ] FOUNDATION 1 ST [ ] FOUNDATION 2ND [ ] FRAMING I STRAPPING [ ] FIREPLACE & CHIMNEY [ ] FIRE RESISTANT CONSTRUCTION [ ] ROUGH PLBG. [ ] INSULATION MFINAL A: [ ] FIRE SAFETY INSPECTION [ ] FIRE RESISTANT PENETRATION REMARKS: ~~41 L.z.- tJ K, E~ ~. eeAt ~\~, DATE V- - .3 0 - 07 INSPECTOR ~. ~ AfW4 ~ 3frr3:;..Z. 'M.:~ .3/33-> Z- TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPT. 765.1802 INSPECTION ] FOUNDATION 1 ST ] FOUNDATION 2ND ] FRAMING I STRAPPING ] FIREPLACE & CHIMNEY [ ] FIRE RESISTANT CONSTRUCTION REMARKS: f ~ [ ] ROUGH PLBG. [ ] INSULATION ~FINAL [ ] FIRE SAFETY INSPECTION [ ] FIRE RESISTANT PENETRATION ;J~ ~ -AUL :Z-BIf ~ A: ~ 1-~rC~. E~ CM.t~. / ~ DATE 7 -1/---01 INSPECTOR #.~ , , .. FIELD INSPECTION REPORT DATE COMMENTS ~"" i)Tl':l FOUNDATION (1ST) . -- d~ v'\ ;; ---------~~c-------------------- t' :.....e. ~~ . , J:> FOuNDATION (2ND) . .. ..~ O~ ~ . r r . "'\ z 9 'U -- V\CJ> ... ---..-. G ..., :0:; ROUGH FRAMING & l':l . '\) l':l PLUMBING . " ..., - . . G ('0 g ~ :: t"' 0 l':l INSULATION PERN. Y. .. ..., STATE ENERGY CODE ~ ..-..--..- , __.._n_ -----..-----t-.-------- ----..- ...-.--.-.-.---- ,."",':'.-, -.. f7-If-." "7 --;;yjjp 2-BA -r"--I-... - B A j,. V r.p .l\i- l'~'V" ~/./7 ..- ,.--'-.. _._n_.'._ ~ .. , - ~ , . . 9'..-"3n- 7 "'--'.X 11 A . ';A f}f< '.e(7~Yl'\ T , FINAL 77 , Q\ ..i (f (J) ADDITIONAL COMMENTS . r:. ~ - 0 . ~ :E . ~~ I~ . Q..)l':l :>< , "" . .. U\ - , ~ 0 ..., - ...J 0 z ..' .,--- .__._-~---- ~~ --..t"' .-""-------------..-- ':t>~ . '=' - l':l "" ..---..- .. ~ e )OtU-9G'.1-7./1 OWNER ,; ..tal{ .s. RE~1.0 LAND 1:.J.o(} y()~ [+oil> /1'fJlJ SEAS. . TOWN OF SOUTHOLD PROPERTY _CORD CARD -- ...... ..... ~..,J.j VI LLAGE DIST. SUB. LOT 9 Des/!.. :e l...l../C<:." 41-1" W)j .ttrro f'vl. 'RD ... PAR S )./. 7(;1( NL VL. 0 FARM Cure. ED I . !i~tt.,.LltJ _ W l... t.4=t:: .., .<f1'; Cl Tv -I- R. COMM. CB. MICS. /I Mkt. Value IMP. TOTAL 6S"IJF q to tl ~:l06 "illable Voodland r\eadowlond 10use Plot "otal DATE '- 79-1(, 'i ;/'/:'''- SfiJf /./3;( fJ~ ;; LucI ~/w" ;; 1I.!l 'S1c"WICZ tiVI c: ;"0000 FRONTAGE ON WATER FRONTAGE ON ROAD DEPTH BULKHEAD 0' - M~~t. l..Jro~ f- B, ixfe~~h + /(, , , ElItension 9-..> lip c.1< . Po~h P~rch Breezeway .. "., ,,,,,""'" 'i<;~,...... """'" " ' Otal 98-1-7.11 3/04 LdX'!! = 'X ') () 2S"'XlJ;.L2$' /69'7 11. X 2/ :2.5"2- \p't.z.~. ~>o \. .,,_...,~~ ':"'4..\\ ~ ~~ l' ~... JYlll2.:'/(,~ '~S'I.. 7 = /1S- A- '1.5 " 2.0 ~ (\~oe+ '\ 2.J X 1~ :. If ltJ o..;;:\~.~ \~ 'r ;?"l'l t~~) 8'1 It>': \0 t~"') " ,,' :?;:;, s-9.J~ 3> :io . J..s' ~ ,jO Cj z- J '/2.. 'K7 ..Ie. o~ \8be ~~ 'e . I I (', ", I ~-s' ~.j r +/3, I 'L oL ,~"l}'~ 1- " ",,, ~ ,., ~, 5 PR )/a i u ~ Q / lVJ\..1l ' '7-~ ,h -+- : ' F' ,- 10: / J' 'f r~F :/.-<x rl II l..-- +1 ....- ~ '" I,,"P I ' n Foundation c..'/j. Both Basement :Puff Floors Ext. Walls W^^,/ sf... Interior Finish Fire Place ~\ ~wt) Heat Type Roof JI,'.Il Rooms 1st Floor Recreation Room , Rooms 2nd Floor 3~ 7lt;7 I ~ $,,,, Dormer ~~ q~1 \~ltt) Driveway Iri... {,...r" /L /).xJL .... +'" ,,~~-..;lot;' rub TRIM WA/i~ I:- f- 111~ I I" , IJ.: I' l-l ..-~ " Ii" __ ~\ rc:t , ". 'LSI' r-.... ( ,. l.t>.... I ," 2 ~ Dinette 1/ I*l"q~..,...~. K. ../ rj, .fileR LR. PM II. DR. BR. 14 , FIN. B ~ I ":4u~..{ tvv.&q;:" .." / ) ,b~ VAIt..c /8f,(p tj 2.G A/"'J4{'liI14r.fiJj - 10"" .,......;--- , f201 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN HALl; SOUTHOLD, NY 11971 TEL: (631) 765-1802 FAX: (631) 765-9502 www.northfork.net/Southoldl BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION CHECKLIST Do you have or need the following, before applying? .?rl "'fW~Rlth ( ~,s_e~s of Buildin; P~ ~ ~ . Planning Board approval -0 Survey Check Septic Form n-,:t>m - N.Y.S.D.E.C. ",v "'- J Trustees Contact: Mail to: PERMIT NO. ,20~ 20 ----..LJ) /(' ~(. -t~))~'>...1j7 L~ p. Examined Approved Disapproved alc Phone: Expiration ,20~ I~- Building Inspector APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT INSTRUCTIONS .2.5 2aOS,20_ a. This application MUST be completely filled in by typewriter or in ink and submitted to the Building Inspector with 4 sets of plans, accurate plot plan to scale. fee according to schedule. b. Plot plan showing location of lot and of buildings on premises, relationship to adjoining premises or public streets or areas, and waterways. c. The work covered by this application may not be commenced before issuance of Building Permit. d. Upon approval of this application, the Building Inspector will issue a Building Permit to the applicant. Such a permit shall be kept on the premises available for inspection throughout the work. e. No building shall be occupied or used in whole or in part for any purpose what so ever until the Building Inspector issues a Certificate of Occupancy. f. Every building permit shall expire if the work authorized has not commenced within 12 months after the date of issuance or has not been completed within 18 months from such date. If no zoning amendments or other regulations affecting the property have been enacted in the interim, the Building Inspector may authorize, in writing, the extension of the permit for an addition six months. Thereafter, a new permit shall be required. APPLICATION IS HEREBY MADE to the Building Department for the issuance of a Building Permit pursuant to the Building Zone Ordinance of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, and other applicable Laws, Ordinances or Regulations, for the construction of buildings, additions, or alterations or for removal or demolition as herein described. The applicant agrees to comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, building code, housing code, and regulations, and to admit authorized inspectors on premises and in building for necessary inspections. OCCUPANCY OR c;n 5-..f' E--.l. 5~a.: ~~~. USE IS UNLA WFU (Signature of app1icantor name, If a corporatIOn) WfTHOUT CERTI o""~ai g::rre ~tlicant) >>11 "l 't7 S h h I.. I OF Or.r.UPANCY I I" I b b 'Id tate w et er app Icant IS owner, essee, agent, arChitect, engmeer, genera contractor, e ectnclan, p urn er or U1 er UNDERWRIJERSCERnACATE REOOIIlE9 Name of owner of premises ~s.-e f:..Gv....\..""'., . 0.S.~D.~ n...c"-~ (As on the tax roll or latest deed) If applicant is a corporation, signature of duly authorized officer APPROVED AS NOTED SHALL DATE:.i.J4'5' B.P. # 3/ '5 3)- :f (Name and title of corporate of~ THE REQUIREMENTSOFT~E FEE: ,~. BY:~ . . CODES OF NEW YORK STATE. #7 . NOTIFY BUlj..QIN(lIDf: Rl1AI'NT AT BUilders License No. t~tf 765-1802 8~ TO 4 PM' FdR THE Plumbers Llc~nse No. OIlERWR!TERSCeATIFIGr' IIf'"' FOLLOWING INSPECTIONS; Electnclans License No. , [, l 1. FOUNDATION _ TWO REQUIRED Other Trade's License No. IItwIIItU FOR POUFlI!D CONCRETE 2. ROUGH . FRAMING & PLUMBING 3. INSULATION u.:tc...lAo '-'~. FINAL. CONSTRUCTION MUST "1M MEDIA TEL V" ENCLOSE POOL TO CODE UPON COMPLETION BEFORE "WATER' ----ts" . ""(&u. . I. (Name) OIIII/\.IAO) ft. iliUM heY "!!lI to "'''Q>i/4Uq ('",,:-IRE J::tlQ'~'hA") Hl!:tw XlnuF~IM'Ma:p"N'Il:'" . i , ': ...1 ' ~ I',",. .;.....' -~ --~.. ONSTRUCTION SHALL MEET THE IREMFNTS OF ~~ES OF NEW :TAlft NOT SIIlLIi FOR ~TRIICTION ~RROR~ County Tax Map No. 1000 Section I c, 6 Subdivision 2. State existing use and occupancy of premises lInd intended use and occupa,ncy of proposed construction: a. EXlstmg use and occupancy J c, 'r.;... ,"",.l,- l~ d( b. Intended use and occupancy , S ,-_..j .... V\.. , ""'^- \, '^--4 \ {I (', ,c, ( 3. Nature of work (check which applicable): New Building Repair Removal Demolition Addition Other Work Alteration --' . D I SL.n __ ............\..A."'l _____ . CX"J' ... ~~ (Description) 4. Estimated Cost '-, 9., . Do U I Fee 5. If dwelling, number of dwelling units If garage, number of cars (To be paid on filing this application) Number of dwelling units on each floor 6. Ifbusiness, commercial or mixed occupancy, specify nature and extent of each type of use. 7. Dimensions of existing structures, if any: Front Height Number of Stories Rear Depth Dimensions of same structure with alterations or additions: Front Rear Depth Height Number of Stories 8. Dimensions of entire new construction: Front Height Number of Stories Rear Depth 9. Size oflot: Front i I "b Vl- Rear l G?:.t) Depth "2.. 'S i ,3. (I 10. Date of Purchase Name of Former Owner II. Zone or use district in which premises are situated 12. Does proposed construction violate any zoning law, ordinance or regulation? YES_NO L 13. Will lot be re-graded? YES >-::. NO _ W~6fi&~~v.ed from premises? YES_NO X 14. Names of Owner of premises > \1(.. ~~\ Address ;l,S:)~..~I\9.lG ' Phone ~~ 1'"73 '-\-7 2..2. ~ Name of Architect Address Phone No Name of Contractor -. ~Addr~s\l,7't~ (W. PhoneNo.k:6\ -72..)..--5502.- ~<-.. -;:j(1M..ES9(.r\."- . 15 a. Is this property within 100 feet of a tidal wetland or a freshwater wetland? *YES ~ NO _ * IF YES, SOUTH OLD TOWN TRUSTEES & D.E.C. PERMITS MAY BE REQUIRED. b. Is this property within 300 feet of a tidal wetland? * YES'~: NO_ * IF YES, D.E.C. PERMITS MAY BE REQUIRED. 16. Provide survey, to scale, with accurate foundati()np!an.a9~'4istf\11ce~ ~: property lines.. '': j~1/('. . '.,\',';' ',( ',,\;_,,~,'-qJ\i ?;::':,"N' ji1C.- It.; 17. If elevation at any point on property is at 10 fe'et or below, mut~,ptovide'{opographical data on survey. 4(. STATE OF NEW YORK) ss: COUNTY "'" being duly sworn, deposes and says that (s)he is the applicant (Name of in ivid I signl g contract) above named, (S)He is the ~ AO >A.~ (Contractor, Agent, Corp(1)rate Officer, etc.) of said owner or owners, and is duly authorized to p'll'foj1'l1 or have p,er:formed the said\vork and to make and file this application; that all statements contained ih this application are true to the best of his knowledge and belief; and that the work will be performed in the manner set forth in the application filed therewith. "'J '~V!n3al.iU "',' Sworn to before me this .,3(',,::>' g day of :::s- v \ '-\ . . 4- Notary Public Signature of Applicant IWlIlN A C ""'" NIIc . .. ., I!lew Wlk NO. OlCA41926D2 '. Qullilled in SuR'bllt c-y . My Commissjqo.E~ i",. . -;;>-0'" I PROP~RTY' 250 PINE TREE CT. CUTCHOGU~" ( 97;c1 0', c" V;:' .~ ,1'0 (J 'Ce' ~ <;. ~ o \.I.. '& o _ \.1 ~ I..J..-l \- ~ \.1 -:x:. ~ I..J..-l ~ . \:La:. 'I (.flZ ~~ ~r 1>1> tDZ o ~.~ 'r <:1 "3 \~( ? ?- o ~ U\ o -;. N Ol ~ I;!! ? ./ /' ,- ./ ./ ~Q. '\~(s ?\~s -I ,. '. _iJ~~ "'Ii' ... / ;;. I \ \ bpLlRKb / S. 85 0 4"" , c 50' E. / ~____.... 149.66' ~Vj' / '~ . cOl)~ A E/ .~_ : Y- leT~t .R8' "'_ \~'- Zo'lc ,,~ . t~. .... " .... Q, C/)"_If ..... ~ ...... 1'~ .... -?>' s ~ "" "<:; ~,,-- , ~~ ~ --'s: ... ~~ --', -':\\'" C< '" "m 'i. ~ ,-" VI , " \ ~~\ ' ( I I ~ I J R -~-~'~_,rh / .!....!;. / \" 1-" - O'l I 1- ~~ \,\1 "'-.J::'l. I I'-.. . , 1-' \ I ~ ! "'- 254.$0' 1\ ~ i \" I 1-"~ \~ "'-" .... I ~~'", , () . q ~ '\ "- '" '" -- ~ .... I) II 0~'\ CO r / ,,0 / A'l- 1- eO ~.~ " / ....<' l'. Ii ,: I :\ r- \\ \ \ ~~ ~ , 2: ". o ". "'1 ". I I I \ .... .... 1> / ^ c r- r o Ul ~ \ OjO \OJ'!J' A~' '!Jo'l- , S.6 6.,0 , 0' " 'L3' ~ :]1 " ' . . , !!, .s~ecx. N:8So42, 50" W. / A REA = I. /324 ACRE S CERTfFED TO' .--J , _. AMERICAN nTLE: NSURANCE COMPANY nTLE NO. 07 - 110836 JOSEPH E. GUt.J,f SUSAN 8. 8RA VfR / N/ 0/ F HJLlLM4R a DO ?IS I .... '" TORNLUND , LRVEr FOR JOSEPH E GUL If A' .' .... .SIJSAN B. BRA VER A .: .... E' TO~ , (# . . 'OLD SUFFi 'LK COUNTY, NY , - 98 - 01 - 7.11 CALE: 1" = 40' Sl.20, 1986 -.r."I9;2009<<:DnitHIrs, W.Hands I. Flood Zones added) _: 1!9, 2tJCJd lbI'llf. adtltlflns) ... 2, 20fJI ( IJHJN. J 1tIAR. 7, 2001 (woad decks) APRI.. 1!2, 2002 ( .. } FLOOD ZONES FROM FIRM I MAP# 36103CO/64! G MA Y 4,1998 CONTOUR LIEs AItD WETLANDS ARE TAKEN . FROII THE: FIVE eASTF:RN TOWNS TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS I N.Y.S. Lie, NO. 49618 YORS a ENGINEeRS RC. o FAX (630 765 - 1797 STREET . ff~ DC 7"'V) / PROPERTY' 250 PINE TREE CT. CUTCHOGUE, N. Y. ?\~s \~s II? " / . PARI(" II 0?-\ CO I S I I .8So 42' I, SO'E~__ I~ '/ I' 1 1 / 1 I / 1 I I I I / / / I i' \ "- /:;<-, , , t ~~i 149.y.6 ' ~~~ " ~' . . 2'oI)~ AE ~. (/ \ I ~/''''/ kt~, / v L'" ;'" - 0 ',~ ~\ zone./'- ~~ '" !P~ " " !<?~. ~ ''-" ....,. 0, k" .C!)'::l. , ",. "-I}, - .... .. .....(J') / ." -', , , , - '/2 , 1 I , ....0 " " I / ) \ " " , , .... , , \.\.- o \.0 r-- fa \..0'0 CL-iX- \- '\ "<">",, \ ....... ...._ 'C' ',~-..... - -..... '- ...? 0 ~ --............." \:a- "'\, ;;:~'" ~ -.-----", -f."" ' \ " '\ r-.", v. , --~jV ~ \ \ ,,'V '\' - " " "'-!'.,. fP" \ \ \ YJ '" \ \' O. ~ '\ \ \ '\ \ k\~ ~ \ \ \ \ \ ' ,,'~ \ \ \ , - I \ \ \ \0 \ \ \ \:\!~ yo \ \ .78.4-' \ _ A- _ \ \ ,', ;....... cs\. l )- - --r, I' \~1-clt;' i I 'I}~ )'\.~ / ~ / / I ~ t " I !~II I 1<\ I I " R I I j I 1 - i _ ~ It I I I 1 ~ tt- / / -j-(\I---I-' m"- / / Ii' / r!-,,~ . I I I / 1 It 'oj ~ I ~ II c.P'!ler I / ~ J l .......0\1 - .} .... / / ! ( . J 1-' / / ! ) (J \J / / J' A \.II I . _ / ~. - \1< ",1254.30' J\~ j \ ~ / 1 ).."'~"<>! , !IJ ,.; ~~. \~ ~~I '" . II t\ ~\ ~ ~ .... , -- ASPHAl.r ... '" .... , 2120.1 . ..... ....r COl-'Q) ;/ .;). ONE sroo~ J:: , ..... 0 I S.R.r, FItIJ!'i / N . -==-- st-u>. t\i / :85042' I 50" 0 W. C\J A'~' 30 'l; ~.& I ;z. N 0'1 :-l Ul ;:- ,/ / ..- ,/ ..- \?- SS ?-Q. / ~ (J)Z 0' I~ ~r 1>1> mZ o ~/ N/ O/F HJALMAR 8 DORIS TORNLUND j( 2 "- o "- "'TJ 1> ^ C r r y 3/93"d- ....l ! 5 I J " \. .',,__1 \ AREA = /. /324 ACRES CERTIFIED TO' ~). ,~ AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY TlTLE,NO. 07 - 1/0836 JOSEPH E. GULMI SUSAN B. BRA VER ! SURVEY FOR JOSEPH E GULMIAND .SUSAN B. BRA VER AT CUTCHOGUE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD l1a-y ?o.2004-!I}i!:>V well) .)0"'1 /~ 1004- (pr"'p ,}"<" ~ ~~~ SUFFOLK COUNTY, NY 5ept. J. ~0'5' ' 1000 - 98 - 01 - 7.11 DEC. 17, 2005( CONTOURS) SCALE: 1" = 40' 'hc:.~~o~. c':,~urs I DEC. 20, 1986 Me<y 5,'l..ooc,Crem.1oro>) Sf:PT.19j2000 (Conlours, W.Uands 8. Flood Zones added) Nov. 29, 2000 (prop. additions) Jan. 2, 2001 ( MHWM. ) MAR. 7, 2001 (wood decks) APRIL 22, 2002 ( final I FI.-OOD ZOfooJES FROM FIRM . MAP# 36103COl64 G MAY 4, 1998 CONTOU8 LINES ARE REFERENCED TO NGVD . 's. Lie. NO. 4961B ENGINEERS AC. (63/J 765 - 1797 (63 P.O. 1230 TR STREET SOUTHOLD, N.,Y. 1/9-71 n~ 7n,., FORM NO.3 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT SOUTHOLD, N.Y. NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL Date: August 22, 2006 TO: Joseph Gulmi 250 Pine Tree Court Cutchogue, NY 11935 Please take notice that your application dated August 22, 2006 For a permit for an "as built" swimming pool at Location of property 250 Pine Tree Court. Cutchogue. NY County Tax Map No. 1000 - Section 98 Block 1. Lot 7.11 Is returned herewith and disapproved on the following grounds: 3* The location ofthe swimming pool is not permitted pursuant to ZBA decision #5~ for construction of the pool at a minimum of 30' (feet) from the westerly front lot line. The foundation location survey indicates the accessory swimming pool at a distance of 28" from the westerly lot line. ~ Clft 'Authorized Signature FORM NO.3 NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL Date: December 11, 2006 TO: Joseph Gu1mi 250 Pine Tree Court Cutchogue, NY 11935 Please take notice that your application dated August 22, 2006 For permit for construction of an "as built" swimming 0001 at Location of property 250 Pine Tree Court, Cutchogue, NY County Tax Map No. 1000 - Section 98 Block 1 Lot 7.11 Is returned herewith and disapproved on the following grounds: The location of the swimming 0001 is not oermitted oursuant to ZBA decision #5340 for construction of the pool at a minimum of 30' from the westerly front line. The foundation location survey indicates the accessorv swimming 0001 at a distance of28' from the westerly lot line. The "as built" fence is not oermitted oursuant to Article XXII. 280-105. A. When located in the front yard of residential zones. the same (fences) shall not exceed four feet in height. '--------- 4~ I Authorized Signature " Peter and Eileen Walker P.O. Box 548 Cutchogue, New York 11935 March 25, 2007 MAR 28 2r Zoning Board of Appeals Town of Southold Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Dear Board Members: We recently found out our neighbors, Braver/Gulmi were to have a Z.B.A. hearing request for variances # 5994, date 3/29/07. The sign went up on Sunday, 3/18 and we did not receive notification by mail until Friday, 3/23, six days before the hearing. We cannot attend this hearing because it is during the day and we both work. I believe two weeks notice is the standard procedure. These are our concerns. I. The drawings we were sent for this project were both difficult and deceiving to read. (Copy enclosed.) 2. When we took this drawing to the ZBA, we were told the information on it was wrong. The construction began without us receiving a revised copy. The copy was never mailed, we had to pick one up. 3. No elevation change was addressed, so the garage/cabana/shed and fence is approximately 3 feet higher, making it more visible from our property. 4. Landscaping was not addressed. The majority of the plantings are deciduous and small. Driving in and out the right of way to our home, we see daily more of this project than we care to. So far we have spent $1500 buying, moving and planting cedars with more to come. Why should we forced to landscape because of their project? 5. Weare concerned about the quality of our well water. A question we asked and received no response, was the issue of the cesspools. Prior to the swimming pool going in, 2 cesspools were put in. The contractor said they had a septic emergency. When we looked at their permit, it said no additional septic was necessary. Before the pool was excavated, another 6 cesspools were added. This time the contractor came to us, wondering where our well was. We showed him that it is approximately 100 feet away. He didn't measure, just assumed it was good. We called the town and was told to call the county and speak with a Mr. Brigham. Mr. Brigham told us he was sure it was just for but would get back to us. Despite numerous calls, be never returned our calL We do not have public water, nor do we plan to install it. 6. The work at the Braver/Gulmi residence seems to be never ending. Forthe past 6 years we have been looking, listening and been incoRvenienced by the constant construction. The bulk of the work has been done on weekends and holidays. The starting time is close to 7:00 A.M. and many times continues into the evening. We have not enjoyed the privacy we built our home for. since these projects have begun. The town has granted Braver/Gulmi huge relief It is time to give relief to us and our neighbors. Their project has been "a change in the character of our neighborhood." All of the surrounding homes have been landscaped to maximize privacy. We feel the wooden fence should be lowered or replaced with a chain link one and evergreens planted in front of it, high enough to hide the fence thus restoring the "character of the neighborhood." Your assistance would be greatly appreciated in addressing and resolving these violations of the town code. Thank you in advance for your help. ~uJ~ V \ Peter and Eileen Walker cc: Building Department