HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-09/05/2013 Hearing 1
1 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK: STATE OF NEW YORK
2 X
3 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ~tECENEl9
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS QCTO92013
4
BOAR OpAPPEA(~
5
6 Southold Town Hall
Southold, New York
7
g September 5, 2013
i 10:15 A.M.
9
10 Board Members Present:
11
12 LESLIE KANES WEISMAN - Chairperson/Member
~ 13 ERIC DANTES - Member
14 GERARD GOEHRINGER - Member
15 KENNETH SCHNEIDER - Member
16 GEORGE HORNING - Member (Excused)
17
18 JENNIFER ANDALORO - Assistant Town Attorney
19 VICKI TOTH - Secretary
20
21
I
22
23 Jessica DiLallo
Court Reporter
2q P.O. Box 989
Holbrook, New York 11791
25 (631)-338-1409
2
• 1 INDEX TO HEARINGS
2
3 Hearing Page
4
5 Ellen Brenner 2007 Trust, #6676 3-10
6 Fordham House, LLC, #6680 10-41
7 William C. Goggins of 13200
8 Main Road Corp, #6677 140-148
9 Maureen Blattner, #6678 41-49
10 Frank Marsilio, #6679 50-54
11 Michael & Celia Withers, #6670 54-57
12 Steven Licata, #6679 58-65
• 13 7850 Main Road LLC, d/b/a The Blue
14 Inn at North Fork, #6675 65-140
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
• 25
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 3
• i HEARING #6676 - ELLEN BRENNER 2007 TRUST
2 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: The first
3 application before the Board is for Ellen
4 Brenner 2007 Trust, #6676. Request for
5 variances from Article XXIII Section
6 280-124 and the Building Inspector's
7 June 20, 2013 Notice of Disapproval based
8 on an application for building permit to
9 construct second story addition and patio
10 addition to existing single family
11 dwelling: 1) less than the code required
12 minimum front yard setback of 35 feet,
• 13 2) less than the code required minimum rear
14 yard setback of 35 feet, 3) less than the
15 code required minimum side yard setback of
16 10 feet, located at: 40 South Lane (Oak
17 Court), (corner Old Orchard Road) in East
18 Marion.
19 Good morning, Mark. Just state your
20 name for the record, please.
21 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yes. Mark Schwartz,
22 architect for the project. We're proposing
23 a small second floor addition over part of
24 the existing footprint of the house. It's
• 25 640 square feet. The rear yard requires 35.
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 4
• 1 The existing is 28.5. Also we're looking
2 to expand an existing patio that will
3 encroach on the side yard setback only.
4 The character of neighborhood the
5 addition is similar to many houses in the
6 neighborhood. Similar characteristics in
7 the neighborhood. There have been a number
8 of variances in the neighborhood. I have a
9 copy and some surveys. In fact, the
10 adjacent property
11 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: We know that one
12 well.
• 13 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yes. Based on the
14 fact, that it's a small addition to the
15 house and a small addition to the existing
16 patio, in my mind it's a small variance
17 request.
18 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Mark, do you
19 want a copy of the local determination from
20 Suffolk County? Okay. So the current
21 front yard setback is 28.5, and you're
22 prosing 20.3?
23 MR. SCHWARTZ: That's the rear yard.
24 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: That's the rear
• 25 yard?
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 5
• 1 MR. SCHWARTZ: Rear yard is 28.5
2 existing, and that's the closest point to
3 where we
9 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Yes, I see that.
5 And the side yard, what is the current side
6 yard?
7 MR. SCHWARTZ: The side yard is 10.
8 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: 10 is the
9 current code required. You're proposing it
10 at 1?
11 MR. SCHWARTZ: 1.5 to the patio
12 extension. Not the second floor addition.
• 13 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: And what is the
14 second floor addition?
15 MR. SCHWARTZ: Side yard is about 25.
16 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: 25 feet. So it's
17 the patio that is at 1 foot?
18 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yes.
19 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: What is the
20 current front yard setback? Do you know?
21 It's proposed at 20.3. Is that what it
22 currently is?
23 MR. SCHWARTZ: That's 20.3 to the
24 proposed patio extension. The average
• 25 setback, if you look at my application
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 6
• 1 sheets, the average setback for that area
2 is only 8.6 feet. So there shouldn't be
3 any front yard variance required here.
4 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: So Mark, the
5 smallest front yard setback to the
6 dwelling, Sheet S2 is 22.9?
7 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yes. Existing.
8 Correct.
9 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: And that would be
10 maintained?
11 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yes.
12 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: The front yard
• 13 setback of the proposed addition, would be
14 conforming or not?
15 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yes, it's conforming.
16 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Do you happen to
17 know what that dimension would be?
18 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yes. It's not on here.
19 It looks to be about more than 40 feet.
20 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: So you're saying
21 that you don't need a variance for a front
22 yard setback because you can take the
23 neighboring setbacks?
29 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah. Well, either way
• 25 we have the 35 feet to the second floor
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting ~
• 1 addition.
2 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Okay. And why the
3 need for the patio?
4 MR. SCHWARTZ: It's a sunny area.
5 It's adjacent to their kitchen. Basically,
6 a water view. And the back part of the
7 house is dark and a lot of trees. Really
8 not a good spot for them to utilize.
9 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: More like a
10 southerly exposure?
11 MR. SCHWARTZ: Uh-hmm.
12 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Why does the patio
• 13 need a variance?
14 MR. SCHWARTZ: For the side yard.
15 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Because it's
16 raised?
17 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yes.
18 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Do you know what
19 it's raised at?
20 MR. SCHWARTZ: It's only a foot or two
21 but when you come around the front, it goes
22 up to about four feet. Three to four feet
23 is the high point.
29 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Do other dwellings
• 25 in the neighborhood have patios and things
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 8
• 1 like that?
2 MR. SCHWARTZ: That I am not sure.
3 But adjacent to this patio is a 20 foot
4 section kind of right-of-way to get in. So
5 there is really no houses.
6 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Okay. So the
7 closest dwelling to that 1.5 setback is
8 about how much would you say?
9 MR. SCHWARTZ: There is a garage and
10 that's about 40 feet or so.
11 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Okay. I have no
12 further questions.
• 13 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Gerry.
14 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Is there any
15 reason, Mark, why the patio has to be so
16 large? I realized you explained to us the
17 waterview aspects.
18 MR. SCHWARTZ: They like to entertain.
19 Go out there and have cocktails. I would
20 have to calculate that.
21 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Could you give us
22 that?
23 MR. SCHWARTZ: Absolutely.
24 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Eric?
• 25 MEMBER DANTES: No questions.
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 9
• 1 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: I have to tell
2 you, Mark, this is very helpful.
3 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Well, the
4 topography is so severe. When you go
5 towards Oak, it kind of levels out to where
6 the street is. When you look at Old
7 Orchard there really is a substantial drop
8 off.
9 MR. SCHWARTZ: Absolutely.
10 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: I really don't I
11 object to this. The backyard, I will say
12 is pretty narrow.
• 13 Mark, did you say you had some
14 variances?
15 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yes. I have a package.
i
16 I only have one copy.
17 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: All right. Is
18 there anyone else in the audience who would
19 like to address this application?
20 (No Response.)
21 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Okay. Hearing
22 no further questions or comments, I will
23 make a motion to close this hearing and
24 reserve decision to a later date, subject
• 25 to receipt of the square footage of the
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 10
• 1 enclosed patio.
2 Second?
3 MEMBER DANTES: Second.
4 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Seconded by
5 Eric.
6 All in favor?
7 MEMBER DANTES: Aye.
8 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Aye.
9 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Aye.
10 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Aye.
11 (See Minutes for Resolution.)
12
• 13 HEARING #6680 - FORDHAM HOUSE, LLC
14 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: The next
15 application before the Board is for Fordham I~
16 House, LLC, #6680. Request for variances
17 from Article IV Code Section 280-18 and
18 Article XXII Code Section 280-116 based on
19 an application for building permit and the
20 Building Inspector's July 24, 2013, amended I
21 August 6, 2013 Notice of Disapproval
22 concerning a permit to construct a new
23 single family dwelling, at 1) proposed
24 construction at more than the code maximum
• 25 height of 2 1/2 stories, 2) lot coverage
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 11
• 1 more than the permitted 200, 3) less than
2 the code required 100 foot setback from the
3 top of the bluff, located at: 5205 The
4 Long Way, adjacent to Long Island Sound in
5 East Marion.
6 Is there someone here to represent
7 this application?
I
8 MS. BISHOP: Good morning. Stacy
9 Bishop, on behalf of the Bergola Family.
10 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: The one thing we
11 need, let me give you a copy of affidavit
12 of local determination and Fordham House
• 13 Memorandum from the LWRP Coordinator and
14 the new letter we got from Suffolk County
15 Soil & Water. That we just got. Let me
16 just enter into the record what the relief
17 requested is. This is an undeveloped piece
18 of property that is heavily wooded. It's
19 for a single family dwelling, three story.
20 The code only permits two and a half story.
21 Lot coverage at 22.9%, where the code
22 permits a maximum of 20% and 61.5 foot
23 setback from the bluff. The code requires
24 a 100 foot setback of bluff sound. So
• 25 those are the three variances. There are a
it
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 12
• 1 couple of restrictions on this property
2 that constrict this modular construction.
3 So we would like you to go over that.
4 MS. BISHOP: I will.
' 5 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: And then we
6 would like for you to address the Soil &
' 7 Water
8 MS. BISHOP: Okay.
9 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: There were C&R's
10 that were filed in the County Clerk's
11 Office that runs with the land that
12 requires a 50 foot non-disturbance land
• 13 buffer, landward at the top of the bluff.
14 And then the final thing that is determined
15 by Soil & Water was two-fold, one is that ~
16 there are two (In Audible) erosion and they
17 provide potential remedy for that. And the
18 other is perhaps the results of a drain ~
19 pipe with water runoff. That needs to be
20 addressed also. And the Soil & Water is ~
21 recommending that the proposed house not be
22 built with the proposed 61.5 feet from the
23 bluff. And they would recommend the
24 limitation of native plants from the zone.
• 25 There should be a considerable distance
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 13
• 1 remaining in a natural state to serve as a
2 buffer and runoff.
3 MS. BISHOP: Okay.
4 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Okay. So we
5 could address those one at a time or
6 MS. BISHOP: Yes. Let's start with
7 the modular end of it. Address that. I
8 had heard rumblings about that and
9 mentioned it to the buyer that I have been
10 working with for about three years. He
11 apparently had discussions personally. She
12 apparently had spoken to someone with
• 13 respect to this concern. And it goes back
19 to the developer. In 1975 he had put forth
15 community planning for this development. I
16 At the time, he came to look at these other
17 restrictions that this developer was
18 looking to such as a 1,000 minimum
19 square foot first floor. Dictate two pets
20 per household. To determine where boats
21 were going to be stored. Close-lines,
22 which nobody uses today, but maybe back
23 then was a concern. So what this developer
24 was trying to do is more of an upscale
• 25 community. The plans that I submitted to
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 14
• 1 the Board clearly shows that this is an
2 upscale home. Some of the reasons for the
3 modular, this has an open floor plan. So
4 we're able to incorporate some Microlam and
5 steel into this structure. So it can be
6 done easily onsite. The house from the
7 exterior conforms to the characteristics
8 and the integrity in the neighborhood.
9 There are some other Mediterranean style
10 homes. In fact, I have had several
11 conversations with Tony Vivona whose the
12 head of the Board of the Homeowners
• 13 Association and he was very excited. To
14 have such a statement home there at the
15 entrance for the community to see. I think
16 that today, 2013, what exists with respect
17 to the capabilities of modular
18 construction, the fact that construction
19 would be done much quicker and this is
20 build on site with less intrusion to the
21 community, it would be done not during the
22 peek summer season but on the off season,
23 if you will, to minimize the impact on the
24 community. So I really think it's more of
• 25 a benefit. This was written in 1975.
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 15
• 1 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: I appreciate
2 your testimony but the Board should enter
3 into the record the fact that Southold
4 restrictions are a matter for determination
5 by the neighborhood association.
6 MS. BISHOP: I have been reaching out
7 to them. To be honest, the buyer went
8 ahead with the purchase. I had nothing to
9 do with it. I have had several talks with
10 him. In the paperwork I did give to the
11 Board, it does say modular homes on it. To
12 my intention, it was still an unresolved
• 13 issue until last week.
14 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: This survey that
15 you provided us defines a proposed two and
16 half story dwelling certified to modular
17 homes.
18 MS. BISHOP: Just because it's a
' 19 modular doesn't mean that it's any less of
20 a construction. It's still going to be a
21 two story or two and a half story.
22 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Well, according
23 to the Building Department it's
24 three-story's. Why is that?
• 25 MS. BISHOP: What the application is to
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 16
• 1 omit pull-down stairs at the landing
2 upstairs in favor of fixed stairs to the
3 attic. It's truly from a cosmetic
4 standpoint because this plan, you can walk
5 into the foyer, it oversees the second if
6 you walk straight through, there is a huge
~ Great Room, that is open to the second
8 floor. There is also a grand staircase. His
9 staircase alone is in the six figures. So
10 it has a pull-down stair at the top. It
11 just doesn't fit with the characteristic of
12 the home. And you certainly don't want to
• 13 be sitting by a custom fireplace and have
14 to look up at a pull-down stairs to an
15 attic.
16 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Usually the
17 determination is made that it's a
18 third-story if habitable space is up there.
19 MS. BISHOP: Thank you. And I had this
20 conversation with the State of New York
21 because originally this plan was off of a
22 website on 3ohnGardener.com. He purchased a
23 copy of the plans and intends to duplicate
29 this. It originally, it had the option for
• 25 a penthouse, which is what he was going to
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 17
• 1 do. We had the okay from the State. The
2 sprinkler system was going to be installed
3 and so forth. However, we decided not to
4 do that. It's him, his wife and a couple
5 of kids. I agree with you, I don't know
6 why the Building Department determined it's
7 a third floor. It's by no means.
8 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: What's the
9 height?
10 MS. BISHOP: 33 feet.
11 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Where the code
12 permits 35. So it's a matter of stairs?
• 13 MS. BISHOP: That is what they said.
14 It would come off the side. It's really
15 just kind of the center part of the house
16 that has any discernable attic space with
17 any access to it. So rather than have these
18 pull-down stairs, it's actually on the
19 plans, there's an elevator, which he
20 doesn't want, fixed stairs.
21 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: The point and
22 question you have to understand is, if we
23 approve this and this is my opinion only,
24 you would never get a CO, because the
• 25 stairway is going to the third floor.
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 18
• 1 Okay. And that is the story. So first of ~I
2 all, we need to look at the overall
3 construction. We need a copy I need a
4 copy of that third floor. I can't
5 understand which is which. Just that the
6 first floor has the living area. In this
7 particular case, if there is any
8 utilization access in the way that you want
9 that utilization, it's my particular
10 opinion that you have a third story. And I
11 do agree with the Building Inspector on
12 that basis. You are going to be required
13 to sprinkler and a description saying that
•
14 it can't be utilized.
15 MS. BISHOP: Absolutely. That's
16 actually on the plan that it's only a three
17 story only. The New York State Building
18 Code is minimum 7 feet. There is no intent
19 of making it other than an attic.
20 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: I understand that
21 but to have a stairway access that is
22 showing a stairwell to that area. I am
23 just saying to you in general, you have to
24 give us a better plan then this.
• 25 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: What is it that
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 19
• 1 you want, Gerry?
2 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: I want to see the
3 floor.
4 MS. BISHOP: There is a section
5 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Here is a
6 section showing the #7012. Here is a
7 floor plan showing the attic. Showing the
8 stairs. See here. Then there is a section
9 that shows where you could stand-up.
10 MS. BISHOP: Right.
11 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: I looked at it
12 once before and I don't remember seeing it.
• 13 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Can you tell us
14 on what basis the Building Department made
15 a determination
16 MS. BISHOP: I honestly don't know.
17 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: I don't get it.
18 Maybe they only looked at this?
19 MS. BISHOP: No, I went over
20 everything. In fact, I submitted
21 everything. (In Audible).
22 (Whereupon, Ms. Bishop stepped away
23 from the microphone.)
I
24 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Does the porch
• 25 still exist?
~i
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 20
• 1 MS. BISHOP: Yes.
2 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: You are saying
i
3 that there is access to that area if
4 it's architectural, it's different. If
5 it's usable, it's there is an ability to
6 get to it.
7 MS. BISHOP: If you look at the
i
8 pictures that I submitted, it shows that
9 it's purely cosmetic.
10 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Those are
11 windows. Not doors. That's what it
12 appears. But if you look at the
• 13 elevation I
14 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: We're trying to
15 facilitate this
16 MS. BISHOP: I understand and I
17 appreciate it. If you zone in on this,
' 18 those are fixed windows.
19 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: You can take out
20 those windows and do sliding doors?
21 MS. BISHOP: You can do that but
22 that's not what is here. This is purely
23 cosmetic.
24 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: I understand that.
• 25 I just want to ask you one question, that
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 21
• 1 is facing west?
2 MS. BISHOP: North. Facing the water.
3 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: How shallow is
4 that, between the windows and the
5 balusters?
6 MS. BISHOP: This looks like it comes
7 three feet forward. He wanted it in line.
8 It's truly cosmetic.
9 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: I think you need
10 to figure out how you're going to change
11 that or modify that?
12 MS. BISHOP: It is a dormer with a
• 13 separate section that will be added to
14 this.
15 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: The elevation of
16 the house or the elevation of the attic,
17 which one do you want me to look at? The
18 hip roof?
19 MS. BISHOP: Yes.
20 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Well, what we're
21 going to have to do is, we can either
22 overrule the Building Inspector and say
23 it's not a third story or we can agree with
24 it and you would have to sprinkle it and it
I • 25 must be proposed as zoning, or you remove
' September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 22
• 1 it.
2 MS. BISHOP: (In Audible) didn't
3 need it.
4 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: First of all,
5 the Board would have to grant a variance
6 for a certain story and in order to do that
7 when we grant them, when we do at all, a
8 very small area, which could be subject to
9 a little porch. That would be determined
10 to be habitable because you can access it.
11 Even though you don't have a door there, it
12 still is accessible. And especially with
• 13 it all depends on how hell-bent he is on
14 that aesthetic. I mean, if it's being done
15 from what you describe, it's being done
16 purely for a cosmetic thing. So if he
17 wants it that badly, then he's going to
18 have to sprinkle the whole thing.
19 MS. BISHOP: (In Audible) bringing in.
20 It really only has to be in line, two feet,
21 three feet.
22 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Why wouldn't you
23 sprinkle it?
24 MS. BISHOP: We11 one, cost. At the
• 25 very onset of the project, it cost
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 23
• 1 $38,000.00.
2 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: If we gave you
3 artificial 12 inches or whatever, the
9 bottom line is, it's the New York State
5 Building Code determines this to be a third
6 story
7 MS. BISHOP: We spoke to people in I
8 Albany (In Audible) third-floor.
9 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: So New York
10 State said it wasn't a third floor. I
11 MS. ANDALORO: No matter what this
12 Board says, you may have to sprinkle that
• 13 floor. (In Audible.)
14 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: So let's see
15 where we are. Technicall I think our
Y,
16 attorney has just described what's involved
17 in making that determination to whether
18 this is a third-story. If involves a second
19 floor. So it looks like a third story. It
20 certainly doesn't do that in the interior
21 volume or height of the roof. So we need to
22 straighten that out. Whether we're
23 proceeding with that.
29 MS. BISHOP: Is it the balcony?
• 25 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: It's the balcony
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 24
• 1 that is at issue.
2 MS. BISHOP: Okay. Is there a way we
3 can perhaps address that, lowering
4 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: I think the best
5 way for you to proceed there frankly is to
6 go back to the Building Department and
7 discuss options with them as to how to get
8 rid of the problem. Maybe you can come up
9 with something with them that could change
10 their opinion as a third-story.
' 11 MS. BISHOP: Okay.
12 CHAIRPERS N WEISMAN: I don't know.
O
• 13 That would be their call. With regard to
14 the modular construction, I do appreciate
15 that. The modular construction is not what
16 it was. Nevertheless, you're still going
17 to have to work out. They are still in
18 place. Whether they are dated or not. And
19 you would have to work out something with
20 the association, that indicates that the
21 existing structure meets their approval.
22 Today modular construction is almost always
23 stick built.
24 MS. BISHOP: Right.
• 25 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: So that's that.
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 25
• 1 So let's see what other issues we have. We
2 have some new information from Soil &
3 Water. We have some new information from
4 the Trustees indicating that they have
S permitted something that didn't require a
6 variance because it was set back more than
7 a 100 feet from the bluff. Now you're
8 requesting 61.5 feet.
9 MS. BISHOP: 61.5 from the second
10 story proposed deck. So it's not actually
11 on the ground. The actual footprint is
12 actually it's going to be elevated
• 13 because of the topography.
14 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: How high off the
15 ground will it be?
16 MS. BISHOP: That's a very good
17 question. We have been trying to figure
18 that out for months now. It's so heavily
19 wooded there and there are people within
20 the association and I have spoken to
21 Mr. Vivona about this, that have been
22 dumping debris, cutting trees or what not
23 in there. So it's making it difficult. In
24 speaking with the surveyor we have been
• 25 there several times. In fact, we have met
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 26
• 1 the Board of Trustees several times.
2 Really to see how it will work out
3 visually. The Trustees gave us permission
4 to clear out a certain path over there. So
5 it's the best estimation, if you take a
6 look at the left, it's 35 feet. The right
7 is 50 feet.
8 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Stacy, I have to
9 be honest with you, we almost bought a home
10 there and we rarely again, I use that
11 word, "we" we are not speaking from a "we"
12 standpoint. Just for myself, I didn't find I
• 13 any path.
14 MS. BISHOP: It grew.
15 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: I would like to
16 see, personally, the two points off the
17 west and the east, the porch of the house,
18 depicted with flags. So I can actually at
19 least know, to get into that point.
20 MS. BISHOP: They're actually flagged.
21 They're flagged physically on site.
22 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: I can't get in. I
23 can't see. Okay. Not only that, I have to
24 tell you, I have been a fireman for 45
• 25 years and the one thing I get unbelievably
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 27
• i is poison ivy. So and many people do.
2 I was very hesitant in going in there. If
3 you can prepare a path for us to be able to
4 understand where it's going to go, that
5 would be great.
6 MS. BISHOP: We did flag it out. That
7 was back two months ago. Everything just
8 kind of grew and things were dumped in
9 there. And to be honest, I couldn't get in
10 there either, which is why I took photos at
11 the beginning of the season. I know where
12 the flags are, so I am able to see the
• 13 perimeter.
14 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: There is no site
15 section here. It's not relevant to the
16 site. This is just construction of an
17 actual house. So without that slope, a)
18 we don't understand runoff would look like,
19 b) we don't know what the elevation would
20 look like. The porch is off grade. So
21 you're saying that the first floor porch is
22 I thought you said it was going to be
23 second
29 MS. BISHOP: Well, it's going to be
• 25 elevated.
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 28
1 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: So we don't know
2 where that is. What is the front yard
3 setback?
4 MS. BISHOP: It's 25 feet.
5 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: You have the
6 septic at 25 feet.
7 MS. BISHOP: Right.
8 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: You can
9 certainly push your house forward.
10 MS. BISHOP: We can push the house
11 forward. It was for two considerations.
12 One, it's the access to the beach. Just to
• 13 the left of the property. We're going to
14 try and maintain a lot of the tree line,
15 but there is a lot of debris in there. So
16 he wants the house set back primarily for
17 privacy. The second reason was to
18 accommodate a crane for the modular.
19 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Stacy, I have to
20 tell you, that is one of the most gracious
21 walkways I have ever seen.
22 MS. BISHOP: It's beautiful.
23 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: It must have cost
24 a fortune. I really don't buy that
• 25 sentiment. I think it could be pushed
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 29
• 1 back.
2 MS. BISHOP: Pushed forward. I just
3 picked these up last night. I did ask them
4 to mark how far off it was off the street.
5 He didn't unfortunately. That would just
6 take me and a little piece of paper. I
7 could probably move it like 10 feet.
8 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: You could move
9 it more than 10.
10 MS. BISHOP: It's not a level street.
11 I need 40x50 for the crane.
12 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: You have free land
• 13 next door.
14 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: There is already
15 erosion on that bluff. There is a real
16 problem there, the neighboring property has
17 a drain.
18 MS. BISHOP: Yes.
19 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: And that is
20 illegal. That is something that the
21 neighbor is going to have to address
22 because it is causing runoff problem and it
23 is also a requirement of Chapter 236 of the
24 Town Code, that all drainage be maintained
• 25 on site for each residential property.
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 30
• 1 MS. BISHOP: Oh, I know. Clearly it
2 has to be mediated by the neighbor. It has
3 to be removed. I have only found one. And
4 it's coming off the back end of his house.
5 He has a elevation of 61.6. It's coming
6 off right here. That is whereabouts the
7 drain is coming in. That is the one that I
8 found.
9 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: This is what
10 often happens with properties in
11 neighborhoods where a lot is developed.
12 Sometimes people dump stuff and whatever
• 13 else on the property. Just so you're
14 aware, our office has notified Code
15 Enforcement about the drainage because
16 we're required by law.
17 MS. BISHOP: I wanted to bring it to
18 your attention. I even wrote it down.
19 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: There is a
20 chainlink fence. That is on the neighbor's
21 property.
22 MS. BISHOP: Correct. The presumption
23 is, the neighborhood in that shaded area
24 appears to have been filled in because it
• 25 doesn't match the topography of that area.
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 31
• 1 Someone put a hedge line acting as a
2 barrier.
3 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: All right. That
9 is going to have to be removed.
5 MS. BISHOP: We were able to go in
6 with the Trustees and the company that came
7 in and cleared that path, they had a lot of
8 suggestions on how to contain it with
9 natural vegetation, specifically on the
10 bluff side. Somehow we're going to have to
11 know what is the existing topography, so
12 that we don't create any more runoff
• 13 concerns. And again, to do that, we're
14 really going to have to get in and clear
15 the property to see what is there.
16 Everything is just so overgrown.
17 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: You wrote down a
18 50 foot buffer but it needs to be described
19 as a non-disturbance buffer. That's
20 different than a buffer.
21 MS. BISHOP: We understand it's
22 fine. That's understandable. I spoke to him
23 about that. He has no problems about that.
24 His intent is to use the house frankly for
• 25 the beach. He doesn't want a pool. He
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 32
• 1 doesn't want anything by way of a
2 backyard.
3 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: That's what he
4 wants but when he sells the house and the
5 people want a swimming pool.
6 MS. BISHOP: Well, fortunately, his
7 children are relatively still young. So
8 this is going to be a long-term.
9 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: You also know
10 that this Board cannot personalize variance
11 relief. It's not related to an individuals
12 life story
• 13 MS. BISHOP: Understood. Yes.
14 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: So you know, we
15 cannot take unface value that this would be
16 the way it plans to be.
17 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: It would be very
18 helpful if you label the plans, like A1, A2
19 or something like that. I am looking at
20 three separate plans and it's hard to refer
21 to them and a written document. Like for
22 instance these floor plans here, we need to
23 have a sheet number, a date, to be able to
24 distinguish each drawing.
• 25 MS. BISHOP: Okay.
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 33
• 1 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: I am looking at the
2 first floor plan with the Great Room. The
3 second floor plan has the bedrooms?
4 MS. BISHOP: Correct. There is a
5 master on the first floor and then there
6 are four on the second floor.
7 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: And the proposed
8 third floor attic space, it would be nice
9 to have a drawing for that. Where does the
10 staircase come up to the attic?
11 MS. BISHOP: By the garage
12 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: This one here? Okay.
• 13 So that's the staircase there. This right
14 here. Then you come over here and up here
15 and up?
16 MS. BISHOP: (In Audible.)
17 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Can you give us a
18 cross section from here? So the stair comes
19 up here some where?
20 MS. BISHOP: Yes.
21 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Can you show it to
22 where the stairs come up, so we have an
23 idea?
24 MS. BISHOP: Sure.
• 25 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Okay. So this is
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 34
• 1 the windows, deck, the roof. Okay. We need
2 these labeled somehow.
3 MS. BISHOP: Sure.
4 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Even if they are
5 hand labeled. First off, let me find out if
6 there is someone in the audience that
7 wishes to address this application? Come
8 forward please and state your name for the
9 record.
10 MR. VIVONA: Good morning.
11 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Good morning.
12 MR. VIVONA: My name is Anthony
• 13 Vivona. I am presently the President of the
14 Beach Lot Owners Association.
15 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Could you spell
16 your last name, sir?
17 MR. VIVONA: V-I-V-O-N-A.
18 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Thank you. What
19 would you like to tell us?
20 MR. VIVONA: I came here this morning
21 to express a problem with the construction
22 of the home because we had just done an
23 extensive beach entrance there. We had
24 timber walls. We changed it to stone
• 25 builders. We put new stairways in. That was
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 35
• 1 Phase I. Now going into Phase II, which is
2 going to be the walkway to the beach. And
3 I had talken to Stacy about my concerns. I
9 don't want there to be damage to that wall
5 during construction. It cost us quite a
6 bit of money to get to where we are now.
7 And the house, like I told Stacy, when we
8 spoke on the phone, it's a beautiful house.
9 It looks like it comes straight out of
10 Sanibel Island. It would be great for the
11 community. Through the meetings that we
12 had, everyone seemed to miss that modular
• 13 construction deal, which have these C&R's.
14 Now we have lived with these C&R's since
15 1975. To change one of the C&R's, I think
16 I can get a declaration of war easier, then
17 trying to change this. So I don't know how
18 to go about this because I am going to have
19 to get the Board together and tell them
20 that someone wants to propose a change to
21 the C&R's. And that would have to be
22 presented to the membership. We have one
23 annual meeting a year. We just finished
24 our last and the next one is August 2014.
• 25 So I don't know how to resolve this issue
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 36
• 1 of changing these C&R's.
2 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: That is really
3 not the Zoning Board's jurisdiction. We
4 really can't help you out with that.
5 MR. VIVONA: I understand.
6 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Perhaps the only
7 thing that I can suggest that the Board
8 might be willing to do is look at the
9 construction and that the home is in
10 keeping with other homes in the
11 neighborhood and that you might want to
12 grant some sort of waiver. I don't know
• 13 MR. VIVONA: I don't either. And the
14 Board cannot do that without the approval
15 of the membership.
16 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Either that
17 approval needs to come beforehand or before
18 the Zoning Board makes a determination or
19 the Zoning Board can make a determination
20 subject to approval by the Homeowners
21 Association for the modular construction,
22 which means they can't proceed until you
23 agree to it. We really don't have the
24 ability to intervene. Given the changed
• 25 nature of modular construction today as
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 37
• 1 opposed to what it was, but that's entirely
2 up to you. You have to deal with it.
3 MR. VIVONA: Oh, we will deal with it
4 but none of us have the authority to deal
5 with it without the members approval. And
6 I would have to hold a special meeting. We
7 have lots of families with kids in schools
8 and they're not going to come out here for
9 a meeting. I doubt very much we could get
10 a quorum. So that's a big problem.
11 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: So I guess you
12 have to speak to the property owner and
• 13 figure out something. I am sure there is
14 something that something can be worked out
15 with respect to any damage to the
16 construction of the walkway. Is there
17 anything else
18 MR. VIVONA: Yes. It was a surprise to
19 me that a crane was going to be introduced
20 into construction. The road is not a very
21 strong road, there is not that much traffic
22 on it. With a heavy piece of equipment like
23 that on there, I think the road is going to
24 be compromised. It's just been a five year
• 25 duration to repave this entire road, which
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 38
• 1 is 12,000 linear feet.
2 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: In all these
3 situations, not only from the point of
4 putting in sanitary systems, my suggestion
5 from the association standpoint and it's
6 merely a suggestion and that is to find out
7 what crane company is going to come and
8 they have to give you a liability policy.
9 You have to see what is involved, so on and
10 so forth. So you can suggest that the
11 property owner or mandate the property
12 owner do that.
• 13 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Is there
14 anything else that you would like to
15 MR. VIVONA: No, I guess the rest is
16 with Stacy because I really need floor
17 plans. I guess we really can't get a good
18 floor plan until there is an approval. All
19 I have is a little paper. We also require
20 garages, which I don't see.
21 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: We don't have a
22 full set of plans because they don't have a
23 site section. They don't know how to place
24 it on the site, but I totally appreciate
• 25 what you're saying. They're proposing a
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 39
• 1 garage. I do want to address the issue of
2 lot coverage. I assume that it does not
3 meet the code because of the modular and
9 it's a certain size. Why can't you conform
5 to a lot coverage of 200.
6 MR. VIVONA: I don't understand what
7 modular speaking. I understand old, where
8 a room was brought in. I don't
9 understand
10 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: I think Stacy
11 has to address that.
12 MS. BISHOP: I think I can address
• 13 that outside of this. As for lot coverage,
14 it's strictly the client's interpretation
15 of the plan that he found on the Internet.
16 He shrunk it down significantly and he is
17 asking for a variance the way that it is.
18 Could it be shrunken down, yes. Could it
19 be, yes. To be honest with you. Just for
20 consideration, that is the way that he
21 would like it to be built.
22 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: It's customized?
23 MS. BISHOP: Correct. Quite frankly,
24 it's for consideration on a floor plan that
• 25 he would like.
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 40
• 1 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: To be honest
2 with you, then he should hire someone and
3 have it built. Then you won't have a
4 modular issue. You won't have a crane
5 issue.
6 Is there anyone else in the audience
7 that would like to address this because
8 given the time, I am going to propose to
9 adjourn this to next month because there
10 are a number of things that need to be
11 addressed
12 MS. BISHOP: Sure.
• 13 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Is there is
14 someone that would like to make an
15 additional comment?
16 (No Response.)
17 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Okay. Hearing no
18 further comment, I will make a motion to
19 adjourn this hearing to October the 3rd at
20 10:00 a.m. You can meet with your clients
21 and tell them what are all the issues.
22 MS. BISHOP: Will do.
23 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: I'll second that.
24 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: All in favor?
• 25 MEMBER DANTES: Aye.
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 41
• 1 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Aye.
2 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Aye.
3 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Aye.
4 (See Minutes for Resolution.)
5 ***++a**+~+*++*~~++**+~+****~+***~~~*+****~
6 HEARING #6678 - MAUREEN BLATTNER
7 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: The next
8 application before the Board is for
9 Goggins; however, he is not here. So we
10 will move on to Maureen Blattner. This is
11 an application, #6678. Request for variance
12 from Article XXIII Section 280-124 and the
• 13 Building Inspector's June 20, 2013 Notice
14 of Disapproval based on an application for
15 building permit for an "as-built" deck
16 addition to existing single family
17 dwelling: 1) less than the code required
18 minimum rear yard setback of 50 feet,
19 located at: 295 Shore Lane in Peconic.
20 Is there someone here to represent
21 this application? Please come to the
22 podium. If you would like to come to the
23 dais so that you could hear us better,
24 that's perfectly fine. Please state your
• 25 name for the record.
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 42
• 1 MR. BLATTNER: William Blattner.
2 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: So we have a
3 deck by the way, we have all been to the
4 site. We do need from you, the green
5 cards. Do you have those?
6 MR. BLATTNER: Right here.
7 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Do you want a
8 letter from Suffolk County for local
9 determination, for your records? This just
10 says that the County of Suffolk has no
11 interest in this application. They have to
12 send that by law. So we have an "as-built"
• 13 deck addition that is existing. That is
14 setback at 40 feet from the rear yard and
15 when the code requires a minimum of 50
16 feet. Okay. The deck has been existence
17 for some time. Can you tell us how long
18 that deck has been there and why you're
19 coming before us?
20 MR. BLATTNER: I think it has been
21 about 10 years.
22 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: And tell me what
23 it is that brings you before the Board now.
24 MR. BLATTNER: We would like to get it
• 25 legalized and have it done properly. We
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 43
• 1 had to get it revamped with everything else
2 now. And he has supplied prints and plans
3 on that.
4 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: It looks to be
5 in very good condition. We have all seen
6 it. We have pictures of it and so on. The
7 application is quite complete. It appears
8 that your house is actually located at 55.8
9 feet from the rear yard. So it would be
10 pretty difficult you would need to have
11 a variance.
12 MR. BLATTNER: That is what we're
• 13 looking for.
14 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: You have about a
15 5.8 foot wiggle room between the code
16 required setback. All right. I don't have
17 any questions.
18 Eric?
19 MEMBER DANTES: Yes. I was looking
20 behind the property. When you're sitting on
21 the deck, what do you look at?
22 MR. BLATTNER: That is preserved land.
23 There is no construction. They can never
24 build there. It's part of the 12 acres of
• 25 the Richmond Shores Association property
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 99
• 1 that is considered preserved land. Also
2 along the creek, there is preserved land.
3 MEMBER DANTES: Where is the creek
4 from your property?
5 MR. BLATTNER: It's across the street.
6 MEMBER DANTES: You can't see it
7 behind you?
8 MR. BLATTNER: No, I can't see it. The
9 creek would be on the other side. I don't
10 see the creek at all. It's way on the other
11 side, across the land.
12 MEMBER DANTES: Is it for public?
• 13 MR. BLATTNER: It's preserved land.
14 MEMBER DANTES: No one ever goes
15 there?
16 MR. BLATTNER: I mean, you have some
17 residents that walk along the creek with
18 their children but nobody really goes
19 there.
20 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Anything else?
21 MEMBER DANTES: No.
22 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: There is one
23 thing noted on the survey that this Board
24 would want to see done anyway, to move the
• 25 shed
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 45
• 1 MR. BLATTNER: It has been moved.
2 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: It's already
3 moved?
q MR. BLATTNER: Yeah. That was moved,
5 I would take a guess, two weeks ago. They
6 charlied it over, Peconic Shed.
7 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: What might be
8 good then, if you could provide a even
g if you do it by hand, if you provide a
10 survey for the existing that shows where it
11 is now. That is has been moved to a more
12 conforming location.
• 13 MR. BLATTNER: It's moved up 8 feet.
14 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Okay. We just
15 need something showing you already did
16 this.
17 MR. BLATTNER: Okay.
18 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Just showing
19 that it has been moved and where it's been
20 moved to.
21 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Is the shed in the
22 side yard now?
23 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: I think it needs
24 to be in the rear yard. It used to be in
25 the side yard. Please just go to the mic
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 96
1 and state your name.
2 MS. BLATTNER: Maureen Blattner. For
3 the updated survey, I would have to go back
4 to the survey people. He did the surveys.
5 He's in Jamesport. So I have to go back to
6 them and have them put the little shed on
7 another survey. Is that what you want?
8 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: The Building
9 Department should be able you know what,
10 I think you can probably just make a little
11 X on the survey showing us where that is
12 located. Eventually, you will probably want
• 13 to have a survey showing us where
14 everything is located on the property. I
15 don't think it's we could do another
16 inspection I suppose. You could show us
17 where it was and where it's now. I just
18 want to make sure that that was taken care
19 of. I don't want to burden you with that.
20 It's up to the Board?
21 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: I am fine with
22 that. I just want to make sure that it's
23 very clear that the deck determines the
29 side yard. It has to be behind that. So
25 you're clear on the location of where it
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 47
• 1 has to be?
2 MR. BLATTNER: Yeah, it had to be
3 moved up they told us.
9 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Moved towards your
5 backyard?
6 MR. BLATTNER: No, moved sideways up
7 to the house. Eight feet I was told.
8 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: The Building
9 Department told you that?
10 MR. BLATTNER: It was told through my
11 wife on whoever she spoke to and that is
12 what I had to do.
• 13 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: From the Building
14 Department?
15 MR. BLATTNER: I guess so.
16 MS. BLATTNER: The Building
17 Department. They said they had to have it
18 10 feet from the property line. So
19 MR. BLATTNER: So it was like four or
20 five feet and then we moved it another
21 eight.
22 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: I don't want them to
23 have to come back here because it's in a
24 side yard.
• 25 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: You see, the
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 48
• 1 shed nears to be in the rear yard with a
2 certain setback from the side yard of the
3 property. Because the deck is attached to
4 your house, that is considered part of your
5 house. It has to be past your deck. Do
6 you know what I am saying? Closer to the
7 rear property line then what the deck is.
8 Vicki, will come out with a survey and show
9 you. I think the easiest way to do this is
10 have the Board put a condition on the
11 variance, the setback variance for the deck
12 subject to having the shed in a conforming
• 13 location. Hopefully, when the Building
14 Department goes out they will issue a CO on
15 the deck. They will do the inspection and
16 they will tell you exactly where it needs
17 to be and if it's correct, and if it's not,
18 and then they will give you a CO.
19 MR. BLATTNER: Okay. That is not what
20 I was told. I was told to move it out
21 eight feet. I had to have it paid for them
22 to move it and I did it.
23 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Well, I think
24 the cheapest and the most impressive way to
• 25 do it, is to indicate that the shed is in a
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 49
• 1 conforming location. When they come out,
2 they will tell you if it's in a conforming
3 location. If it's not, they will tell you
4 that you have to move it there, which is
5 what they should have told you to begin
6 with. I don't want to burden you about
7 anything with a survey now. We will deal
8 with the deck right now, and note that the
9 shed needs to be in a conforming location.
10 MR. BLATTNER: Thank you.
11 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Is there anyone
12 else who would like to address this
• 13 application?
14 (No Response.)
15 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Hearing no
16 further comments or questions, I will make
17 a motion to close the hearing and reserve
18 decision to a later date.
19 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Second.
20 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: All in favor?
21 MEMBER DANTES: Aye.
22 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Aye.
23 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Aye.
24 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Aye.
25 (See Minutes for Resolution.)
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 50
1
• 2 HEARING #6679 - FRANK MARSILIO
3 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: The next
4 application before the Board is for Frank
5 Marsilio, #6674. Request for variance from
6 Article XXII Code Section 280-116(B) based
7 on an application for building permit and
8 the Building Inspector's June 28, 2013
9 Notice of Disapproval concerning a permit
10 to construct additions and alterations to
11 an existing single family dwelling, at 1)
12 proposed construction at less than the code
• 13 required bulkhead setback of 75 feet,
14 located at: 1080 Deep Hole Drive, adjacent
15 to Deep Hole Creek in Mattituck.
16 Is there someone here to represent
17 this? Would you state your name, please.
18 MS_ NIEMANN: Natalie Niemann, I am
19 the architect of record.
20 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Let me give you
21 a copy of this LWRP recommendation, which
22 indicates that the proposed additions are
23 consistent and also a notice of Suffolk
24 County local determination. Okay. It
• 25 would appear that the additions and
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 51
• 1 alterations are proposed at 72 feet from
2 the bulkhead, where the code requires 75
3 foot bulkhead setback. You're proposing a
4 seaward deck and covered porch. Has a DEC
5 permit and if it were 3 feet, it would be
6 conforming.
7 MS. NIEMANN: That's correct.
8 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Do you need
9 Trustees for this?
10 MS. NIEMANN: We're dealing with
11 Trustees hopefully once we get the variance
12 for this.
• 13 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Okay. Eric,
19 questions?
15 MEMBER DANTES: Yes. There is an
16 indentation on the bulkhead, I don't know
17 if it's on the survey or not.
18 MS. NIEMANN: There was a dock. Its
19 indicated from the main part of the
20 bulkhead.
21 MEMBER DANTES: And what kind of
22 covered porch? Is it going to be a deck?
23 MS. NIEMANN: Yes. It's composite
29 decking with the standard wood framing
• 25 underneath with the footings. It's covered
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 52
• 1 with asphalt shingles to match the existing
2 house. Also the roof is a Hip roof.
3 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Is the porch
9 proposed to be enclosed? Screened porch?
5 MS. NIEMANN: No.
6 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: It's open?
7 MS. NIEMANN: It's just open.
8 MEMBER DANTES: Is that area of the
9 property, is it flat or slopes down?
10 MS. NIEMANN: It's relatively flat
11 around the porch area. When you get to the
12 bulkhead, it's about down to three feet or
• 13 so. So there is 3 to 4 foot change in
14 grade over a 70 foot length.
15 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: I did note when
16 I did a site inspection, that the depth of
17 that porch is approximately the same as the
18 depth of the existing deck going in and out
19 of the property.
20 MS. NIEMANN: There was an X on the
21 concrete site. That comes out further.
22 MEMBER DANTES: Are there other homes
23 in the neighborhood that have some porches?
24 MS. NIEMANN: Yes, they do. I also
• 25 know that they're encroaching on some as
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 53
• 1 well. The neighbors to the south have
2 that.
3 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Ken, anything?
4 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Nope.
5 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Gerry?
6 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: What is the
7 distance of the proposed decking area from
8 the back of the door to the property line?
9 That open area?
10 MS. NIEMANN: On the side yard?
11 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Yes, the side
12 yard.
• 13 MS. NIEMANN: The proposed deck is
14 lined up with the house. So it's almost
15 22 feet. There is a dimension there right
16 by that drywell. Do you mind if I step
17 over so I can point it out?
18 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Sure. One of the
19 great issues that I have had is the ability
20 I am Mattituck fireman, is the ability
21 to get around the house. I suspect there
22 will be no closing up around here. Thank
23 you.
24 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Anything else
• 25 from the Board?
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 54
1 (No Response.)
2 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Is there anyone
3 in the audience that wishes to address this
4 application?
5 (NO Response.)
6 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Hearing no
7 further questions or comments, I make a
8 motion to close this hearing and reserve
9 decision to a later date.
10 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Second.
11 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: All in favor?
12 MEMBER DANTES: Aye.
• 13 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Aye.
14 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Aye.
15 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Aye.
16 (See Minutes for Resolution.)
17 *a+****+*+~+++**********~+~+**++***++++*+++
18 HEARING #6670 - MICHAEL AND CELIA
19 WITHERS
20 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: The next
21 application before the Board is for Michael
22 and Celia Withers, #6670, request for
23 variance from Article XXII Code Section
24 280-116(B) based on an application for
• 25 building permit and the Building
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 55
• 1 Inspector's June 13, 2013 Notice of
2 Disapproval concerning a permit to
3 construct additions and alterations to an
4 existing single family dwelling, at; 1)
5 proposed construction at less than the code
6 required bulkhead setback of 75 feet,
7 located at: 6635 New Suffolk Road,
8 adjacent to School House Creek in New
9 Suffolk.
10 Is there someone here to address this
11 application? Please state your name for
12 the record.
• 13 MS. STEELMAN: Hi, Nancy Steelman from
19 Samuels and Steelman Architects.
15 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Okay. So we
16 have a proposed artist studio at 465 square
17 feet with side yard setback no, bulkhead
18 setback of 35 feet, where the code requires
19 75 feet. Okay. We have an LWRP letter, do
20 you have a copy?
21 MS. STEELMAN: No, I don't.
22 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Let me give it
23 to you. Also a notice from Suffolk County
24 for local determination. It's a unique
• 25 piece of property. That's for sure. The
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 56
• 1 challenge of the Zoning Board is to find
2 properties. So it's clearly being proposed
3 as far away from the bulkhead as it could
4 possibly be.
5 MS. STEELMAN: Correct.
6 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: In a very flat,
7 grassy yard. Is there anything else that
8 you would like to tell us, Nancy?
9 MS. STEELMAN: Weli, the entire house
10 is within the 75 feet. There is very few
11 options. We tried to push it back as far as
12 we could from the bulkhead but shifted it
• 13 slightly to get a little bit of a view
14 area.
15 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Eric, do you
16 have any questions?
17 MEMBER DANTES: No, I don't.
18 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: It's a difficult
19 site. It's a beautiful marina along this
20 property.
21 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Gerry, any
22 questions?
23 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: No, I know this
24 property very well. I used to keep my boat
• 25 there. It is wonderfully taken care by
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 57
• 1 Mr. & Mrs. Withers, and I think it's the
2 only site it could be placed.
3 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Nancy, it would
9 appear that there is a framed shed that
5 would be existing in a side yard. Eric is
6 pointing out that the zoning is MII but
7 it's still an accessory. I don't know if
8 it's conforming or not conforming. It's
9 not in the Notice of Disapproval. All
10 right. Anything else from the Board?
11 Anyone else wishes to address the
12 application?
• 13 (No Response.)
14 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Hearing no
15 further questions or comments, I make a
16 motion to close this hearing and reserve
17 decision to a later date.
18 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Second.
19 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: All in favor?
20 MEMBER DANTES: Aye.
21 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Aye.
22 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Aye.
23 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Aye.
24 (See Minutes for Resolution.)
• 25 **~~++*****+*~~+~**+~**+~*+~**++t**~*+*****
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 58
• 1 HEARING #6679 - STEPHEN LICATA
2 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: The next
3 application before the Board is for Stephen
4 Licata, #6679. Request for variance from
5 Article XXII Code Section 280-116(B) based
6 on an application for building permit and
7 the Building Inspector's June 28, 2013
8 Notice of Disapproval concerning a permit
9 to construct additions and alterations to
10 an existing single family dwelling, at; 1)
11 proposed construction at less than the code
12 required bulkhead setback of 75 feet,
• 13 located at: 670 Old Salt Road, adjacent to
14 Peconic Bay in Mattituck.
15 Could you please state your name for
16 the record, please.
17 MR. GORMAN: I am Bill Gorman, on
18 behalf of Steve and Amy Licata. As you
19 stated here, we're looking to do some
20 renovations to the house. Primarily,
21 dormers. Two dog house dormers in front
22 and one in the back as well. We want to
23 redo the screened porch and put a roof on
24 that. Staying within the footprint of the
25 existing porch.
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 59
• 1 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: I just wanted to
2 give you a copy of the LWRP report showing
3 consistency. So you have it for your
4 reports. And a notice from Suffolk County.
5 The Notice of Disapproval is additions and
6 alterations are a 57 bulkhead setback. The
7 code requires 75, but that is rare.
8 MR. GORMAN: The existing "as-built"
9 pergola, we want to get approval for the
10 "as-built" pergola.
11 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: None of these
12 were built with any kind the patio, the
• 13 fire pit, never got a Trustees approval.
14 They were all built between 2007 and 2010,
15 also the LWRP specifies that as well. Are
16 you going to need to go before the Trustees
17 now?
18 MR. GORMAN: No.
19 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: So you went to
20 Trustees?
21 MR. GORMAN: I went to them and they
22 said that I didn't need that. I will
23 certainly go back.
24 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Were they aware
• 25 that the patio was raised?
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 60
• 1 MR. GORMAN: Probably not.
2 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: You might want to
3 show them a copy of the LWRP.
4 MR. GORMAN: Yes, I will do that.
5 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Because of the
6 raised patio and the pergola, none of them
~ have conforming setbacks. We have to look
8 at the setbacks of the patio, not just the
9 pergola. The survey shows a 56 setback
10 from the pergola, whereas the Notice of
11 Disapproval says 67 feet. Because that
12 patio is raised, I would think that we need
• 13 to look at variance relief from the raised
14 patio. If you are here to legalize you
15 might as well look at all of it.
16 MR. GORMAN: Let's look at all of it.
17 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Do you know what
18 the setbacks are from the raised patio to
19 the bulkhead? The screened porch shows
20 MR. GORMAN: I have a scale but not
21 with me. It's in my car. It's almost
22 half. It's a little bit less than half.
23 So if it's 63. Then it's more than half
24 way. Do you want to look at the fire pit?
• 25 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Yes. Because
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 61
• 1 that is considered a structure.
2 MR. GORMAN: It's going to be about 27
3 feet.
4 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: On the surface
5 of it a11, what you're proposing to do
6 relative to the dwelling is really not
7 monumental. It's just that all of them are
8 going to require setback relief. And I
9 don't know if the Building Department
10 realized that this was a raised structure.
11 I think we need to have the Building
12 Department reexamine the Notice of
• 13 Disapproval.
14 MR. GORMAN: Can we table part of it
15 and look at the structure itself?
16 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: You can talk to
17 us about it but I don't think we can
18 fragment the application. It should be
19 looked at as a total package. We can look
20 at what you're proposing to do. The porch
21 doesn't have a permit. The pergola doesn't
22 have a permit. I think we should back
23 track and get all squared away.
24 MR. GORMAN: Right.
25 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: The other thing
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 62
• 1 is, the LWRP is recommending that if there
2 is an approval, that a 15 foot perpetual
3 landscaped buffer be established.
4 MR. GORMAN: Okay. Right.
5 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: So that is
6 something that we would like to give you
7 and talk to your clients about.
8 Gerry, do you have any questions or
9 anything that you would like to talk about?
10 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Not about the
11 original application, all the reasons were
12 discussed. It's a pretty well taken care
• 13 of property.
14 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: The other thing
15 that would be helpful to this Board is to
16 provide us with typical bulkhead setbacks
17 in the neighborhood. There aren't many
18 that are nonconforming that area but it
19 would be helpful to this Board.
20 MR. GORMAN: Okay.
21 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: I know that
22 there are plenty in that area that have
23 variance relief.
24 MR. GORMAN: All right.
• 25 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: So back to the
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 63
• 1 Building Department for an updated Notice
2 of Disapproval.
3 Is there any other questions?
9 (No Response.)
5 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Is there anyone
6 in the audience that would like to address
7 this application?
8 (No Response.)
9 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Okay. So this
10 would be 11. Vicki is just looking at the
11 photographs. We all did a site inspection
12 but we didn't measure it.
• 13 MR. GORMAN: I don't remember.
19 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: What baffles me
15 is, we have a similar situation at Nassau
16 Point. A relative new construction, there
17 was no denial from the Building Department
18 because it was a fixed structure.
19 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: They're probably
20 going to have to go out.
21 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Do you want to
22 request setbacks for that?
23 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Yes. What I am
24 going to do is suggest that I leave this
• 25 meeting open to the Special Meeting, two
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 64
• 1 weeks from now. And you can submit to our
2 office any additional information,
3 secondary determination from Building on
4 the setbacks and then if there is no if
5 you can get it to us in the next couple of
6 days
7 MR. GORMAN: I can do that.
8 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: If you can get
9 that all together and we have no further
10 questions, then we can close the hearing
11 two weeks from today and deliberate.
12 MR. GORMAN: I will do that.
• 13 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Do we want to
14 indicate on the survey if the patio is at
15 grade or not?
16 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Yes.
17 MR. GORMAN: I will have that all
18 taken care.
19 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: We just don't
20 want to leave anything not taken care of.
21 MR. GORMAN: I appreciate that.
22 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Is there anyone
23 else in the audience that would like to
24 address this application?
• 25 (No Response.)
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 65
• 1 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Hearing no
2 further questions or comments, I make a
3 motion to adjourn this application to the
9 Special Meeting.
5 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Second.
6 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: All in favor?
7 MEMBER DANTES: Aye.
8 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Aye.
9 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Aye.
10 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Aye.
11 (See Minutes for Resolution.)
12
• 13 HEARING #6675 - 7850 MAIN ROAD, LLC,
19 D/B/A THE BLUE INN
15 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: The next
16 application before the Board is for 7850
17 Main Road, LLC, d/b/a The Blue Inn at North
18 Fork, #6675. Request for Special Exception
19 per Article VII Section 280-35(B) to expand
20 the current restaurant use to include being
21 pen to the public, enclose the existing
22 patio and surround with a 3 1/2 foot wall
23 located in a Resort Residential (RR)
24 District, located at: 7850 Main Road and
• 25 Orchard Lane, a.k.a Orchard Road in East
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 66
• 1 Marion.
2 Good afternoon.
3 MR. GLASS: Good afternoon. My name is
4 Samuel Glass. I am representing 7850 Main
5 Road, and I am also the principal of this
6 LLC.
7 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: All right. Let's
8 review what is going on here. This is an
9 application to create a Special Exception
10 permit for the operation of a restaurant on
11 the subject property in association with
12 the existing resort hotel. Let me ask you,
• 13 do you propose to this is currently a
14 seasonal use restaurant?
15 MR. GLASS: That's correct. And we
16 want to continue it as a seasonal use
17 restaurant. The only thing that we're
18 actually asking you, madam, is that we have
19 we can temporarily close it during the
20 months of Memorial Day through October 1st.
21 What we find is, that most of the people
22 sit out in the patio and in the patio that
23 we're next to a farm, a lavender farm.
24 And there is a lot of bees and insects that
• 25 are there. So therefore, we would like to
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 67
• 1 put a netting around it. And during
2 inclement weather, we would like to put
3 plastic. We're asking that a 3 1/2 foot
9 wood barrier be placed around the patio for
5 safety purposes. So people will not back up
6 and fall off the patio. And we would open
7 it install it at the beginning of the
8 season and we would remove it at the end of
9 the season. Up to now, we operate as a
10 restaurant, and the restaurant has been
11 operating for many years, but we find that
12 because of the people in the area and our
• 13 guests or whatever, that to enclose it,
19 would make much more sense.
15 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: And the proposal
16 is to include enclosing it with both
17 netting and plastic?
18 MR. GLASS: Plastic, yes.
19 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: And you're
20 proposing a wood barrier? It wasn't clear
21 in your application.
22 MR. GLASS: It's a wood barrier. A
23 removable wood barrier that you would put
24 up around the patio. So that wood barrier
• 25 would be anchored you know, temporarily
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 68
• 1 anchored and we would put the netting above
2 that. It would be you know, nothing
3 would change in terms of the size of the
4 patio or anything else or the capacity of
5 the restaurant.
6 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Can you tell me
7 a little bit about that, sir? What is the
8 current capacity of the restaurant?
9 MR. GLASS: In the Health Department
10 permit, 48 person occupancy.
11 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: For the
12 restaurant?
• 13 MR. GLASS: That's correct.
14 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: And is that
15 about what you intend to be looking to do?
16 MR. GLASS: Correct.
17 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: You're not
18 proposing to expand it?
19 MR. GLASS: Not at all.
20 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Now that is
21 acceptable to your current septic system.
22 It would not need to be enlarged in any
23 way?
24 MR. GLASS: Not at all. Last year we
• 25 had an inspection of the septic and also
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 69
• 1 the facilities last year, and this year by
2 the Health Department. And we have been
3 approved for every inspection. We have been
4 operating here. We purchased this about two
5 and half years ago.
6 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: So the restaurant
7 is proposed to be an accessory to the motel
8 use?
9 MR. GLASS: That's correct.
10 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: And you're not
11 proposing to operate any differently other
12 than slightly longer season?
• 13 MR. GLASS: Not even a longer season.
14 In fact, we're cutting the season shorter.
15 We were open before past October 1st, but
16 we found that it did not have the clientele
17 for it. Not enough guests eating at the
18 restaurant for it. In fact, the reason
19 that we're bringing this up, two-fold.
20 When we signed an agreement with the Town
21 of Southold, and in the Town of Southold,
22 we agreed that this would be used as an
23 accessory building. We thought that the
24 accessory building meant that you operate a
• 25 restaurant, and there was some issue
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 70
• 1 whether or not you could have locals who
2 were coming to our restaurant eat there. So
3 then we were told in order to set the
4 record straight, that we come before you
5 and then for an approval, and then we
6 could have locals local people come
7 there or neighbors who have come there over
8 the years. See in order to operate a
9 especially with the competition in other
10 areas. Not just in Southold, but in
11 Greenport or thereabout. I am talking about
12 other areas that are still competing for
• 13 people to come out. Like to all vacational
14 areas. You have to be able to offer them a
15 restaurant. During the week, we do not have
16 enough guests to sustain a restaurant, and
17 sometimes on weekends also we don't have
18 enough people to sustain a restaurant. So
19 without the financial assistance of the
20 neighbors and the locals to come to the
21 restaurant with our guests, we would not be
22 able to open up the restaurant. And thus,
23 it would reduce the amount of people there
24 and thus not make a profit of opening the
• 25 restaurant. This year, we only opened up
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 71
• 1 the restaurant for our guests because we
2 didn't want to do anything until this issue
3 was settled with this Board. And I can
4 only tell you that a lot of neighbors
5 called us up and asked us why we weren't
6 opening and all that. And we told them
7 that we have this hearing and we have to go
8 forward with the permission to do so. But
9 we're not changing anything except to make
10 it more comfortable for the people going to
11 dine there and also to allow the local
12 people and neighbors to come to the
• 13 restaurant also.
14 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: What are you
15 currently serving in the way of food?
16 MR. GLASS: That is undetermined, and
17 I will tell you why. The first year we had
18 a very fancy French Belgium chef that did
19 not work to well. The prices were too high.
20 Last year, you know, we had a we had a
21 lesser type of menu. We did very we had
22 a lot of people there. The cost control and
23 then at the end that we were told by the
24 Town that we had to reduce, you know the
• 25 people, the locals, we found it
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 72
• 1 unprofitable. We had to stop it at that
2 particular time. This year, we haven't
3 really done that much. We had a number of
4 conversations. We just wanted to be fair.
5 You know, just do, you know, the prices for
6 dinner would be $30-$35.00 per dinner.
7 Nothing extraordinary. Good wholesome food
8 actually. Now, I wanted to point out also,
9 it's not just the restaurant is
10 necessary because we're getting a lot of
11 foreigners into the country who are
12 vacationing on the North Fork and the South
• 13 Fork, because they find it money can buy
14 them a lot. And when they come here,
15 they're looking for places that do have a
16 restaurant. In fact, many of the travel
17 agencies, we work with New York State
18 Travelers Guide. We're working with other
19 tour guides. So the restaurant is necessary
20 for us to compete and bring people. We're
21 also thinking in terms of bringing day
22 buses in to come out here because there is
23 a lot of wine tours and they want a
24 restaurant to come to, and some place to
• 25 maybe go swimming or do something else.
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 73
1 We're looking into that also. You know,
2 trying to expand the scope of our business.
3 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: When we did an
4 inspection of the property, I managed to
5 look at the fact that you had about 30
6 units altogether?
7 MR. GLASS: 29.
8 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: 29. And I
9 counted 27 parking spaces. Am I off?
10 MR. GLASS: I think you're off by one
11 or two but you're not considering also,
12 ma'am, that there is we have land that
• 13 we haven't put parking spaces on that we
14 could use, and if we did find that we need
15 more parking, we can valet the parking and
16 put it on that property near the garage.
17 Right behind the pool, where we could valet
18 another 30 cars. While, I don't expect
19 that we will ever get that type of parking,
20 because if you have 48 people and I am
21 hoping from the Inn itself, at least one
22 half of the people will be from the people.
23 So we're going to bring out "sliders," so
24 to speak, we will need about 15 parking
• 25 spaces, which we can easily handle without
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 74
• 1 a problem.
2 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Based on the
3 proposed area according to the
4 determination of the ingress and egress,
5 you have plenty of options. Although
6 they're quite small and a narrow road and
7 exit (In Audible). Behind the pool, that
8 is what you're talking about?
9 MR. GLASS: Yes. Correct.
10 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: If you were to
11 exit onto Old Orchard, you have to be very,
12 very careful, knowing that street,
• 13 practically collided with a truck coming
14 off the main road, it's very tight there.
15 It may have to require a little cutting
16 back of the area to make it a little bit
17 better, but that is probably a Planning
18 Board jurisdiction. There is a formula for
19 required number of spaces due to the
20 occupancy of the resort/motel. And then
21 there is parking relative to the parking
22 aspect of the restaurant. And I am sure
23 that what you're proposing can be combined
24 somehow. If you had a full house, then you
• 25 don't have any parking spaces there are
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 75
• 1 slight parking spaces.
2 MR. GLASS: That's correct. In most
3 cases, let me say this, this weekend, if we
4 had the restaurant open, most likely three
5 quarters of the guests at the restaurant
6 would come at least one night, would come
7 from us and therefore, we wouldn't need the
8 additional parking. And let's say, we had
9 another 15 people and they come two in a
10 car, which generally happens, we can easily
11 accommodate 7 additional cars passed the
12 area. You know, without a problem.
• 13 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Can you provide
14 a little bit of background for us? I am
15 sure you know the history of the property
16 and how long it's been in existence and how
17 long a restaurant has been operating there
18 and so on?
19 MR. GLASS: Well, to my knowledge, the
20 restaurant has been operating for 50 years
21 over there. I know that in the last 7 or 8
22 years, prior to our taking it, you know,
23 purchasing it from the bank, that it wasn't
24 being operated. So I know there were
• 25 certain problems with that. You know,
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 76
• 1 where they used to operate it to the early
2 parts of the morning. There was a lot of
3 noise. There was a lot of other things
4 going on that I am sure that the Board and
5 the neighbor's did not want to see. But I
6 can only tell you, in the time hat we have
7 operated it, we haven't had any incidents.
8 We have an agreement, with no outside music
9 after 9 p.m., which we have adhered to
10 strictly. We try to be a very good
11 neighbor. In fact, we're a family oriented
12 in fact, when you were there, we're
• 13 family oriented and we don't have rowdy
14 people coming there. We're not trying to
15 make this into a bar scene. In fact, it
16 would be easier for us to make it into a
17 bar scene then do the restaurant, which we
18 don't want to do. We want it to be quiet
19 after a certain period of time, because
20 people have to go to sleep and we don't
21 want to have any problems with anyone.
22 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Zs there anything
23 else that you would like to tell us at this
24 point?
• 25 MR. GLASS: I am looking if you
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 77
• 1 grant this permission to operate, we're
2 going to be hiring at least, six or seven,
3 you know local people to do so, number one.
4 Number two, we only want it from Memorial
5 Day to October lst. We discussed the hotel
6 room. I discussed the oversees travelers
7 and whatever with you already. And I
8 wanted to just say that when we did operate
9 the restaurant, many of our neighbors
10 enjoyed it and they encouraged us. So
11 thank you very much for your time.
12 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: One quick
• 13 question. You indicated, your diagram shows
19 a 55'x39' outdoor cement patio with 12
15 tables and 98 seats?
16 MR. GLASS: Yes.
17 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: You also have 6
18 tables with 12 seats inside?
19 MR. GLASS: We would not be using the
20 inside restaurant. We would only put the
21 people on the outside.
22 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: That's why you
23 wanted to enclose it.
24 MR. GLASS: Yes. Let me just say this,
• 25 they don't want to sit inside. They want
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 78
• 1 to sit outside.
2 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: What about a bar
3 area, perhaps?
4 MR. GLASS: Well, they could do that.
5 In my experience in the last two and a half
6 years, most of the people just want to sit
7 down. We have very few people at the bar.
8 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Let me ask if
9 the Board has any questions of you before
10 we open this up.
11 MR. GLASS: Yes.
12 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Yes. You talked
• 13 about, you proposed to do a 3 1/2 foot, I
14 guess little knee wall?
15 MR. GLASS: That's correct.
16 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: You said that you
17 would remove that? Why would you remove
18 it? Why wouldn't you just leave it up?
19 MR. GLASS: In the winter first
20 off, we don't want to leave anything
21 permanent there, number one. And number
22 two, during the winter with the snow and
23 everything else, it's just going to become
24 it won't work. It would just be much
• 25 easier to take it down like we take the
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 79
• 1 awning off also. We take everything off. It
2 becomes very cold during the winter. In
3 order to protect everything.
9 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Okay. Yes, I noticed
5 that you would need that little wall there
6 because there is like an 8 inch ledge. I
7 could see where that would be a little
8 hazard.
9 MR. GLASS: It's mostly for safety.
10 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Why would you
11 restrict yourself without having dining in
12 the area where the bar is?
• 13 MR. GLASS: Because during the summer
19 when it's not cold outside, it's much
15 easier. Everyone wants to sit outside.
16 Nobody wants to sit inside. It won't work.
17 We're set up to do 48 people. Now, what we
18 would hope to do, if we had so many people,
19 we would have two different Beating's or
20 whatever. We haven't come to that problem
21 yet and it would be a very good one to
22 approach.
23 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: No other questions
24 from me.
• 25 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Gerry?
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 80
. 1 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: No, I am good.
2 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Eric?
3 MEMBER DANTES: No.
4 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: At the moment,
5 what I would like to do is allow anyone in
6 the audience who would like to address this
7 application to come forward to either
8 microphone. Just stand up and go and state
9 your name and spell it please, for our
10 record. It's being tape recorded.
11 MS. IMANDT: Hi. My name is Robin
12 Imandt, and that is spelled, I-M-A-N-D-T. I
• 13 am here in two capacities. One as
14 co-president of the East Marion Community
15 Association, and the other as a neighbor
16 and resident. I live diagonally across the
17 street from The Blue. Right now, I would
18 like to speak as the co-president of EMCA,
19 as we call it. We're a civic organization,
20 whose mission is to preserve and protect
21 the rural character and agricultural
22 interests of East Marion. Our membership
23 is, we're six years old and our membership
24 represents about half of the duration of
• 25 East Marion. Permitting The Blue to expand
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 81
• 1 the restaurant and enclose the patio and to
2 open a restaurant, not just for the guests,
3 which is what they agreed to. In their
4 agreement, they didn't say anything about
5 neighbors coming to the restaurant. It's
6 an accessory. It's for the guests at the
7 Inn. I think it's in conflict with the
8 character of the neighborhood. We have a
9 post office. We have a general store and
10 the Hellenic, which is on a big piece of
11 property and has a golf course around a
12 good portion of it. So we're opposed to
• 13 this. I will say that this summer has been
14 wonderful. I have one complaint, and
15 that's the glaring light that comes into my
16 bedroom, and perhaps Mr. Glass doesn't
17 know, we have a lighting code that I would
18 be happy to give a code on that. I would
19 really love if they turn it off at night.
20 It's on 24 hours a day. I would also like
21 to say that we had lots of problems with
22 the area. Not under Mr. Glass' ownership,
23 but these are a sampling of the police
24 reports. The agreement well actually
• 25 there was a letter sent to the State Liquor
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 82
• 1 Authority by the Town denying not
2 approving their application. Then they set
3 up an agreement between Mr. Glass and the
4 Town. The items that they mentioned in the
5 letter to the SLA were that a commercial
6 establishment opened 7 days a week to
7 4 o'clock in the morning is not appropriate
8 for that area. I don't Mr. Glass didn't
9 mention any changes in the hours. So I
10 would like to know if he has any changes in
11 the hours. And also, the Town has 31
12 police complaints regarding although
• 13 it's not this current ownership, it's the
14 potential of what could happen if a bar and
15 restaurant are open there. It was a
16 nightmare. I went on for ten years, I
17 might add. So any agreement Mr. Glass
18 Mr. Glass signed an agreement that said
19 that this agreement shall remain in effect
20 so long as the owner maintains a liquor
21 license issued by the New York State Liquor
22 Authority. So I wondered what happens to
23 this agreement if there is a change? Also,
24 I wonder if the temporary wall has anything
• 25 to do with I am not an expert on this, I
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 83
• 1 don't do building code and all of that.
2 It's my understanding that if it's
3 temporary, it's not really changing the
9 footprint or property and therefore still
5 grandfathered and previous nonconforming
6 use. So I would like some clarification on
7 that because I really don't understand
8 that. And also I wonder, what hours are
9 they thinking of having? Are they thinking
10 of having music? What in addition to
11 serving 48 people dinner do they have in
12 mind? So those would be things that I
• 13 would be interested in.
14 MR. GLASS: May I respond?
15 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Yes, you may.
16 MR. GLASS: When we made an
17 application for the liquor license, the
18 Town of Southold put in a denial of it and
19 we had a meeting, and we signed an
20 agreement. Do you have a copy of that
21 agreement?
22 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Yes, we do.
23 MR. GLASS: Okay. And in the agreement,
24 it says the hours, which we're still going
• 25 to maintain. We don't want to it says,
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 84
• 1 accessory building. It my mindset, I
2 thought accessory building meant use of the
3 restaurant, provided that the Inn was
4 operating. It was never in my mindset that
5 we couldn't have locals or guests. It only
6 came up about a year and a half after we
7 were operating. And instead of my going to
8 court and doing that, I felt that I would
9 rather come before the Board and explain to
10 them that in my opinion, the accessory
11 building was meant with guests. And even
12 though it is or not, we asked for a Special
• 13 Exception to do so. We're not expanding.
14 We're not the hours. We want to just
15 continue with the restaurant. And in fact,
16 by having locals come to us, they could
17 supervise us much better, because if they
18 eat there and they find that we're a
19 setting of what we're supposed to do then
20 they're first hand witnesses to it. So
21 we're actually asking them to be the
22 surveillance to the Town to a certain
23 extent. Because anybody that has eaten at
29 our place, the neighbors know that and we
• 25 have had no complaints. I know that the
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 85
• 1 prior owners had many, many complaints. We
2 have been living that down for the last
3 year, two years. But now we're coming to
4 the end of our second full season and into
5 our third season, and I think that we have
6 really provided to you that we really just
7 want to do business, a local man. We want
8 to just keep operating the way that we do.
9 And not causing any problems. In fact, we
10 have letters here from a couple of
11 neighbors and I think you have received one
12 or two. Them telling us that they have
• 13 enjoyed the restaurant and at The Inn. In
14 fact, I just got an e-mail from another
15 neighbor asking me the same questions that
16 you're asking me and she also said that she
17 would be in touch with Mary O'Brien, our
18 manager, and she wants to book 12 rooms
19 next year for family guests.
20 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: What are your
21 hours of operation?
22 MR. GLASS: Our agreement is that we do
23 not have music outside after 9:00 p.m., and
24 that inside, we do not have music after
• 25 11:00 p.m., and that we do not serve drinks
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 66
• 1 after any after 11:00 p.m. So we're
2 going to maintain the same thing. And
3 hopefully, have the restaurant cleared by
4 10:00 or 10:30 because we serve
5 generally, we will start at 6:00 - 6:30.
6 And if we have people coming in at 8:30,
7 they should be done by 10:00 or 10:30. We
8 don't want noise because we have guests
9 there. The other thing, what do I tell
10 this woman who brings me 12 guests and she
11 wants to eat at the restaurant with them?
12 She can't attend. I am trying to be
• 13 sensible here also.
14 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: The reason I
15 asked you about the history on the property
16 is because I wanted to establish the
17 wayward of the restaurant historically has
18 existed, and it would appear that the
19 restaurant use has always included being
20 open to the public.
21 MR. GLASS: It has. That's true.
22 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: You know, I just
23 want to make that historic fact reflected
29 in the record, because I went and checked
25 with the Building Department and whether it
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 67
• 1 would need Site Plan requirements and so
2 on, and it appears that their
3 interpretation is that it has existed
4 historically in the same way as it is
5 currently operating. The exception with
6 the previous owner who certainly had hours
7 of operation way beyond the scope of what
8 had historically been there, with the
9 place being rowdy. And I am sure there is
10 a lot of emotional, you know, resentment
11 still, in operations based upon the
12 experience of locals. It's a residential
• 13 community. Even though it's a main strip,
14 it's really surrounded by residential
15 houses.
16 MR. GLASS: We respect that and we
17 understand that. And also for our guests.
18 Our guests want to go to sleep at
19 11 o'clock. They don't want loud noise
20 also. And we don't make that much money
21 from the restaurant also. It's from the
22 guests who stay overnight. Just from that
23 priority alone, we want them to come back.
24 This isn't something that we have a bar
• 25 scene or we're making something like that.
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 88
• 1 This is not even our consideration. Our
2 consideration is that we want to operate
3 the restaurant so our guests can go there,
4 and for their convenience, and we can get
5 outsiders, who are especially from oversees
6 and to these group situations. From New
7 York State and other tour guides.
8 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: So let me get
9 this clear, your intent is to adhere to the
10 hours of operation and limitations on
11 music. That we discussed with the Town?
12 MR. GLASS: Definitely.
. 13 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: And you do not
14 intend to make this a permanent structure
15 but rather just a seasonal use as it has
16 been operating and a temporary wood ledge
17 that is removable?
18 MR. GLASS: Yes. Exactly. Let me just
19 say one thing too. If there was a problem
20 with the lighting and you would have called
21 us, we would have turned the lighting down
22 and done something with it. And we will do
23 that now. All we want is communication.
24 We're not looking to fight with anybody. I
25 want you all to understand that. We're
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 89
• 1 looking forward to you working with us so
2 we can make this a nice comfortable Inn
3 where it says the community also. We need
4 you all from the community to help
5 recommend us.
6 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: I'm sorry to
7 interrupt you. You need to address the
8 Board and not the audience.
9 MR. GLASS: I'm sorry. I just wanted to
10 be I'm sorry. I just wanted everyone
11 here to understand our position. Our
12 position is not to be confrontational and
• 13 not to be confrontational with the Town of
14 Southold, and our position is not to be
15 confrontational with our neighbors. We
16 want people to be able to say that the Inn
17 is operating well. That they could
18 recommend the Inn and that when they think
19 of the Inn in the area, they would think of
20 us favorably so that more people would come
21 there. And anybody who has come to our
22 establishment, seen the rooms, knows that
23 we have put a lot of time, effort and money
24 to making these rooms very good. We keep
• 25 them very clean. It's immaculate. I
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 90
• 1 believe our staff is excellent, and we're
2 trying our hardest so we can be excellent
3 and we just need your assistance in this
4 area.
5 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Thank you.
6 MR. GLASS: Thank you.
7 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Mr. Glass, I just
8 need to ask you a question?
9 MR. GLASS: Yes, sir.
10 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: How can we be
11 assured that you may have a lot of people
12 at this restaurant, more than the occupancy
• 13 based upon some of the other techniques
14 that you're using to have people come here?
15 In other words, you have 48 seats. How can
16 we be assured that you won't have 60 people
17 there with, you know, with an additional 12
18 waiting in line to get in or 20 in or
19 whatever the case might be? I mean, it is
20 a country type place. That's the reason
21 why I am asking that question.
22 MR. GLASS: We would tell the people
23 we would have two Beating's. We will do
24 the Beating's probably 6 or 7 o'clock or
• 25 6:30, and we will have one seating. Once
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 91
• 1 the seating is at 48 people, we will tell
2 the other people they have to return in an
3 hour and a half when we have the next
4 seating. I hope it comes to that. Where
5 we have more than what you're suggesting
6 but we would do that. And other thing is,
7 I am certain that with the neighbors or
8 whatever, we will hear immediately if we're
9 not compliant. And we will comply with it.
10 We're not looking to - we're not trying
11 to do anything underhanded. We just want
12 to run it with the 48 people. May I point
• 13 out, by the way, that the Town of Southold,
14 not Suffolk County, once gave permission
15 and we still have it, for 120 people. Are
16 you aware of that? So I am not even
17 mentioning that by the Town of Southold, we
18 have specific instances that say we can
19 have 120 people there but I am abiding by
20 Suffolk County that allows us for 48. So
21 therefore to show you our commitment and
22 all of that, we don't want 120 people. We
23 can't handle that. Though we do have a
24 certificate that says we can have.
. 25 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Is that certificate
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 92
• 1 for the patio?
2 MR. GLASS: That certificate is for the
3 restaurant.
4 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Which includes the
5 patio?
6 MR. GLASS: Yes.
7 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: So it's the bar
8 building
9 MR. GLASS: And the patio. And we're
10 saying that we want only 48. We're not
11 looking for any more than that. We want to
12 live within the letter agreement.
• 13 Madam Chairman, are you aware of that?
14 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: We don't have
15 Department of Health. We will get that. I
16 just want you and the rest of the people in
17 the audience to be aware of a couple of
18 facts. Number one, a Special Exception
19 permit does not run with the land. If this
20 were to be granted, it would be granted to
21 you. If you ever sold the business to
22 someone else, they would have to come back
23 to this Board and reapply, and we would
24 have to go through this all over again. To
• 25 make sure that there response to operate
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 93
• 1 was a responsible intent and well within
2 something that is appropriate with the
3 context of the neighborhood. So this does
4 not run with the land and only with the
5 application. Secondly, if a violation takes
6 place with a Special Exception permit,
7 these are things that are actually included
8 in our decision. When we render a decision,
9 these understandings are written in the
10 decision, so that it's very clear to
11 everyone. If there is a violation on that,
12 we have the right to revoke through a
• 13 Public Hearing process any Special
19 Exception permit that this Board grants. So
15 I just want the audience to understand the
16 process here. We have an applicant who is
17 approaching us to legalize in a formal way,
18 what was formally there. Trying to do the
19 right thing by coming to us to openly
20 discuss your intent here and to get this
21 Special Exception permit. But again, as I
22 said, we have safeguards in granting these
23 permits. They are uses that are permitted
24 in a certain zone district by a review of
• 25 this Board. And there is a whole list of
_ _
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 94
• 1 things, standards, including ingress and
2 egress and any potential adverse impacts on
3 the neighborhood, adequate onsite parking.
4 All of within the standards that this Board
5 has to evaluate in granting a Special
6 Exception permit. So that is some
7 important information for people to be
8 aware of.
9 Did you want to
10 MS. BRAMSON: Yes, Madam Chairperson.
11 My name is Ruthann Bramson. I am a resident
12 of East Marion. B-R-A-M-S-O-N. And I have
• 13 spent every summer of my rather long life
14 in East Marion and my family has on the
15 property there for almost a 100 years. I
16 can tell you a little bit I would like
17 to tell you a little bit about the history
18 of the property. When I was a child, and
19 they were all of this area, there was a
20 number of tourist homes in East Marion.
21 People who would take visitors into their
22 home and who would stay a few nights and
23 who had little signs out in front of their
24 homes, tourist homes. It was very common
• 25 in the 40's and the 50's in this area. And
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 95
• 1 the Blue Dolphin was one of them. We have
2 a situation here where there has been a
3 creep has occurred. Then permission was
4 given to the Blue Dolphin for a little
5 snack bar. It was a popular place for
6 fishermen and they allowed them to have a
7 snack bar and so fishermen could get a beer
8 after they returned from their fishing.
9 And over time, we have grown to the place
10 where we're talking now about a major
11 restaurant in the middle of what is a
12 residential area. On all sides of this
• 13 property, are homes of people who work.
14 Who have to get up every morning. This is
15 a residential area. This is not a place to
16 allow a restaurant to grow larger and
17 larger. We have gone from the place where
18 there were a number of these little tourist
19 homes, where now there is just one left,
20 The Blue Dolphin. And now we're talking
21 about a major business in the center of
22 East Marion that is quite contrary to the
23 character of the neighborhood. Mr. Glass
24 has told us in his remarks that in order to
• 25 be profitable, we would need to lower the
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 96
• 1 costs of meals to attract more people. In
2 fact, have multiple seating's to attract
3 more people. And day buses that would
4 bring people out from the city, I am
5 assuming and some of the foreign visitors
6 he has referred to. Buses with running
7 engines in the center of East Marion, it's
8 really quite unsuitable to our community.
9 Mr. Glass is probably quite right, that
10 there are probably people from the
11 neighborhood that visited the restaurant
12 last year who enjoyed a meal, but that is
• 13 frankly irrelevant to what we're talking
14 about here. We're talking about a request
15 to grow a business in the center of a
16 residential area. There are no businesses
17 nearby. Certainly not businesses that
18 attract the numbers that he is proposing.
19 Now Mr. Glass, I believe you recall telling
20 me on occasion, when we met, that you have
21 a legal background.
22 MR. GLASS: Yes.
23 MS. BRAMSON: That is what I recall.
24 So it surprised me that a lawyer didn't
• 25 know what a accessory building meant or
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 97
• 1 what a accessory use was. I would have
2 expected an attorney to have known that or
3 at least researched it. So I think the
4 innocence that we have heard here is a bit
5 surprising given your background. You
6 eluded, Madam Chairman, to the public
7 parking. There are in the front of the
8 building, only four or five marked spots
9 that are not in front of the various motel
10 units. Last summer when there was a
11 restaurant use, here is a photograph of
12 what it looked like when the building was
• 13 being used as a restaurant. And here is
14 the available parking spots. We would ask
15 the neighbors, the community association
16 would ask this Board, to think very long
17 and hard before you make another error
18 which has been made by Board's before you,
19 not necessarily the Zoning Board but other
20 local Boards in allowing this property to
21 become a very serious problem in the mixed
22 of our very small residential and rural
23 hamlet. Thank you very much.
24 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Is there anyone
• 25 else that wants to?
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 98
• 1 MS. ZIMMERMAN: Hi. My name is Ellen
2 Zimmerman. I live in East Marion. I own
3 property there for nearly 20 years. I
4 realize that The Blue has been a very good
5 neighbor for the last couple of years.
6 There hasn't been a lot of noise and it has
7 not been a problem like it has been years
8 before that. But my concern is that, that
9 might not last. Last winter, there was an
10 article about possibly opening up an Irish
11 pub in there. It was quoted in the North
12 Fork online paper, The Patch. Which said,
• 13 Mark Graham, a former chef of the Elbow
14 Room and Eugene Gluck to open a restaurant
15 which was under scrutiny by Southold Town
16 last fall for not conforming to code. The
17 new place for a soft opening of May 16th,
18 is called Rays of the Blue and it would be
19 an Irish Pub. Now, I think we understand
20 that that didn't happen, but all through
21 the winter, friends of mine were getting
22 e-mails with pictures of people partying at
23 a pub and you know, seems like it was what
24 they were going for, which was a lively bar
• 25 scene. That is the sort of thing that we
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 99
• 1 would really like to avoid in East Marion,
2 and so our concern is that, if the
3 permission is given to expand the
4 restaurant in the way that Mr. Glass is
5 proposing, that it would turn more into
6 something which was not what he not what
7 it started out to be. That's our concern.
8 Thank you.
9 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Thank you. I do
10 just want to reiterate to make sure that I
11 understand this correctly, and that all of
12 you do as well, that the Department of
• 13 Health currently permits 48 seats in this
14 restaurant. It doesn't stipulate whose
15 sitting in them. It just says 98 seats.
16 The proposal is not to expand beyond 48
17 seats. The other thing that is important
18 for you all to understand is that when a
19 Special Exception permits are granted, this
20 Board rather frequently puts conditions on
21 them, that addresses mitigation of any
22 potential adverse impacts. For example,
23 onsite parking may become a requirement to
24 avoid parking on the street. If that is
• 25 not adhered to, then a code enforcement
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 100
• 1 will go and a violation will be issued.
2 And again, if violations take place, this
3 Board, then can have a Public Hearing to
4 revoke the permit. Now, I am only saying
5 that because of the history here and
6 because of the wide range of concerns that
7 the neighborhood has with regards to
8 potential adverse impact, an expansion
9 would be an intense of the use beyond what
10 already currently exists. The hours of
11 operation are within the limits as defined
12 within the agreement with the Town,
• 13 includes music and so on. And all of those
14 become not only part of the public record
15 but the Special Exception permit should it
16 be granted. What we do here is fact
17 finding. We're not making decisions today.
18 We're here to listen to people so that we
19 can digest it all and see if we have any
20 other questions and then we deliberate when
21 we feel we have all that we need to have.
22 Mr. Glass, did you want to
23 MR. GLASS: Yes. I just wanted to
24 respond to the last person. In my
• 25 professional opinion, I thought that an
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 101
• 1 accessory building would be for outside
2 guests as well. Guests of outside people,
3 number one. Number two
4 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Excuse me.
5 There is an accessory use and then
6 accessory building. An accessory building
7 is an detached building. What you have is
8 a canopy that is attached to a building.
9 So that is not considered an accessory
10 building. That is simply a patio that is
11 covered with a canopy.
12 MR. GLASS: Correct.
• 13 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Even if you were
14 to suggest to enclose it, which is not what
15 the Town would particularly want to happen,
16 with permanent walls, it would still not be
17 an accessory building, because it's
18 attached to your principal building, your
19 restaurant.
20 MR. GLASS: That's correct.
21 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: So an accessory
22 use means that it's something that is
23 related but incidental to a principal use.
24 A principal use is permitted in the RR
• 25 Zone, residential zoning. So you're
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 102
• 1 permitted to have a motel as of right. You
2 don't need a Special Exception permit for
3 that, but to operate as a restaurant, that
4 is considered accessory to the principal
5 use. It would be the use of the restaurant.
6 Historically, the question is this, has the
7 restaurant been operated simply as an
8 accessory to the principal use or is the
9 restaurant operated as a restaurant, that
10 has not only been available to your guests
11 but available to others? Now, we have
12 testimony that has said both. However, what
• 13 we need to do is look at going forward.
14 Listen to the applicant and the neighbors
15 and their concerns.
16 MR. GLASS: I just wanted to make that
17 point. That is all.
18 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Okay.
19 MR. ZIZZO: Thank you, Madam
20 Chairperson, my name is Joseph Zizzo. I own
21 a home across from The Blue Dolphin or The
22 Blue, as it is called now, and
23 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Excuse me. Could
24 you spell you last name.
• 25 MR. ZIZZO: Z-I-Z-Z-O.
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 103
• 1 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Thank you.
2 MR. ZIZZO: Now in all fairness to
3 Mr. Glass, he has been an excellent
4 neighbor for the last couple of years and
5 he seems like a very sincere, nice
6 gentleman. Unfortunately, Mr. Garritano
7 seemed like a nice person too. And as he
8 did last summer, I was one that went over
9 to the restaurant. I enjoyed it very much.
10 In all fairness to us, this is the same way
11 the relationship started with Mr. Garritano
12 as well. He was a very nice guy and went
• 13 over there and had a beer. We were sort of
14 pals with the guy. In a couple of years
15 ago, we had music going to four in the
16 morning. At the height of it, one fishing
17 season, there were cars parked up on lawns.
18 There was music going till four in the
19 morning. It was crazy. My son was three or
20 four-years-old. He couldn't sleep. And the
21 problem that we have and Ms. Bramson
22 encapsulated with the word, "creep" is that
23 this property has morphed into something
24 that I don't think was ever intended when
• 25 it was built originally. And in the letter
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 109
• 1 from the Town Attorney opposing Mr. Glass'
2 liquor license, it says that based on
3 applicable statutes and regulations, that
4 the establishment would be permitted to
5 remain open till four in the morning, seven
6 days a week. And that is from the Southold
7 Town Attorney. Now, I am sure that's the
8 in the letter
9 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: It says that he
10 can operate till four in the morning?
11 MR. ZIZZO: Yes, it's in the letter.
12 I have a copy of it right here if you would
• 13 like to see it? That came from the
19 Southold Town Attorney.
15 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Hold on. We
16 have our Assistant Town Attorney.
17 MR. ZIZZO: I believe Mr. Glass that
18 it's not his intention to own a bar open
19 till four in the morning, but I think it's
20 obvious that in the inspection of the
21 structure and the way of the building that
22 it's being used, and I am sorry this is
23 blunt, it seems like the owners of the
29 property have been trying to make extra
• 25 money on the cheap. Mr. Garritano put up
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 105
• 1 the awning. He extended it a little bit to
2 the cafe building. You know, restaurant
3 tourists invest a lot of money into
4 restaurants. If you look at the restaurants
5 that have open, Noah's. Even a place like
6 Skipper's, they have their own building. It
7 represents a large investment and
8 commitment to a building and a business. By
9 just sticking a restaurant business under a
10 canopy, there is not the commitment to the
11 business that would allow their business to
12 creep louder and louder. With 50 people in
• 13 seats, as someone on the Board said
14 earlier, you could have people waiting.
15 There is 60 people. It's an open building.
16 There is no way to contain it. The noise
17 is going to be you know, perhaps there
18 is vehicles, buses. This is a completely
19 inappropriate use for the property and our
20 neighborhood. I have no problem if the
21 business were to remain as it was last
22 summer, but as we saw with the previous
23 owner, it did not intend to stay the same
24 on the property from one year to the other.
• 25 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Let me just
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 106
• 1 interrupt you for clarification. This
2 letter dated March 15, 2011 from this is
3 actually written from the Town to the State
9 Liquor Authority. And what it says here,
5 based upon applicable statutes and
6 regulations, the establishment will be
7 permitted to remain open till 4:00 a.m., 7
8 days a week. This property is surrounded
9 by a residential area with single-family
10 homes. See Attachment A, a narrative of the
11 site and surrounding area. This is a
12 commercial retail establishment that is
• 13 opened 7 days per week to 9:00 a.m. is
14 inappropriate and has greatly concerns to
15 the Town. This was not saying that the Town
16 is permitting
17 MR. ZIZZO: No, I did not mean it to
18 come out that way, Madam Chairman.
19 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Z was just
20 referring to what you originally said.
21 MR. ZIZZO: I did not mean to say that
22 you or this Board is advocated that. What I
23 mean to say is that we're afraid that this
24 is what this business will create into.
25 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Here is one
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 107
• 1 substantial difference. And again, the job
2 is to fact find and for this Board to look
3 at the material and absorb all these facts,
4 to listen to everyone with invested
5 interest. So please don't misconstrue what
6 I am about to say as a conclusion, it's not
7 but I want to reenforce the fact that a
8 substantial difference is that the previous
9 owner was operating without any benefit of
10 any favorable (In Audible). There were no
11 constraints. There were no boundaries.
12 There was nothing but whatever his market
• 13 strategy was. This applicant is coming
14 before this Board to establish a use that
15 will be sanctioned, which is permitted
16 under the law, legal regulations. So that
17 in fact, any abuse takes place there is
18 legal remedy to it. All right. So if in
19 fact, there are concerns and abuse, there
20 is a way to handle it. And I do think that
21 is important to reflect in the record, in
22 being fair and open minded. It's difficult
23 not to bring forth bad past experiences in
24 evaluating the present and future but it's
• 25 important to understand the distinction of
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 108
• 1 one, is legal remedy here and recourse.
2 Mr. Glass, did you want to say
3 something?
4 MR. GLASS: Yes. By the way, the prior
5 person, Mark Graham, I forget who it was.
6 We have no we never dealt with him. I
7 met him one time. I met him one time.
8 Never had any agreement with him. If he
9 sent out anything, it wasn't authorized by
10 me. I just want you to know that. In
11 terms of this gentleman, we're not asking
12 to expand the establishment. We want to
• 13 all they're saying is, we don't want 98
14 people at the end (In Audible) if they want
15 to come over, let them come over and eat
16 there. That is all that we're saying.
17 We're not doing anything more than that.
18 And when you were there last time, I don't
19 believe that there was a lot of noise. I
20 don't remember that there was and I think
21 it was conducted in a very nice manner, in
22 terms of the restaurant. That's basically
23 it. So we're only temporarily enclosing it
24 because we're next to a lavender farm, and
• 25 they have bees and insects and they come
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 109
• 1 over and instead of being stung by a bee,
2 we want to put up a netting. You know,
3 that's all we're saying here. Now, in terms
4 of commitment, we put in about over
5 $800,000.00 to renovate the place. Then we
6 put in about $80,000.00 to fix the
7 restaurant when we first came in and all
8 that. Nearly one million dollars into
9 making it a proper setting. Plus we bought
10 the property for over two million dollars.
11 So what I was saying is, if we put in
12 nearly three millions dollars into it, I
• 13 think that is somewhat of a commitment. You
14 know, in that respect. You know, we're not
15 open like everyone else. We're open up
16 during the week. We want to for most
17 cases in June, we want to be open every
18 Saturday because that is when we do
19 business. And we may open up a few more
20 days during July and August, which is a
21 high season and then we're going to be on
22 the weekends again. This is not going to be
23 an everyday situation. We have no plans for
24 that. There isn't enough case in it for
• 25 anything more than that. We're not what
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 110
• 1 we did in the past, we're going to continue
2 in the future. There are many different
3 directives that we're operating under. We
4 can only operate outside with music until
5 9:00 p.m. and inside the restaurant until
6 11:00 p.m. We're going to close the
7 restaurant at 10:30. We can't serve any
8 more liquor after 11 o'clock. And if the
9 neighbors come over, such as yourself or
10 whatever, and if we're in default of it, I
11 am certain that you and the other people
12 will call up this Board and they would put
• 13 violations against us and then we will be
14 back here and they will revoke our license.
15 If we can't live us to what we're promising
16 here, we shouldn't be in business. We
17 shouldn't be able to operate outside. If
18 we were trying to do some master plan, then
19 we wouldn't invite you's. We wouldn't
20 invite the locals to come in because they
21 would be the ones to come to the Board and
22 violate us.
23 MR. ZIZZO: Again, I don't doubt
24 Mr. Glass' sincerity as we stand here
• 25 today, but my final point, I am sure you
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 111
• 1 will be glad to hear, the other thing that
2 we're surprised by is the lack of
3 enforcement by the Town. I mean, the
4 stipulation in a resort residential zoning,
5 is that no outside music may be heard
6 beyond the property line. I have it
7 memorized. We tried to bring the situation
8 of Mr. Garritano under control and we were
9 powerless for many years. They said it was
10 a Zoning regulation. Everyone said the
11 other. When and I am addressing the
12 Board, when you're making your decision,
• 13 please take into account that should the
14 years of all the people that lived in East
15 Marion, it sounds very nice that oh, yes,
16 if they get out of hand, we're going to put
17 them back in their place. But so far we
18 have not seen any evidence of that. The
19 Town has looked the other way, up until
20 now. Again, this is a different situation
21 and I understand that but up until now, the
22 Town has looked the other way when
23 Mr. Garritano did all of his illegal
24 unregulated business and nobody did
• 25 anything to stop him. He had to go out of
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 112
. 1 business for that to stop.
2 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: I am sure all of
3 you were very active in the noise
9 ordinance.
5 MR. ZIZZO: Yes. Absolutely. I had a
6 shouting match with Mr. Garritano in this
7 very same room at that time. By the time
8 that noise ordinance came in, he was out of
9 business. So this is what we're afraid of.
10 There will be more than something else, and
11 there will be no input. Thank you very
12 much.
• 13 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: You're very
14 welcome.
15 MS. EIGABROADT: My name is Lois
16 Eigabroadt, E-I-G-A-B-R-O-A-D-T. I live
17 down the street on Bay Avenue. I am sure a
18 lot of people here live in East Marion and
19 they were (In Audible) I have a couple of
20 questions. What's the difference between
21 inside and outside music?
22 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Hold on. I'm
23 sorry, you're going to have to address the
24 Board.
• 25 MS. EIGABROADT: Sorry. What is the
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 113
• 1 difference between inside and outside
2 music, when all you have is an enclosed
3 restaurant? Where is the outside music?
4 And I wanted to know about the controls?
5 Who is enforcing these things? Many noise
6 controls were made against them and nothing
7 was done. And if we had some assurance that
8 some kind of immediate controls, we might
9 be a little more comfortable with that. And
10 I think it's a little naive to assume that
11 you you can't restrict it to local
12 patronage. I mean, I like it walking to the
• 13 restaurant. And the last one, (In
14 Audible) and a bus? Is that meaning 48
15 people on a bus? And what does that mean?
16 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Mr. Glass, would
17 you like to address this?
18 MR. GLASS: Yes. Thank you very much,
19 Madam. The first thing is, let me take the
20 last thing first. We were talking about the
21 Jitney. That is number one. We're not going
22 to have 40 people coming out. They want to
23 put packages out where people can go on the
24 Jitney. They stop about a half a block from
• 25 our place and then they come to the place.
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 114
• 1 So there won't be any additional buses. We
2 can't handle buses and we know that. Number
3 two, I received a phone call from the Town
4 Building Department and they explained to
5 me that there was an issue of whether we
6 could do public and guests. Instead of
7 going into any further, I closed the
8 restaurant about a week or two, and then we
9 got the papers for the Special Exception
10 and we filed the papers. We did that
11 immediately without anybody telling us that
12 we you know, only telling us that there
. 13 was an issue and we didn't want to have a
14 problem. That we would come before you. As
15 I say to you, if we're granted permission
16 and you're going to be the judges to it, we
17 will agree. Whatever we're promising you,
18 we're going to adhere to. And if we don't
19 adhere to, we understand the consequences.
20 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Let me ask you
21 about the music. Since you do not inside
22 the building where it is enclosed, that
23 would obviously be inside, where the bar
29 room is.
• 25 MR. GLASS: Yes.
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 115
• 1 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: If you're
2 talking about under your canvas, with
3 mosquito netting, is that inside or
4 outside?
5 MR. GLASS: That's outside.
6 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: So even when the
7 plastic is down?
8 MR. GLASS: That's outside. 9:00 p.m.
9 we finish. We conclude. There won't be
10 anymore. In addition, we have a noise
11 ordinance that we're controlled by. Before
12 9:00 p.m. we can't have any noise.
• 13 MS. EIGABROADT: At the bar. Why
14 would there be music there; I don't
15 understand?
16 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: I don't know
17 necessarily there would be. I am just
18 trying to determine what was considered
19 inside and what was determined outside.
20 Inside would be in an enclosed building.
21 Outside would be beyond the walls because
22 there aren't any walls. Do you plan to
23 have music in the bar area after
24 9 o'clock?
• 25 MR. GLASS: Yes. The same music
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 116
• 1 there are speakers for the music. There is
2 the same music outside and there is
3 speakers inside. And after 9 o'clock or
4 before 9 o'clock, we shut the speakers off.
5 we leave the inside speakers on, or there
6 could be television instead of music that
7 we have inside. Some people like to watch
8 the game or sports or whatever or the
9 news.
10 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: After 9 o'clock,
11 what would people be doing in there? In the
12 bar or eating dinner or what?
• 13 MR. GLASS: Well, it depends. If it's
14 raining or if there is only a certain
15 number of people, but in terms of it, most
16 people if it's nice, most people are just
17 going to eat outside. No one eats inside
18 when the outside is open.
19 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Okay. You're
20 still talking about 48
21 MR. GLASS: 48 people, inside and
22 outside.
23 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Okay. All right.
29 I just wanted to be sure.
• 25 MR. GLASS: We're not going to have
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 117
• 1 more than 48 patrons at one time.
2 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: In the interest
3 of time, I would like to ask if there are
4 any other comments that are different from
5 the kinds of things that we have heard or
6 questions. Okay. Then I am going to please
7 ask that you try and restrict the length of
8 your comments. We have been at this for a
9 very, very long time now and I don't want
10 to stop everybody. I want everybody who
11 wants to be heard, be heard but please, try
12 and limit the time so that we can
• 13 MR. DUGGAN: Hi.
14 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: One second, sir.
15 MR. DUGGAN: Okay.
16 MS. IMANDT: Madam Chairperson, I
17 would like to ask a question to the Board.
18 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Yes.
19 MS. IMANDT: On the March 15th letter
20 that we mentioned before to the State
21 Liquor Authority from the Town, Section IV,
22 it says, "as a preexisting nonconformity,
23 the property in use thereon has never been
24 subjected to site plan approval or the
• 25 Planning Board nor Special Exception
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 118
• 1 approval of the Zoning Board of Appeals.
2 Should the existing use of the
3 hotel/accessory food establishment exceed
4 beyond the scope of this historical as it
5 existed prior to the enacting of the
6 applicable zoning regulations, that the
7 property must be brought into compliance
8 with applicable zoning regulations and
9 obtain site plan and special permit
10 approvals." My question is, if this was
11 allowed, would there be a site plan? Would
12 there be
• 13 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: This Board can
14 require it in association with a Special
15 Exception permit. One of the reasons why I
16 asked about parking was just for that
17 reason. Because although we have to
18 consider parking in our determination, the
19 people who are best qualified to calculate
20 parking and ingress and egress and lighting
21 and so on, is the Planning Board. That is
22 really their jurisdiction. So the answer is
23 yes, we can require it. The Building
24 Department can require it depending upon
• 25 what we do. There is a step by step
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 119
• 1 process.
2 MS. IMANDT: Would they then be
3 required to fit into the Resort Residential
4 description of what a Resort Residential
5 District is?
6 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: I have to look
7 at that definition to be able to answer it
8 accurately?
9 MS. IMANDT: Okay.
10 MR. DUGGAN: Hi. James Duggan,
11 D-U-G-G-A-N and I am an East Marion
12 resident. Before I start, I have a
• 13 question, Mr. Glass stated that Suffolk
19 County allowed him to have 120 people in
15 his restaurant, and the Town of Southold is
16 limiting it to 48? Is that what I
17 understood?
18 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: No, it's the
19 other way around. The Department of Health
20 had limited their capacity to a full
21 restaurant at 48 patrons. 48 seats. That's
22 based upon the size of the septic and a
23 number of other variables.
24 MR. DUGGAN: Okay. That is all I wanted
• 25 to know. My concern is off-street parking.
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 120
• 1 If we agree to a restaurant that is open to
2 the public, where are these people going to
3 park? I passed there a few times during the
4 day and there were cars parked on the
5 driveway and limited their access to the
6 driveway. Last Saturday night, the section
7 to the east of their building, blacktop, I
8 don't know if there was a parking spot on
9 the main road, but it was occupied Saturday
10 night when I came home. The off-street
11 parking situation between Gillette and Star
12 Road is a atrocious. Right. You put a
• 13 Jitney bus and a dump truck, and you're
14 lucky you can get through. And now you add
15 the bicycles and people jogging and people
16 in motorized wheelchairs and it's an
17 accident waiting to happen. So if he
18 doesn't have ample off-street parking for
19 how many people if they're going to do
20 two shifts, 48 people, everybody is not
21 going to be cleared out for the second.
22 People are going to remain around or
23 whatever. So that means that parking for
24 whatever amount of people or cars is not an
• 25 actual number. So that is my concern about
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 121
• 1 off-street parking. It's crazy. It's
2 absolutely crazy. Thank you.
3 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Thank you.
4 Anyone else?
5 MS. O'BRIEN: Hi. I am Mary O'Brien. I
6 am the manager at The Blue Inn. I just
7 wanted to address the parking Saturday
8 night. There was one blacktop area. It's on
9 the right-hand side. It's not necessary our
10 property in that area. We do not allow
11 guest park there. In the morning, I park my
12 car there. I am not the only one that parks
• 13 along that road. In regards to the
14 restaurant, the parking, I have been there
15 for three years. Especially the last year
16 as an assistant manager. We have not
17 necessarily had long-term parking from the
18 restaurant on it. We have had people come
19 most of the time the people that have
20 showed up at the restaurant outside of our
21 (In Audible) were local in the area and
22 that have walked to the restaurant. And I
23 do see many faces in the room that have
24 utilized our restaurant last year on
• 25 several occasions. I am not into having a
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 122
• 1 restaurant be a loud party place. I do not
2 want a bar scene. It is not what I am
3 intending for. All we really want to do is
4 be able to walk up and we're not turning
5 them away. At this point, if anyone walked
6 off the street and said, "oh, we would like
7 to have a hamburger." I have to say,
8 "Sorry, but we cannot serve you." We don't
9 want to have to do that. I am not looking
10 to make this a huge big deal where
11 everybody is coming and parking. It's not
12 what we're looking to do. I just wanted to
• 13 say that. And I have a letter from one of
14 the neighbors. They did not hand it to you.
15 So I just wanted to give you that.
16 MS. MCKEE: My name is Jackie Mckee,
17 M-C-K-E-E. I am a resident of East Marion.
18 I do live on Old Orchard Lane. Sort of
19 behind The Blue Inn, and as a former New
20 Yorker, I would love to have a place to
21 walk to for breakfast, a place to walk to
22 for lunch, a place to stop in for a drink.
23 I don't think that is what we're looking at
24 happening here. I think that we need to
• 25 explore what history of open to the public
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 123
• 1 means. And I defer to Ruthann, and correct
2 me if I am wrong, but my history out here,
3 is a little restaurant was open out here
4 for the fishermen to have a little bit of
5 coffee and to get a beer in the afternoon.
6 As it proceeded along, local people would
7 walk over have breakfast, have their coffee
8 and go home. It was not advertised as a
9 restaurant. It was not promoted as a
10 restaurant. Business was not permitted off
11 the premises and my fear is, that is what
12 will happen. And I believe and correct
• 13 me if I am wrong, the agreement that
14 Mr. Glass signed does preclude him from
15 opening his business to the public. And I
16 want to be clear that if you do sign off on
17 this, which seems like a perfectly
18 legitimate thing to me, in theory, but
19 again as Mr. Zizzo said, it's been an
20 infamous thing over the years. We have
21 lived through this and we don't want to
22 live through this again. I don't want to
23 stop Mr. Glass from making a living but we
24 also don't want to be responsible for his
• 25 increased income. Thank you.
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 124
• 1 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Thank you for
2 your comments. I do want to address one
3 thing and that is the agreement with the
4 Town. I did check with Mark Finnegan prior
5 to this hearing to get his position as a
6 representative of the Town, if there was
7 any position. And his position was, the
8 rights of a property owner to appear for
9 Special Exception permit before this Board
10 supercedes any agreement with the Town. The
11 State grants this Board jurisdiction to now
12 only provide relief from the code but also
• 13 grant upon review, permits that are
14 permitted in the zone under special
15 circumstances. Say, well, we looked at this
16 and all these things are okay. And if
17 they're not okay, then it's not permitted.
18 In fact, the applicant has come forth to
19 try and comply with what the Town requires.
20 I had a question, Mr. Glass, maybe you can
21 answer this for me. In your application,
22 you do make a reference to proposing small
23 events for outside guests until 9:00 p.m.,
24 but you don't say what they might be. What
• 25 kind of small events do you have in mind?
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 125
• 1 And would they be limited to 48 seats?
2 MR. GLASS: In the past, we were
3 thinking we would have a single singer that
4 plays a guitar and he is well known in the
5 area. I forget his name now. Something like
6 that.
7 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: That is what you
8 consider a special event?
9 MR. GLASS: Yes.
10 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: So you're just
11 talking about music accompanying dinner?
12 MR. GLASS: That's correct.
• 13 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: That is not
14 when somebody says to me, small events for
15 outside guests, I am thinking birthday
16 parties, wedding showers.
17 MR. GLASS: That is what I was thinking
18 of when I put down special events.
19 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Well, that is
20 important to clarify.
21 I will take one or two more comments,
22 and then I think we're going to need to
23 wrap this up.
24 MR. GLASS: Okay.
• 25 MR. COPE: My name is Jim Cope,
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 126
• 1 C-O-P-E. I live in East Marion. I have
2 lived here for the last 20 years.
3 Certainly, I will conform to you with your
4 request and not to be redundant. I can't
5 guarantee it. It's a limitation I have. I
6 don't have bullet points. The points that
7 have been made along the way, well, I
8 didn't write down in my outline. And I will
9 skip around, if you bear with me. And
10 frankly, as a side, sure you're listening
11 to a lot of arguments and there is a degree
12 of redundancy. But we're going to have to
• 13 live with what happens here for a long,
14 long time. We think I think that if you
15 have to postpone this meeting so that
16 anyone and everytone who wanted to have a
17 comment, whether or not it was redundant,
18 should be allowed to do so. Your personal
19 (In Audible) is not withstanding and I am
20 sympathetic to it. And I respect the Soard.
21 That is just an off the cuff remark. I
22 shouldn't have to tell you that I am from
23 East Marion. I am a local. I know enough
29 about business so that every successful
• 25 business is concerned about location. Zt's
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 127
• 1 people that are going to spend money. There
2 are a lot of (In Audible). Mr. Glass, he
3 is a gentleman. I also will remind you of
4 the fact that I told my teenage daughter
5 that my definition of a gentleman is a
6 patient wolf. But what happens now and
7 what happens going forward is a great
8 concern of ours because we're the most
9 family oriented people. The proprietor of
10 this business and his minority investors
11 are here to make money. I am here and my
12 fellow association members are here for
• 13 quality of life. I have my home here. This
14 is the most important and best use for this
15 area because it's a residential area. There
16 is a residential commercial restriction in
17 place. Why the exception? For whose
18 benefit? For the community? For a
19 sandwich? A sandwich joint? It's an easy
20 decision to make. I put all of my hard
21 earned money into this neighborhood and I
22 continue to do so. And that's true with the
23 neighbors. Now, Mr. Glass has made
24 reference to what he does. He did say he
• 25 was a lawyer. One of the members raised a
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 128
• 1 point and kind of wondered why he wasn't a
2 bit sharper about definitions. He didn't
3 mention that he has a similar operation in
4 Montauk that he doesn't have a restaurant.
5 What he has told us in the past and we have
6 noticed is that he is an absentee landlord.
7 Both here and in Montauk. He says he hardly
8 ever goes there. He has a business in
9 Western Suffolk and he has a business in
10 Hempstead. Now, this is America. You can do
11 a lot of things in America. It's a free
12 country. And what I am concerned about
• 13 mostly is what will happen in the end, this
14 Board or any other Board that comes along.
15 Remembering since the last time I was here,
16 change is the concept. What would be the
17 highest legal use of that property with
18 these changes versus a voluntarily
19 agreement? I would tell you, I don't know
20 if anyone on the Board is an attorney. And
21 I applaud the fact that the supervisor from
22 the Town Attorney has his instrument, (In
23 Audible) agreement at the Town's
29 assistance. Frankly, as a citizen, I looked
• 25 at him and said, it's nice that I am
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 129
• 1 agreeing to this but you know, the
2 agreement is really a statutory allowances.
3 Take the SLA for instance. I don't know as
4 we discuss this, it's not his permit to
5 stay open till 4:00 a.m., 7 days a week,
6 trumps any decision that you might look to
7 impose if he leaves the building after
8 getting the okay and appeals to the State
9 Authority. Okay. What we're concerned about
10 is what we're going to be left with. The
11 fellow who had it before, because we have
12 very poor control of what he has done in
• 13 terms of an inspector. We went months and
14 months without an inspector in this town.
15 We have one when we have any. I mean, can't
16 be in every place. It's a do it and seek
17 forgiveness. You know, that's the "ha ha"
18 in this town. The prior owner expanded
19 that business and put in a larger patio.
20 This fellow comes in and expands it even
21 more. He practically tripled it. You talk
22 about permits. I feel that this gentleman
23 is not compliant. He entered this agreement
24 with the Town because he was forced to by
• 25 this community. He didn't voluntarily do
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 130
• 1 this. He was called on the carpet because I
2 reported to the Town that he was not
3 operating within a building permit that he
4 had. He was putting up something that was
5 in his interest. He put up some curtains.
6 His building permit didn't permit that.
7 He's willing to do what is outside the law
8 unless he's made to do something else. So
9 you have made the point several times that
10 he's here to seek permission. It's only
11 because the community responded to
12 noncompliance that he is here. No other
• 13 reason. All right. So again, let me go over
14 a couple of other things. Madam Chairman,
15 you eluded to the egress. He has is at an
16 exit only. You know, there is no traffic to
17 prevent anybody. You say it's narrow. I
18 would tell you that the exit is as narrow
19 as the lane or street, but not route but
20 lane. I go back and forth on that all the
21 time. I have another way of going in and
22 out but it's also a lane. It's over near
23 the lavender farm. You can hardly get two
24 cars passed one another. You have to slow
• 25 down to about 5 mph. It's not a street.
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 131
• 1 It's a lane. So if you're talking about
2 parking. That's an issue. What do I tell a
3 person with 12 guests? What do you tell
4 people about 12 guests eating in Montauk
5 when you have no restaurant? What? A
6 restaurant for 50 years. I inspected that
7 premise before he put in the restaurant of
8 the patio. The way the previous owner left
9 it. What was in there was four cocktail
10 tables. A little bit bigger than this
11 podium with four chairs around it.
12 Incidental, I would tell people that they
• 13 could come back in an hour. I have never
14 heard about a businessman who had a tiki
15 bar outside of the enclosed area that he's
16 talking about sending somebody to another
17 location. I have heard of managers sending
18 them to the bar for free drink until they
19 wait to be seated but not to another
20 restaurant. So he is an absentee landlord
21 and he has been a noncompliant in the
22 facts, and creep is an issue. What happens
23 is and we can see it in this operation,
24 somebody moves into a business, they fall
• 25 back on what this man is going to do. What
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 132
• 1 you give him today, even though you may be
2 able to rescind it if he violates it. If
3 the next guy who comes in and talks to the
4 next Board, I am not going to be here for
5 the other one. I have seen many changes.
6 Change is constant. The reason they don't
7 stay open all year long is because there is
8 a restriction on the motel section. There
9 is a restriction on the usage and the motel
10 section is because the septic system is not
11 adequate for the site. All right. Am I
12 concerned about that? Sure, I am concerned
• 13 about that. A lot of you have a full house.
14 Two seating's? Wow. I can't see it. I think
15 it's unreasonable to give him an exception.
16 And he talks about job offerings. Well,
17 jobs, we all need jobs. These are hard
18 economic times. I saw that the people who
19 did all of the renovation at that location
20 came from Ozone Park, Queens. And you know,
21 like you're going to pull out somebody who
22 is local? It would be presumptuous for me
23 to say that the number of people who I
24 spoke to, you know, were it's anecdotal.
• 25 I don't know how much money they spent
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 133
• 1 locally. I don't know how much taxes they
2 spent to the State or Federal Government,
3 but I do know that they did not come from
4 here. He said he was going to use local
5 talent and he did not. Thank you.
6 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Thank you.
7 MS. BRAMSON: Madam Chairman, I am
8 going to be brief.
9 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: And I will
10 accept your comment and comments from you,
11 but I am going to we're really running
12 out of time for this. We have another
• 13 hearing to get to; however, what I am going
14 to suggest is that we leave this record
15 open for two weeks and propose to the Board
16 that we adjourn it to our Special Meeting,
17 which is two weeks from today so that
18 everyone can think about this and all
19 digest it. If you want to submit we will
20 close it to testimony but if anyone wants
21 to submit anything in writing, whether
22 they're here or not here, whether it's
23 Mr. Glass or the restaurant of you or
24 anyone you know, we will accept that and
• 25 make it apart of our official record. So we
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 134
• 1 won't cut off the conversation to this but
2 I am going to cut off soon additional
3 testimony. So we have two more people and
4 that's it.
5 MS. BRAMSON: I will be very brief.
6 Ruthann Bramson. In this room there are
7 people who have been looking on problems
8 and issues to this property for 12 to 15
9 years. This has been a longstanding major
10 concern for East Marion. The preexisting
11 nonconforming use of this property, the
12 Supervisor has been so aware of the
• 13 problems for many years that he worked
14 with Mr. Glass on an agreement, in which
15 Mr. Glass among other things, said that the
16 restaurant would be only an accessory use.
17 Your quite right, Mr. Glass is within his
18 rights to come here and ask for a Special
19 Exception and ask for relief from that
20 agreement, but that doesn't mean that this
21 Board needs to grant that relief. I ask
22 you to please listen to us because this is
23 a concern for East Marion that is not going
29 away and nor are we.
• 25 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Thank you.
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 135
• 1 Please state your name, please.
2 MS. DELLAPORTAS: Hi. My name is Pat
3 Dellaportas.
4 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Could you spell
5 it?
6 MS. DELLAPORTAS:
7 D-E-L-L-A-P-O-R-T-A-S. I own the adjoining
8 property next door to The Blue. 7970, 8100.
9 I did use local people to rebuild 8100.
10 They did all the work outside. The
11 carpenter still lives down on Bay Avenue.
12 His name is Wayne Baker. His parents have
• 13 been there for hundreds of years. His light
14 is on all night. I have a business in
15 Queens and I am here to relax. That light
16 is on all night long. They did have a
17 guitar playing. They were there till one in
18 the morning. You can hear it. He takes my
19 property, which is next to his and slightly
20 in front of his office. I called him a
21 couple of weeks ago and said, please move
22 the cars. He says, well maybe you should
23 think about it. Maybe we can take it to
24 court. I said, because your a lawyer and I
• 25 sound like I am stupid because I have a
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 136
• 1 accent? You think that is okay? No, we
2 will move it off. Talk about integrity? You
3 talk about how your originally came out
4 here (In Audible) he's not Mr. Garritano.
5 I don't think he will be. I own a
6 restaurant. I also bought one in Southold a
7 couple of years ago. My kids are out there
8 running it. You know, I plan to retire out
9 here. I have three kids. One house each. I
10 am going to plan to fix the one next door
11 too. I haven't fixed that house yet. You
12 know, should I spend that kind of money if
• 13 I am going to have that next door? (In
14 Audible). I told him he called me up on
15 my cellphone and going back and forth with
16 the properties. People don't know me
17 because I am not out here that often
18 because I do have a business and a
19 restaurant. You have 25 rooms. You have it
20 family oriented, now it's five people in a
21 room. Times that by 20. There is a 100
22 people. Nobody is going to come back to
23 eat. They're going to stand by the bar. So
24 you're lying. Don't lie to anybody else. I
• 25 am going to retire out here. I am not that
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 137
• 1 much younger than anyone else in this room
2 but my kids are younger. And this
3 gentleman, (In Audible) and I do use local
4 people. They all know. It's small houses.
5 It's like in Greece. Everybody knows. Did
6 you talk to this one? I am a little shaky
7 because I don't speak well. But I do want
8 to let you know, they're lying. He's not
9 the sole proprietor. He's never there. He
10 has Mary. How are you going to rent rooms
11 if nobody is there? I have had two surveys
12 twice to have my property surveyed to know
• 13 what is my property. I don't know how many
14 parking spaces he has but those six parking
15 spaces on the side, that's my property.
16 Those properties were all owned by
17 Garritano. He had all the properties.
18 He had no issues because it was his
19 property. He ended up buying it. It took
20 me three or four years to get those
21 properties going back and forth with the
22 bank. I am going to be a local.
23 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: We have all been
24 to the site
• 25 MS. DELLAPORTAS: And (In Audible).
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 138
• 1 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: I saw what you
2 put up
3 MS. DELLAPORTAS: And I wanted to make
4 my property look pretty and not offend
5 Mr. Glass. Okay.
6 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: That's it for
7 the public.
8 MR. GLASS: Madam Chairperson, may I
9 say one thing?
10 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Yes, you may.
11 MR. GLASS: What she has failed to
12 tell you is this, that her husband wanted
• 13 to purchase The Blue Inn yes, you did.
14 And basically, we refused to go forward
15 with the agreement. And as a result, she is
16 coming now, that she's opposing it. So
17 basically, they wanted to operate this
18 place as a restaurant and all that. Just
19 let me comment on the fellow before. We
20 never expanded the patio. We just repaired
21 the patio. It was not expanded at all. And
22 in terms of using outside labor, we used
23 many people within the community as well as
29 other people in Suffolk and in Nassau.
• 25 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: The bottom line
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 139
• 1 is, these specific last comments are not
2 germane before us and I don't want anyone
3 to get in what he said, she said. We have
4 heard each of you and what you had to say
5 and we will take all comments that have
6 been raised today by everybody. We're going
7 to leave this record open for a few more
8 weeks. So that everyone can think about any
9 questions that may have been unanswered.
10 The Board may make another decision to
11 adjourn to another hearing for another
12 date, until such time that the questions
• 13 get answered.
14 MR. GLASS: Thank you very much for
15 your time.
16 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: You need to send
17 your comments to the Zoning Board of
18 Appeals to Vicki Toth. If you wish to
19 submit anything in writing, you can come to
20 our office. Mr. Glass, just so you know,
21 we have a FOIL procedure. If anyone wants
22 to see what comes in and then make comments
23 on any of that, approach our office. Fill
24 out a very simple form and then you can
• 25 look through the records. I just want to
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 140
• 1 have complete transparency here for all
2 parties. So that is available for you as
3 well. All right.
4 So I am going to make a motion to
5 adjourn this hearing to September 19th.
6 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Second.
7 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: The testimony is
8 no longer available but written commentary
9 will be received.
10 We have a second.
11 All in favor?
12 MEMBER DANTES: Aye.
• 13 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Aye.
14 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Aye.
15 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Aye.
16 (See Minutes for Resolution.)
18 HEARING #6677 - WILLIAM C. GOGGINS OF
19 13200 MAIN ROAD CORP.
20 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Our final
21 application of the day is for William C.
22 Goggins of 13200 Main Road Corp., #6677.
23 Request for variance from Article X Section
24 280-45C(f) and the Building Inspector's
• 25 June 5, 2013 Notice of Disapproval based on
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 141
• 1 an application for building permit to
2 convert dwelling to two apartments and
3 office space, at 1) the proposed apartments
4 will comprise of more than the code
5 permitted maximum 400 of the principal
6 building, located at: 13200 Main Road in
7 Mattituck.
g MR. GOGGINS: Good afternoon. I
9 apologize for missing my appointed time of
10 10:45 hearing, but I appreciate you taking
11 me at the end of calendar. William
12 Goggins, on behalf of the applicant, 13200
• 13 Main Road Corp. This was an application
19 that this Board had approved for apartments
15 and the idea was to have two multiple
16 dwellings. To conform with the master plan
17 and to be consistent in the Hamlet Business
18 area. After that approval, I went to the
19 Board of Health for their approval, at the
20 time, concurrently, we applied to the Town
21 Board for sanitary flow credits, to make
22 sure that we have the necessary flow. The
23 Town Board approved the sanitary flow
24 credits. We went to the Health Department,
• 25 the Health Department disapproved the plan
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 142
• 1 because they don't permit double density on
2 sanitary flow credits. We had to appeal
3 that decision, which we lost, and that they
4 would not give more than double density on
5 sanitary flow credit. So in working with
6 the Health Department, the Health
7 Department determined that in order to have
8 double sanitary flow credits, I think it
9 was 374 in credits, they would approve two
10 600 square foot and 785 square feet of nn
11 medical office space. So I redid the plans
12 for the Health Department to accommodate
• 13 two apartments that were 600 square feet
14 each and office space of 785 square feet.
15 Now that we have that Health Department
16 approval, I had to apply for the Building
17 Department in order to get a variance
18 because the apartments exceeds the
19 permissible area, use area of a structure.
20 So I am asking for a variance from the 40%
21 criteria, being you can't have a 40o
22 residential in a business building. The
23 application still conforms to the master
24 plan and in keeping open space outside of
• 25 the hamlet.
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 143
1 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: The Notice of
• 2 Disapproval says one apartment, 600 square
3 feet and office of 850 square feet.
4 MR. GOGGINS: That's incorrect. It's
5 785.
6 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: So we're going
7 to need this plan corrected because that
8 would be inconsistent. So the office is
9 785 and not 850?
10 MR. GOGGINS: Correct.
11 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: We have a total
12 gross floor area of 2006. So I could see
• 13 why your colored drawings, yellow and
14 green
15 MR. GOGGINS: Yeah.
16 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: 600, 600 and 850
17 adds over 2,000.
18 MR. GOGGINS: Right.
19 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Now, is that
20 correct, and the 780 is incorrect?
21 MR. GOGGINS: Well, yeah. When we put
22 it together, we have to make the porch a
23 little bit bigger because that is
24 non-habitable space.
• 25 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Okay. That's fine.
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 144
. 1 So what is different with this than your
2 original application?
3 MR. GOGGINS: The original application
4 was three residential units. Two being 850
5 square feet and one being 497 square feet.
6 And because it's different sanitary flow
7 credits for apartments if you have
8 apartments above 600 square feet, with the
9 sanitary flow credits, they're 200. For
10 each apartment. So I had to reduce the
11 apartments to 600 square feet or less.
12 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Okay. So now we're
• 13 dealing with apartments and an office
14 space, where previously we were dealing
15 with dwelling units?
16 MR. GOGGINS: Correct.
17 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: So that's the
18 difference?
19 MR. GOGGINS: Correct.
20 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: But everything else
21 is the same? I mean, the building is not
22 going to change?
23 MR. GOGGINS: The Planning Board has
24 asked me for a different parking plan,
• 25 which will be submitted tomorrow.
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 145
• 1 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: In the original
2 application, the previous one that was
3 granted, you had two apartments
4 MR. GOGGINS: Three apartments. No
5 office.
6 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Now, you're
7 planning two apartments and an office?
8 MR. GOGGINS: Correct.
9 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Is the kitchen
10 going to be taken out?
11 MR. GOGGINS: It will be removed.
12 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: You're going to
• 13 have to add some stairs
14 MR. GOGGINS: Right.
15 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: I went nuts
16 trying to figure out from this floor plan
17 what's Main Street. North is always
18 supposed to be north.
19 MR. GOGGINS: Right.
20 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: So whoever did
21 this, shame on them.
22 MR. GOGGINS: It wasn't me.
23 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: This is what
24 we're seeing in white are steps with a
• 25 deck.
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 146
• 1 MR. GOGGINS: Yeah, there will be a
2 deck on the southwest side, and then the
3 stairs will come down on the south side of
4 the building.
5 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: It's just the
6 way it's drawn, it's like what? What? So
7 what we're really proposing are two
8 substandard dwellings, apartments
9 MR. GOGGINS: No, they're two standard
10 apartments.
11 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: That's right.
12 Because what we had granted previously is
• 13 one dwelling consisting of less than the
14 required 800 square feet. So each of these
15 apartments is 600 square feet. It's not an
16 issue because of the apartments. It's an
17 issue because it's more than he 40~ of the
18 principal uses.
19 MR. GOGGINS: Right.
20 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: All right. I got
21 it.
22 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: My other question
23 is, why can't you meet that 40%
29 requirement?
• 25 MR. GOGGINS: Because the sanitary
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 147
• 1 flow credits.
2 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Okay.
3 MR. GOGGINS: And as you reduce the
9 size of the apartments, you reduce building
5 space. It's probably an average size of a
6 one bedroom apartment. The apartments that
7 I do have, we make them nice. Granite
8 countertops, the in the kitchen, carpet.
9 So we try and make it nice so that people
10 want to rent and they want to stay there.
11 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: So this decision
12 will supercede the previous decision. We
• 13 will just have to make reference to it with
19 information and indicate that the reason
15 was based on Department of Health sanitary
16 flow credits. And what else, subject to
17 site plan approval.
18 MR. GOGGINS: Correct. And I have to
19 submit a new plan to you.
20 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: I have no
21 questions. Eric?
22 MEMBER DANTES: No.
23 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Ken?
24 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: No.
• 25 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Gerry?
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 148
• 1 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: No.
2 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: So we'll close
3 the hearing subject to receipt of a
9 corrected floor plan.
5 MR. GOGGINS: Thank you.
6 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Second.
7 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: All in favor?
8 MEMBER DANTES: Aye.
9 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Aye.
10 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Aye.
11 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Aye.
12 (See Minutes for Resolution.)
• 13
14
15 (Whereupon, the September 5, 2013,
16 Regular Meeting of the Zoning Board of
17 Appeals concluded at 3:52 P.M.)
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
• 25
September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting 149
• 1
2 C E R T I F I C A T I O N
3
9
5 I, Jessica DiLallo, certify that the
6 foregoing transcript of tape recorded Public
7 Hearings was prepared using required electronic
8 transcription equipment and is a true and accurate
9 record of the Hearings.
10
11 Signatur
12 J ssica DiLallo
• 13
14
15 Jessica DiLallo
Court Reporter
16 PO Box 989
Holbrook, New York 11741
17
18 Date: September 24, 2013
19
20
21
22
23
24
• 25