Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-05/09/1957SOUTHOLD TOWN BUILDING ZONE ORDINANCE...BOARD OF APPEA~.~ ~AT~- 9 19~7 The BOard of Appeals met May 9th 19~7 at the Tow~ Clerk' s Office at 7,50 P.M. Pre~ Gregonis,Rosenberg,~illispie for the Board; absent Doyen and Bergen. Also present R G Terry Jr,Town Oounsel and Howard Terry,Building Inspector. ~harles ~Eemappeared in correction with his development on 0ak~awn Awe. Southold. He has agreed to enlarge all his lots to conform to mt~tmum of 100 x 125,however,he wanted the board's reaction to sale of two lots 90 x ~00 which are so situated that the-_width cannot be enlarged without unnecessary h~rdship. The board agreed unofficially to regard the sale of these lots favorably,~articularly since:he has agreed to enlarge all other lots where.possible, Ralph Glover:appeared in cobh'action with lot 200 x 451/465... irregular shape on~h there~is now a house 172' from fron~ line on easterly hal£...le6a-~t-e~ Kenr~'s Road,Southold.. Mr Glover wondered what board' s reaction would be to division into 8 slightly undersize lots. and erection on: each of a ~-11 con,age for rent(~oot~age would be larger than 550 sq ft)..Board suggested he:might look into the possibility of a Tourist.Camp at the rear of the property,and division of the remaining area into fully sized lota~ ~ubdivision of. land should be taken up with Planning Board. ~ & Mrs ~ieglerappeared in connection with property they own on ~ay Ave,East Marion.. This property was discussed in May 2nd meeting,. PI~:. in~efinite~: want approval of 50 Foot lots for cottages larger than tourist camp minimum(550 sq ft)~or they may want to build some duplexes. Ware advised that subdivision of land is matter for Planning Board.. Oonstruction of duplexes in a residential zone w~uld require~ change of zone,a matter for Town Board. ~rs Anderson,owner of a 50~ lot with residence in Mill Oolo~y, near Sothold Town Beach,has opportunity to purchase adjoining lot of 150' width,.O~ner will not sell a less~ width. Question propounded by Mr R ~Terry ~r~what would be board's attitude in case of this kind where two or more lots are me=ged in e~nt owner wishes to sell a 1OO fo~ lot from the new~ acquisition of 150~.-Noard reacte~ favorably~ since owner's original lot would be widened by 50' and thereby improved.. In general the board seemed to feel that merging of lots did not imply the original lot held in single and separate: ownership before enactment of the ordinance had to be increased to lOCk,or that the lot to be increased from 50 to 80 should in any way b~ penalized in future transactions~ somewhat similar case was discuseed,~he~e both the lot with the house and the adjoining lot on a corner now vacant are undersized but both lots were in separate ownership before the enactment of the ordinance. Gould the owner of the house on the inside lot purchase the adjoining empty lot and obtain a permit to build on' a 65' lot..Board reacted favorably. There was some discussion with reference to issuance of building permits on 20~ lots,as well as question of building permits~ to extensions of non-conforming usese. Minutes of the April 25th Meeting were read and approved.Meeting adjourned 11~50 P.M. 0hairman' s M~nutes R W Gillispie Jr