Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-03/27/1958 APPEAL BOARD k4Ek4BERS Rob~rf W. Gillispie, Jr., Chairman Robert B,e rgen Herberf Rosenberg Char!es Gregonis, Jr. Serge Doyen, Jr. .~nUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. Telephone SO $-2660 MINfUTES Southold Town Board of Appeals March 27, 1958 A regul,r meeting of the Southol~ Town Board of Appeals was held on Thursday evening, March 27, 1958, at 7:30 P. M. in the Town Olerk's Office, Southold, N. Y. There were present: Mr. R. W. Gillispie, Jr., Chairman Mr. Robert Bergen Mr. Herbert Rosenberg Mr. Charles Grigonis, Jr. Mr. Serge Doyen Also present: Mr. Howard M, Terry, Building Inspector P~BLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 53 on application of Bertra~ B. Daiker of 43 Flower Lane, P~lyn Heights, N. Y., for a variance to the Zoning Ordinance due to lack of access under Section 2~O-a, ~ubsection 3 of the Town Law. Location of property described in accompanying w~p as North Side of Bayview Road, Paradiee Shores. The Chair~n opened the meeting by reading the application for appeal, legal notice o£ hearing with affidavit from the Long Island Traveler-Mattituck Watch,-An and letter to applicant advising of date of public hearing. Chairman: To clarify this hearing I would state tBat the P]A~ing Board, on March 13, 1958, turned down the petition of Paradise Shores Association to establish an "Open Develo~aent Area" and we are considering this because access has been turned down by the Town Board and the Planning Boar~. Is there a~yone present who wishes to speak for this application? Mr. Daiker explained to the Board that he was planning to proceed with a ~11 extension to his cottage and had stated in his written application the reasons for the appeal. He also stated that he purchased his lot in 1952, knowing full well that this was a private road and has contribute~ to having it black topped. He is asking for reco~tion of the right of way to his own property only. Ohairm~ stated it was the feeling of the Board that some provision should Be made to clear this right of way of over~;~ging branches and shrubbery and Mr. Daiker --- 2 ~ So~thold Town Beard of Appeals Marc~ 27, 1958 ~JTE~, Co~t~nued agreed that this would be done. Chairlift Is there anyone present who wishes to speak against this appeal? I believe then that we are ready to make our decision. Board u~a~i~ously gra~ted the variance with approval of a 20 foot right of way, as subaitted on Map dated July 5, 1939 & May 24, 1940 By Otto W. Va~uyl, with the understanding that overhanging branches and shrubs will be cleare~, up to a heighth of twelve feet, the full width of this 20 foot right of way, in order to provide free access for Town vehicles such as fire trucks. P~BLIC ~E. ARING: Hearing reconvened on Appeal No. 54 - application of R. B. Hudson, 4 U~ddelton Road, Greenport, N.Y. Hearing had been recessed one week, from March 20, 1958 to the present date, due te lack of ~*or~ation. Chairman: Mr. Hudson, as I recall it you own two lots in Fleetfield? Mr. Hudson: No, I owned two lots but sold one some time ago. I am ask~n~ for the var~_~ce on the single lot. Chairman: I guess that is all Mr. Hudson. I believe we ca~ make our decision. Appeal was una~ously granted since lot was purchased prior to the enactment of the Zoning Ordinance and held in single and separate ownership. This subdivision is nearly all built up and lots in the area are all of similar size. PUBLIC HEARING: Hearing reconvened on Appeal No. 49 - Application of Isaac T. Edwards, Main Road, Orient, New York~ Hearing had been recessed two weeks, from March 13, 1958 to the present date, to give all i~terested parties an opportunity to file written briefs. Chairman opened the hearing by stating that recess of the hearing had been agreed upon in order to give other interested parties, either for or against this proposition, an opportunity to express their views. He further explained that the application was filed in order t~ attach a garage to the house on the property in questioa and that the application stated that "permissive use is requested in order that applicant can build garage to house his business trucks#. Chair.~__~: I ~ight also state that we received a n~mber of letters both for and against and also state that this variance is also involved with a~ extensiom of a nen-eonforming use. In other words, the two propositions are confused here. It is not simply an application for a garage to be attached to a residence too close to a line but also an application for the facilities to house physical equipment used in the oil business and under these conditions we are considering it. The Chairman then read letters received from the following who are opposed to the granting of this permissive use~ Clement J. Welles, Constance A. Er~ and Lilian Dwight Stern. He also read a letter from Katherine M. Miller of Orient, N.Y., in favor of the granting of this appeal and stated that ca Sunday he had a telephone call from Mrs. Beverly Lomas withdrawing her objection to this appeal and that is co~firmed in a letter to Mr. Tasker. Chairman then presented a letter received from Mr. Edwards clarifying his intentions ~ud a copy of brief presented By Mr. ~asker. Sehthold Town B~ard of Appeals 3 Maria 27, 1958 Chair~;~ Is there anyone present who would like to speak for this appeal? Anyone wis .h~ng to speak against it? Mr. Schriever~ I would like to speak against this. My feeling about this garage is really two things that strike me as objectionable to such a garage. One is that in place of discouraging the use of what is obviously a residential property for business purposes, it encourages its If it is inconvenient to run a bus£uess from a residential piece of property, or from one's residence, it is certainly less likely that it will continue in years to come and the ~ore inconven- ient it becomes the less likely it will continue and I tb~-~ the building zoming was setup to try to discourage the use of residential property for business. This has bee~ residential for over 50 years or more and it has been divided into residen- tial lots and there are new houses going up right now and I think it is detrimental to all of the property owners and partic-lArly to us to have the use of this property for business purposes encouraged. The garage is at least 50% larger than a two car~ garage. It is obviously suited to park a large truck and to say that the garage will hold only two vehicles is not right either. The garage is 36 feet long and you ca~ park 3 or 4 cars in there is all are standard size vehicles and that is not to ~y mind a two vehicle garage even though it maybe describe~ as such. The second thing is - there is always the possibility that if you grant this petition then it becomes to Mr. Edwards' advantage to move the remainder of his business to this property an~ were there no garage he would not be ineomvenieuced too much to have to go elsewhere to store his oil trucks. My feeling is that the granting of this petition will merely setup the circumstances for still another application to be forthcoming and this application will be to put the oil ta~ks there and then we will have the business there, and that is ~y feeling about it. Chairman: I don't believe there is anything in the Or~-Ance stating that a garage shall be limited in size. However, a garage and accessory buildings m~y not occupy in excess of ~ of rear yard area, as defined in the Ordinance. Mr. Rosenberg~ That is correct. If a --u wanted to put up a five car garage he could. The fact that it is attached to the house is the only reason we are legally entitled to consider this application. In other words, he would not have to appeal to us if the garage were separated. Mr. Schriever~ Is this true in spite of the size of the garage? Ohairaan~ This is an extension of the house. Were it separate there would be no appeal. On the matter of oil tanks. They are located in East Marion, several miles away~ and it is unlikely that he would ever move the tanks. In any case, this Board is empowered to prohibit the installation of oil tanks in the future on this property A~d I believe we will do this if we gra~t this appeal. I believe the effect of this addition will be to screen you from the unsightly oil trucks and other physioal equipment used in the oil business. What you have stated about the area being residential for 50 years is true. The fact that this application has come up fer permissive use of part of the property enables this Board to prohibit any further extension of this use. I th~nk that if this application is granted the total effect on summer residents in the area is going to be a vast improvement. Is there anyone else who wishes to speak against this? Mar~ 27, 1958 Soathold Town Board of Appeals .MINUTES, Continued Mr. Henry Tasker~ I have a telegram here from Ramona Burnham and ~.ucy A. Gesell, addressed to the Board in my care, which I should like to read. Mr. Tasker then read the telegram, which did not oppose the granting of the appeals but was in favor of the granting of said appeal with certain restrictions as outlined in Mr. Tasker's brief. Mr. Tasker stated that he understood there were to have been other telegrams to be presented butup ko 8:15 P.M. he had not received them. Ohair~n: Thank you all for coming. We will close the hearing and arrive at a decision later tonight. Hearing closed. PUBLIC HEARINGs Appeal No. 50 - Application of Mr. James O. Whalen of 216 Lakeview Avenue, Malverne, N. Y. for a variance to the Zoning Ord~ ~n~nce under Article III, Section 303. Also Appeal Nos. 51 and 52 - Application of Mr. JAmes C. Whalen for permissive use under Article VIII, Section 801-A, ~ubsection O of the Zoning Ord,-A-ce. Ohair~-- read applications, legal notEces of public hearing with affidavits from the Long Island Traveler-Mattituck Watchman and letter to applicant advising of date of public hearing. Ohair~: Is there ~nyone present who wishes to speak for this application? Mr. James O. Whalen: I have a map of the property here which I would like to present and pictures and plans of the proposed homes to be erected. I stated in the application for the variance that I purchased this property in 1955 with this thought in mind and the survey shows the layout for the intended use. I would not have invested in this property if this would not be permitted. A lengthy discussion was held between Mr. James C. Whalen, his brother Mr. Robert Whalen, Mr. Henry Tuthill of Greenport, N.Y., Mr. William Wickha~of Outchogue, N. Y., and the members of the Board. Mr. Henry Tuthill expressed an objection to the granting of this appeal as he felt that the purpose of the Zoning Ordinance was to protect the Town and not let the area downgrade in any way. Mr. William Wickham stated that he was appearing on behalf of his wife and himself and Mr. &Mrs. F. H. Baxter of New Jersey and that they sl] owned property in the area. He stated that he felt that if the Board allowed two acres of land to be split up in less than the required size lots they would be setting a tremendouse precedent. It was explained to the owners that the Board does not have the power to reduce the size of building lots except in cases involving undue and unique hardship and that financial hardship is not considered a sufficient basis for proving undue hardship. It was suggested that applicant redraw their map to confor~to the Ordinance as far aa possible and hearing was recessed to April 10, 1958 at 8 P.M. Decision in the case of Isaac T. Edwards - Appeal No. 49: Appeal unanimously granted. The Board does not consider that the granting of this request is to be construed as an expansion of the present nen-eonformi~g busi~esse We believe that the construction of this garage will inprove the cb~racter ~f the neighborhood. It is hereby stip-~ted that this construction must be completed within one year, Southold Town Beard of Appeals MINUTF~, Continued 27, 1958 ¥t-utes of the February 13th meeting were reade On motion duly made by Mre Grigonis, seconded by Mr. Rosenberg, and carried, minutes were approved. Minutes of the March 13th meeting were then read. On motion duly made by Mr. Rosenberg, seconded by M~. Grigonis, and carried, minutes were approved. Mi-utes of the March 20th ~eeting were read. On motion duly made by Mr. Doyen, seconded by Mr. Bergen, and carried, minutes were approved. The next meeting of the Board is scheduled for Thursday evening, April 3rd, at 8~30 P.M. in ~outhold, N. Y. Meeting adjourned at 11~25 2. M. APPROV~D: Respectfully submitted, Grace B. ~ey~ Secretary