Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4962 4 „ ,,,,,,,,, iip APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS • ” 0 %UFFOL"( o ®�® ® Southold Town Hall Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman d i � � :t 53095 Main Road Lydia A.Tortora '1'; k � P.O. Box 1179 George Horning �,. ®^7 �� Southold, New York 11971-0959 � Ruth D. Oliva . �� ZBA Fax (631) 765-9064 �' � � Vincent Orlando = 1 +,0i0 Telephone (631) 765-1809 /''° http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF MAY 2, 2002 Appl. No. 4962 - ROGER J. AND LESLIE WALZ. Parcel #37 -6-5 Location of Property: 2505 Old Orchard Road, East Marion. BASIS OF APPEAL: Building Inspector's Notice of Disapproval dated May 2, 2001, denying a permit for a second-story addition stating that the proposed addition to a non- conforming structure is not permitted pursuant to Article XXIV Section 100-242A. The existing structure has a nonconforming side yard setback of 3 ft. from the easterly lot line and 6.5 ft. on the westerly line and the second-story addition represents an increase in the degree of nonconformity. 9 AREA VARIANCE REQUESTED: Applicants request side yard variances of 3 ft. and 6.5 ft. for a second-story addition instead of the code-required 10 ft. minimum for a single side yard and a total of 25 ft. for both side yards, all as shown on the maps (A-4, A-5, S-1) prepared by Fairweather-Brown Design Associates, Inc., dated March 16, 2001, May 1, 2001, May 14, 2001, and May 24, 2001. The second-story would create 1,615 ft. additional living space over an existing first floor living area of 1,087 sq. ft. and 722 sq. ft. attached garage. The expansion would create two bedrooms and a recreation room that would extend through the center of this very long, approximately 75 ft. +-, L-shaped house with widths that vary to a maximum of 38 ft. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held public hearings on this application on June 7, 2001; August 16, 2001; September 20, 2001; November 15, 2001; November 29, 2001, at which hearings written and oral evidence were presented. At the applicant's request, the hearing was re-opened March 28, 2002, at which time written and oral evidence were presented. Based upon all testimony, documentation, personal inspection of the property, and other evidence, the Zoning Board finds the following facts to be true and relevant: 1. PROPERTY FACTS: Applicants' property is located on the east side of Old Orchard Road in East Marion. The .215-acre lot (9360+- sq. ft.) was created prior to zoning as part of an old map subdivision known as Gardiner Bay Estates, Section Two. The lot is long and extremely narrow with water frontage of 54.89' on Gardiners Bay, and 257.4 ft. along the east property line and 265.0 along the west property line. Access to the property from Old Orchard Road is via a 20 ft. wide black top drive that angles sharply upward for a distance of 47 ft. in front of the adjoining property owners lot to the west. The property is improved with the applicant's one-story single-family residence, attached garage, porch, cabana and brick patios, all as shown on the site plans prepared by Fairweather-Brown Design Associates, Inc , dated May 16, 2001. a t 410 16 Page 2—May 2, 2002 Appl No 4962— R and L Walz 37 -6-5 at East Marion 2. The existing residence is an older waterfront home located on a very tiny, narrow lot, that is substantially elevated above the adjoining property owner on the west lot line. The applicants have owned the residence since 1980 and wish to expand the house in order to retire there in the future. Because the lot is so narrow, and the residence is already 75 ft. long, applicants propose a second-story addition to gain total living area of 2,202 ft. excluding an existing 722 sq. ft. attached garage. 3. The second-story would create 1,615 ft additional living space over an existing first floor living area of 1,087 sq. ft. and 722 sq. ft. attached garage. The expansion would create two bedrooms, a bath, recreation room and balcony that would extend through the center of this very long, approximately 75 ft. +-, L-shaped house and the east side, and over the full first floor on the west side The width of the house varies to a maximum of 38 feet. 4. The community consists of odd-sized substandard lots, some with residences such as the applicant's that were once summer cottages created prior to zoning. While the applicant's attorney submitted a map indicating many waterfront homes in the area have one-and one-half and two-story residences, the board finds that only three are less than 50-feet wide, and a majority are substantially larger than the applicants. 5. Nonetheless, some of the existing homes, particularly in the immediate waterfront area, are located close to the lot lines, and these neighbors offered support for the applicants' proposal. 6. Both adjacent residences, on the east and west of the applicants' property, are very close to the applicants' lot lines. On the east side, the adjoining neighbor's single-story residence is located 5 ft. to 6 ft. from the property line at the closest point. The neighbor sent a letter in support of the applicant stating that the nine ft. house-to-house distance allowed them to carry on conversations from their porches and share a flower bed. On this side, the applicant's architectural plans show a proposal to extend the existing first floor straight up with a gabled roof at the existing setback of three (3) feet. 7 The board notes that variances run with the land and that future owners may not appreciate the effects of a two-story, 75+-ft. long house set three (3) feet from the property line. The board also notes that because the applicant's existing house is only three (3)feet from the property line, fire vehicles have no access to the south water-side of the residence, and the proposed straight-up second story will only exacerbate the problem and further limit fire access to the east side of the residence. 8. Both the applicants' architect and attorney conceded that the proposed second-story with gabled roof on the east side was a "problem", and more massive and intrusive than the low, shed-type roof design on the east side of the house. They maintain that the 2 r '' a 40 Page 3— May 2, 2002 Appl No 4962— R and L Walz 37.-6-5 at East Marion straight design is necessary to achieve the applicants' desired 1615 sq. ft. of additional living space. 9. The board disagrees. The existing house is not a cottage but a substantial structure located too close to the lot lines on a very small lot. The property has constraints, and the negative impacts of a huge house on a tiny lot are not in the best interests of the health, safety and welfare of the community. The board believes the applicant can achieve additional living space by creating a smaller, less intrusive second-story addition on the east side. 10. On the west side of the applicant's existing residence, a brick path near the property line shows sign of erosion onto the adjoining property. The land slopes sharply upward from Old Orchard to the applicant's lot. The roof line of the objecting neighbor's one-half story residence is approximately level with the applicant's existing residence. The adjoining owner has expressed strong opposition to the proposed second-story addition. The neighbor's residence to the east also has a nonconforming setback (approximately 3.5 feet) to the lot line, and they maintain that the proposed addition will create a towering wall over their residence, and create problems of loss of privacy, water and septic contamination. Combined with the proposed setback of 6.5 ft. in this application, the total distance between the two residences would be nonconforming (approximately 10 feet total instead of 25-30 feet total for both dwellings). 11. To mitigate the impact to the westerly premises, applicants' architect designed a shed roof with an eave that would eliminate the gable roof and create a less severe roof line, similar to a modified pyramid. The second floor would not be incorporated over the L- shaped south side of the residence. The applicants have agreed to install french drains to contain roof run-off. REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: On the basis of testimony presented, materials submitted and personal inspections, the board makes the following findings: 1. A) Grant of the area variance on the west side of the residence will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The alternative drawing submitted by the applicants' attorney for a second- story addition with 10' and 15' side yard setbacks from the side property lines (that could be constructed without a variance) would create a straight-wall, towering effect, affecting the neighbor's property on the west side. Applicant's architect has designed a less massive, second-story addition with a lower roof line to mitigate the impact to the adjoining westerly neighbor. B) Grant of the area variance on the east side of the residence will produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby (3.5) 3 11b lir . , , Page 4— May 2, 2002 Appl No 4962— R and L Walz 37 -6-5 at East Marion properties. For reasons stated previously, the board believes that the requested variance to permit a 75 ft. long, straight-up, second-story, 3 ft. from the property line will be out-of keeping with the narrow width and small size of the property, and will be a detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the community. 2. The benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance. The applicant submitted a drawing indicating that a full-second floor could be added over the existing structure, which would not require variances and would comply with the code's 10 ft. minimum and 25 ft. total side yards. Neither the applicant nor the board believes that the example cited offers a reasonable design solution. The board does believe that the applicants can achieve the benefit of a second-floor addition on the east side with a modified pyramid roof line to provide a greater setback to the property line. 3. The variances requested are substantial. The applicants request total side yards of 9.5 ft instead of the code's 25-foot minimum. Although the magnitude of the second-story addition on the west side has been diminished by the proposed design, the design on the east side will create a 74+- ft. long, massive two-story structure, set three feet from the property line. 4. The alleged difficulty has been self-created. The code's minimum side yard setback were in effect at the time the applicant purchased the property in 1980 as a summer home. The desire to create a large house on a small lot can only be described as a self-created difficulty. 5. Because of the high elevation of the applicant's property over the adjoining westerly property, the existing erosion and roof runoff could be exacerbated by the proposed second-story addition. The board will condition its approval of a variance on the west side with the installation of French Drains. The requested variance at the east side will have an adverse impact on physical conditions in the neighborhood. The size and magnitude of the proposed second story will close off the waterfront, have an effect of wall-to-wall building, and create an unwarranted fire hazard for both firefighters and the residents. 6. Grant of the requested variance on the west side is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of second-story additions to a single- family residence, while preserving and protecting the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community. The requested east side variance is not the minimum necessary because the applicant can achieve additional living space by creating a smaller, less intrusive second-story addition 4 J 4 I I I 0 Page 5-May 2, 2002 Appl. No 4962- R and L. cNalz „fie/ 1/ 37.-6-5 at East Marion 0 \ RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD: In considering all of the above factors and applying the balancing test under New York Town Law 267-B, motion was offered by Member Tortora, seconded by Member Orlando, and duly carried, TO GRANT a Variance authorizing a second-story addition on the west side with a minimum setback of 6.5 ft. with the CONDITION that the second floor be constructed in full accordance with the site plan dated May 14, 2001 (S-1) prepared by Fairweather-Brown Design Associates, Inc., and made part of the record, and with a further CONDITION that French drains be installed to contain roof runoff on site, and reinforcement and reconstruction of the brick path; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, TO DENY a Variance authorizing a second-story addition on the east side with a minimum setback of 3 ft., and to GRANT ALTERNATIVE RELIEF authorizing a second-story addition with a minimum setback of seven (7) feet on the east side, with the CONDITION that the design and roof follow the modified pyramid design of the opposite (west) side second floor. A shed roof can be placed over the four (4) ft. distance from the existing roof line to the exterior wall of the second floor, or to the secondary roof of the second floor. This action does not authorize or condone any current or future use, setback or other feature of the subject property that violates the Zoning Code, other than such uses, setbacks and other features as are expressly addressed in this action. VOTE OF THE BOARD: Ayes: Members .= ringer Chairman , Tortora, and Orlando. (Absent were: Members Horning and YIiva.) This --solutio as ly a.2 r-d ,4-0). f, r` ..,,.--"GERARD P GOEHRINGER, CHAIRM A 1 ' - '- ' 5///0/0 L '-'f-.--r? /0;00 -- -_ (3D , -- , _,,. i P 5 ) COUN OF SUFFOLK\ f\u .. ie • � $(6%.\ _Ltd ,14.,'7 �i ROBERT J. GAFFNEY SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE THOMAS ISLES, AICP DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING DIRECTOR OF PLANNING ^ k , June 7, 2002 ' { 4/ An 14Z Town of Southold Zoning Board of Appeals Pursuant to the requirements of Sections A 14-14 to 23 of the Suffolk County Administrative Code, the following application(s)submitted to the Suffolk County Planning Commission is/are considered to be a matter for local determination as there appears to be no significant county-wide or inter-community impact(s). A decision of local determination should not be construed as either an approval or a disapproval. Applicant(s) Municipal File Number(s) Walz, Roger& Leslie 4962 Floyd King Trust 5045 Laoudis, Theodore &Angela 5077 Laoudis, Thoedore &Angela 5078 Ahlers, Paul & Patricia 5082 Carnesi, Anthony 5083 Kistner, John 5085 Wood, Joan 5087 Giacale, Louis & Sarah 5088 Bedell, John& Susan 5090 Young, Robert& Dorothy 5091 Arnold, Richard&Joan 5092 Edgewater III 5093 Buskard, Donald - 5094 Gusmer Realty 5096 Sleckman, James & Cathy 5097 Ketterer, Gwyneth 5103 Blackley, James 5107 DiBlasi, Robert 5112 Edgewater III 5120 Custom Designer Homes, Inc. 5121 Ellis, Scott& Constance 5122 CD LOCATION MAILING ADDRESS H LEE DENNISON BLDG. -4TH FLOOR ■ P 0 BOX 6 1 00 ■ (5 I 6) 853-5 190 100 VETERANS MEMORIAL HIGHWAY HAUPPAUGE, NY 1 1 788-0099 TELECOPIER(5 1 6) 853-4044 June 72002 *OLK COUNTY PLANNING DEPARIODIT Page 2 Como, Joseph& Christina 5128 Youngman, Arline 5129 Very truly yours, Thomas Isles Director of Planning S/s Gerald G. Newman Chief Planner GGN:cc G\CCHORNY\ZONING\ZONING\WORKING\LD2002 JAN\JUN\SD4962 JUN / f '''' / LOCATION MAILING ADDRESS H LEE DENNISON BLDG -4Th FLOOR ■ P 0 BOX 6 100 ■ (5 I 6) 853-5 190 100 VETERANS MEMORIAL HIGHWAY HAUPPAUGE, NY I 1788-0099 TELECOPIER(5 I 6) 853-4044 VP COUNTY OF SUFFOLK.) 1 5;t 4N. TV �=r'cayy'r 411. ;; •%-It i, 4 1 41 ROBERT J. GAFFNEY SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE THOMAS ISLES, AICP DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING DIRECTOR OF PLANNING June 7, 2002 (�s JCA! 1113 Town of Southold Zoning Board of Appeals Pursuant to the requirements of Sections A 14-14 to 23 of the Suffolk County Administrative Code, the following application(s)submitted to the Suffolk County Planning Commission is/are considered to be a matter for local determination as there appears to be no significant county-wide or inter-community impact(s). A decision of local determination should not be construed as either an approval or a disapproval. Applicant(s) Municipal File Number(s) Walz, Roger& Leslie 4962 Floyd King Trust 5045 Laoudis, Theodore &Angela 5077 Laoudis, Thoedore &Angela 5078 Ahlers, Paul &Patricia 5082 Carnesi, Anthony 5083 Kistner, John 5085 Wood, Joan 5087 Giacale, Louis & Sarah 5088 Bedell, John& Susan 5090 Young, Robert& Dorothy 5091 Arnold, Richard& Joan 5092 Edgewater III 5093 Buskard, Donald 5094 Gusmer Realty 5096 Sleckman, James & Cathy 5097 Ketterer, Gwyneth 5103 Blackley, James 5107 DiBlasi, Robert 5112 Edgewater III 5120 Custom Designer Homes, Inc. 5121 Ellis, Scott& Constance 5122 LOCATION MAILING ADDRESS H. LEE DENNISON BLDG -4TH FLOOR ■ P O. BOX 6100 ■ (5 16) 853-5 190 100 VETERANS MEMORIAL HIGHWAY HAUPPAUGE, NY 11788-0099 TELECOPIER(5 16) 853-4044 .,, -- June 7, 2002 S , , OLK COUNTY PLANNING DEPART, . r Page 2 Como, Joseph& Christina 5128 Youngman, Arline 5129 Very truly yours, Thomas Isles Director of Planning S/s Gerald G. Newman Chief Planner GGN:cc G\CCHORNY\ZONING\ZONING\WORKING\LD2002 JANUUN\SD4962 JUN LOCATION MAILING ADDRESS H LEE DENNISON BLDG. -4T1-1 FLOOR ■ P. 0 BOX 6100 • (5 I 6) 853-5 190 100 VETERANS MEMORIAL HIGHWAY HAUPPAUGE, NY I 1788-0099 TELECOPIER(5 I 6) 853-4044 die . June 4, 2002 Mr. Gerald G. Newman, Chief Planner Suffolk County Department of Planning P. 0. Box 6100 Hauppauge, NY 11788-0099 Dear Mr. Newman: Please find enclosed the following application with related documents for review pursuant to Article XIV of the Suffolk County Administrative Code: Appl. No. —4962 — Roger J. and Leslie Walz Action Requested: Front yard setbacks Within 500 feet of: ( ) State or County Road ( X) Waterway (Bay, Sound or Estuary) ( ) Boundary of Existing or Proposed County, State, Federal land. If any other information is needed, please do not hesitate to call us. Thank you. Very truly yours, Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman By: Enclosures 10 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS ' r ,//$,O�OSQf FO(,�co` Southold Town Hall Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman ���a� Gyd: 53095 Main Road Lydia A.Tortora t y Z P.O. Box 1179 George Horning " O t Southold,New York 11971-0959 Ruth D. Oliva y 0�/' ZBA Fax(631) 765-9064 Vincent Orlando = 491 jig +." Telephone(631) 765-1809 http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD May 10, 2002 Fairweather-Brown Design Associates P.O. Box 521 Greenport, NY 11944 Re: Appl. No. 4962 — Roger and Leslie Walz Variance Determination Dear Sir or Madam: Enclosed please find a copy of the variance determination with conditions regarding the above application. If you have any questions regarding the next step in this building permit/zoning review process, please feel free to call the Building Department (765-1802) for remaining documentation to complete the building permit file. We have today also furnished copies of the enclosed determination to both the Building Department and Eric J. Bressler, attorney for Mr. and Mrs. Walz. Thank you. Very truly yours, GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN Enclosure Copies of Decision to: Building Department Suffolk County Department of Planning r� � I. O. RECEIPT OF ZBA DECISION Appl. No. 4962—Roger Walz Decision Rendered May 2, 2002 1 Received 1N FE © 7WE' r 7 MAY I , )2 itipj IP lip NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS THURSDAY, MARCH 28, 2002 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Section 267 of the Town Law and Chapter 100 (Zoning), Code of the Town of Southold, the following applications will be heard during public hearings by the SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS at the Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York 11971, on THURSDAY, MARCH 28, 2002, at the time noted below (or as soon thereafter as possible). 7:05 p.m. Appl. No. 4962 — ROGER J. and LESLIE WALZ. This is a request for a Variance under Article XXIV, Section 100-242A, based on the Building Inspector's May 2, 2001 Notice of Disapproval regarding the proposed second-story addition to existing dwelling. The reason stated in the Notice of Disapproval states that the existing structure has a nonconforming setback of less than 10 feet and 15 feet on the side yards, and as a result, the addition of the second-story represents an increase in the degree of nonconformity. Location of Property: 2505 Old Orchard Road, East Marion, NY; Parcel 1000-37-6-5. (The hearing was concluded on November 29, 2001, and reopened at the request of the applicants' attorneys.) 7:45 p.m. Appl. No. 5058 - PETER & VAL LEONIAK — (Continuation from February 28, 2002). This is a request for Variances under Zoning Code Sections 100-30A.3 and 100-31, based on the Building Inspector's November 29, 2001 Amended Notice of Disapproval. The applicant proposes Parcels 1 and 2, each with less than 40,000 sq. ft. in size. Parcel #1 will also contain less than 125 ft. of lot width (frontage), and includes the existing accessory garage on a lot, presently vacant and without a principal use. Location of , Property: 2040 Pine Tree Road, Cutchogue; 1000-98-1-15, 16 and 17(approx. 1.5 acres as exists). The Board of Appeals will hear all persons, or their representative, desiring to be heard at the hearing, or desiring to submit written statements before the conclusion of each of the above hearings. The hearing(s) will not start earlier than designated. Files are available for review on regular Town Hall business days between 8 and 3 p.m. If you have questions, please do not hesitate to call (631) 765-1809. Dated: March 19, 2002. GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS Town Hall 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 N°1 J►4' FORM NO. 3 /)- TOWN OF SOUTHOLD f �� BUILDING DEPARTMENT ! �' U� �' SOUTHOLD,N.Y. 2 52001 NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL o x DATE; May 2, 2001 TO Amy Martin A/C Walz PO Box 521 Greenport NY 11944 Please take notice that your application dated March 16, 2001 For permit for 211d story addition to one family dwelling at Location of property 2505 Old Orchard Road East Marion County Tax Map No. 1000 - Section 37 Block 6 Lot 5 Subdivision Filed Map# Lot# Is returned herewith and disapproved on the following grounds proposed addition not permitted pursuant to Article XXIV Section 100-242A which states; Nothing in this Article shall be deemed to prevent the remodeling,reconstruction or enlargement of a nonconforming building containing a conforming use,provided that such action does not create any new nonconformance or increase the degree of nonconformance with regard to the regulations pertaining to such buildings. Existing structure has non-conforming setback of 3 feet from easterly side lot line and 6.5 feet on westerly side line, the addition of the second story represents an increase in the degree of non- conformity Authorized ature TOWN (:0 'i b;UTHOT D` _y-_= - ; - BUU D T,APPLICATION CHECKLIS! BUILDING DEP . • _ave or need the following,before applying plc TOWN 1:141;', �� Board of Health SOUTITOED,NY 11971 —, i 9 ' . 3 sets of Building Plans . TEL: 765-1802o sm L 0 � t D' .,. . , Survey . L''''1241'1"-- - PERMIT NO. Check - • - Septic Form • N.Y.S.D.E.C. . Trustees Examined ,20 Contact: Approved -,20 ," Mail to:. - Disapproved a/c 6 21/01 - . ` - , ' 3)/1)AAj" , Phone: Building Inspector APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT ' . ,Date , /6o , 200/ INSTRUCTIONS a. This application MUST be completely filled in by typewriter or in ink and submitted to the_Building Inspector with 3 sets of plans, accurate plot plan to scale. Fee according to schedule. b.Plot plan showing location of lot and of buildings on premises,relationship to,adjoining premises or public streets or areas, and waterways. - c.The work covered by this application may not be commenced before issuance of Building Permit. d.Upon approval of this application,the Building Inspector will issue a Building Permit to the applicant. Such a permit shall be kept on the premises available for inspection throughout the work. e.No building shall be occupied or used in whole or in part for any purpose what-so-ever until a Certificate of Occupanc- is issued by the Building Inspector. , , . APPLICATION IS HEREBY MADE to the Building Department for the issuance of a Building Permit pursuant to the , Building Zone Ordinance of,the Town of Southold, Suffolk County,New York, and other applicable Laws, Ordinances or Regulations, for the construction of buildings,,additions or alterations or for removal or demolition as herein described.The applicant agrees to comply with all applicable laws, ordinances,building code,housing code, and regulations, and to admit authorized inspectors on premises and in building for necessary inspections. u , .rte . � , / ,___..a' , (Signa%e of applicant or name,if a corporation) • ..e sa i %, , , - iiys (Mailing •i.ress .Lr..pplicant) State whether applicant is owner, lessee, agent, architect, engineer, general.contractor, electrician, plumber'or builder- • Name o er of premises ler v, ' //.5// ei /0,4-izJ ' : . - ;� (as'on the tax roll or latest deed) • If applicant is a corporation, signature of duly authorized officer - .(Name and title of corporate officer) •• . . . Builders License No. Plumbers License No. • . Electricians License No. ' Other Trade's License No. - - ' 1. Location of land on which proposed work_/� will be done: / c7/.6-0 -0 ® aee ct.N6 72-b gstp- Acle/ON ' House Number Street ' Hamlet - - County Tax Map No. 1000 Section 3 7 :Block Gp - .. , , s, Lot= ; Subdivision q />j,y S y Rs frfe.,�-, • 'Filed Map No. a7'5-�~ 'Lot' -e1 o` ' (Name) / D 2.: State existing use and occupanc , ises and intended use and occuAD roposed construction: a. Existing use and occupancy ' n `� - b. Intended use and occupancy i').1 /e.„- 4,pc.,e_.2JV - 3. Nature of work (check which applicable): New Building Addition - v - Alteration Repair- - Removal , Demolition - Other Work (Description) 4. Estimated Cost - 46'0) 000 . Fee . (to be paid on filing this application) 5. If dwelling, numbefof dwelling units / . Number of dwelling units'on each floor If garage, number of cars. ,fry 6. I'f business, commercial or mixed occupancy, specify nature and extent of each type ofuse. ,/i$' ' 7. Dimensions of existing structures, if any: Front /a - z Rear 761 t - Depth dila. 312'3-1-: Height /,:5 ' `1" 2: Number of Stories / Dimensions of same structure with alterations Or additions: Front V e - Rear 76 't - Depth 3,2.5-2-4e.E, Height �a /6 " Number of Stories vt% 8; Dimensions of entire new construction: Front - Rear Depth" Height - Number of Stories 9. Size of lot: Front 010 ' _ Rear ?51 4' Depth 94, r r- - , 10. Date of Purchase %980 ? Name of FormerOwner - 11. Zone or use district in which premises are situated )QE,fs,dP•,-r/.� . , , , 12. Does proposed construction violate any zoning law, ordinance or regulation: kiPi6.6 - ,C s,_ 'a/c-/-' 13. Will lot be re-graded ' kid �' Will excess fill be removed from premises: YES NO 0961 ye- ai.j 112e'-4 ei— ' - -40_, ; ., 14. Names of Owner of premises . ,9 4 Z Address 42!d `''/A- tiu Phone g. " 1/7"7 - 4064'/ _' Name of Architect ,Obey`5Y©um Address'4/3 "3- Ai eS-` Phone No /177-975749. Name of Contractor Address - Phone No. . 15. Is this property-within 100 feet of a tidal wetland? *YES NO V _ . ' - • IF YES, SOUTHOLD TOWN TRUSTEES PERMITS MAY BE REQUIRED 16. Provide-survey,to scale, with accurate foundation plan and distances to property lines. - ' ' 17. If elevation at any point On property i`s at 10 feet or below,must provide topographical data on survey. STATE OF NEW YORK) - " , SS: , COUNTY OF •.3.07 /k). . - ' fiir)X � / l !�'Ibeing duly sworn, deposes and says that(s)he is the applicant (Name ofdividual signing contract)above named, (S)He s the " CA e,--/- _ . . .. , . (Contractor, Agent, Corporate Officer, etc.) . . . of said owner or owners, d is duly authorized to perform or have performed the said work and to make and file this application; that all statements contained in this application are true to the best of his knowledge and belief; and that the work will'be performed in the manner set forth in the application filed therewith.` Sworn to before me this / 9 day of /�jt'/eh/ 20 0// -1 to k. -.A a_ ,(7%,,,,,. , ' ' \ iz I.At JA___A../ " ' , Notary Public : attire of-Applicant ELIZABETH A STATHIS - NOTARY PUBLIC;State of New York , " No.01 ST6008173,Suffolk Co - - - ; - Term Expires June 8,20� ; .- , s, ' . -b i s o f 3''iCf.km T signed No. °Et. For Offic/ q/ce Use Only: Fee$ * • , TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK APPEAL FROM DECISION OF BUILDING INSPECTOR ' AI /4 �O f DATE OF BUILDING INSPECTOR'S DECISION APPEALED: / TO, THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS: I,(We) (Appellant)knY /224,9-(0.-.74a-ckieeihy* ot...aiietc).MLYtee- r iwk) (Tel # /7/72-970-7'9 ) HEREBY APPEAL THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DATED � !D &2 - FOR: DENIED AN APPLICATION WHF,REBY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR ( tif Permit to Build , ( ) Permit for Occupancy ( ) Permit to Use ( ) Permit for As-Built ( ) Other. �,� .g!'411. ���/�P���l 1. -Location of Propert c:1 -0..C.c:1 -0..C. ad ®�°e�'1,' D q`� Zone District 1000 Section..4 y�.Block.h..Lot(s) 6P' Current Owner... - 2. Provision of the Zoning Ordinance Appealed. (Indicate Article, Section, Subsection _v", and pa (vrajah of Zoning Ordnance by numbers. Do not quote the law.) R E C E I D ArticleXl�l Section 100-v.� .. ...S . ub-Section 3. Type of Appeal. Appeal is made herewith for: . MAY 15 2001 ( Variance to the Zoning Ordinance or ZoningbM New York Town Law �fno�d town Clerk ( ) A Variance due to lack of access as required y Chap. 62, Cons. Laws Art. 16, Section 280-A. ( ) Interpretation of Article , Section 100 • - ( ) Reversal or Other: 4. Previous Appeal. A previous appeal (has) (has not) been made with respect to this property or with respect to this decision of the Building Inspector(Appeal # Year ) REASONS FOR APPEAL (Additional sheets may be used with applicant's signature): AREA VARIANCE REASONS: (1) An undesirable change will not be produced in the CHARACTER of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties, if granted, because: ` 4- cofd /?on- &alik (2) The benefit sought by the applicant CANNOT be achieved by some method feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance, because: Jae ...5!t 07e ` - t- (3) The amount of relief requested is not substantial because: Mr /,reie ,3i6lC' 70 E- / iov--/e/�J0-- (4) The variance will NOT have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district because: �o�- T,� /7 let)/(t- //y/,iebv� 74€ f ii��h/vG67' v/a y ,7 &,i 0<4-A14 (5) Has the alleged difficulty been self-created? ( ) Yes, or (�No. This is the MINIMUM that is necessary and adequate, and at the same time preserve and protect the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety, and welfare of the community. ( ) Check this-box if USE VARIANCE STANDARD re comple - • a d attached. i ' / / ' Sworn to before me this Signature . Appellant or Authorized Agent) 75-'—,day of ?t , 2019 . (Agent m submit Authorization from Owner) L� ,F77 A - Notary Public_____ g , . _ ZBA App /00 LINO,P.KOWALSKI SL'OS'AoN soJcdx3 uosssiururea Notary Public,State of New y , 900 3110unS ail paisilerio 1 • No.52-4524771 LLLPZ9t'- 9'°N Qualified in Suffolk:oL A Mehl}o ems•ancrod kWh Commission Expires Nov.3O S1VMON J VflNI1 Nil 411410 - Appeal Application, Continued BOARD OF APPEALS : TOWN OF SOUTHOLD COUNTY OF SUFFOLK:STATE OF NEW YORK x Application of Appeal Application (Continued) Property ID# REASONS FOR USE VARIANCE • x Continuation of Appeal Application for a Use Variance (when applicable): For Each and Every Permitted Use under the Zoning Regulations for the Particular District • Where the Protect is Located (please consult your attorney before completing): (1) The applicant CANNOT realize a REASONABLE RETURN because: (2) The HARDSHIP relates to the property and does not apply to a substantial portion of the district or neighborhood because: (3) The relief requested will not alter the essential CHARACTER of the neighborhood because: (4) Has the alleged difficulty been self-created? ( ) Yes, or ( ) No. (5)This is the MINIMUM that is necessary and adequate, and at the same time will preserve and protect the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety, and welfare of the community because: (6) The spirit of the zoning ordinance will be observed. (7) The public safety and welfare will be secured and substantial justice done. (Signature of Appellant or Authorized Agent) Sworn to before me this day of , 20 . (Notary Public) ZBA App 08/00 - M ---,. V) /jid J7 _ c _4,-- TO1i.. .IF SOUTHOLD PIS. :PERTY RECORD CARD DWNER STREET r VILLAGE DIST. SUB. LOTS, ' ..� –hQ/ �-D Ca Et_ �W L7- '1• 4 . OLl oReimi W " . � mil f ' fir G J-i 14-1 /1.� _7L,.'u-^ , / aZ� FORMER OV)/NE� N E ACR. t :U\c?L VA d IC 1 Pe va..4 c\U)(c dr2,2,#5 I - S W TYPE OF BUILDING ES. j p SEAS. VL. FARM COMM. CB. MISC. Mkt. Value L. ID IMP. TOTAL DATE REMARKS A� /� 7 �J /1 y l roc') ..6-6 eo o otO /�``t'- 1.-.1 bey 2 741 to,59S 0 ke-H -6 `H e I Vat-£ 1.pre.r- /l v o t, '°' ''e+ 6 66-0 0 -V9 j// 1 W2,/42., �i ae .v 7 I .p4 9 . Oc� c5tcs —4-d Dave))4o0 j. Y. ,4.,Eofwavd 2ktis aL 120 ,®�kniu4k) iPEr?.i a R1 P Lz Au)F ' :6a�.1. r - AGE BUILDING CONDITION \IEW NORMAL BELOW ABOVE FARM Acre Value Per Value ( ®\' ' Acre ilia 1 illab 2 iliable 3 'oodland vampland FRONTAGE ON WATER b-U ` , ' °0 y / 4 0 0 •ushtand FRONTAGE ON ROAD ) t:-t .` • ' ouse Plot DEPTH f Js`ei r BULKHEAD ',+' n DtaI DOCK • S r' V t'`, - .. leiii, :.1. y ' ' ': , ' :' ' ' ''':,. ,'. '' ' ' , 1P17, , ' • , "o ' r' I ,T I, 1„tAt.LAa.C6,�1��F1 ''! i} i• 'm r ; -,j i „' !'•:'„ r; i'` 1 l r 1`•'i t ,. • ' N;._5,4 t"G'30"In... G J Mia �._._._ .•_ ''_..._` -;__ .�' ._._.. :'` 1 j { _' �� _ Fete` -\l' ! I r.) 11 i 311' r ~r - �� ! .-",.67,.. , . , , ' , I r > n 1Cr' war. .datratt Ni ,,, , e •/ ' 'iI , . Z,, , ; , rt" 01 T F.a „ t3.akn or the New Yeade �, �•; .I d � { �) _ _ �� mar. �}�' i• { f ;Il+ t i,; ,.�:sQ �F �!/�c; cO�X�� s mail Trot 1' "a .C." �p�1CK Vq�� thytgnd au,veyori Wcedd seal or ' j i , I f •: 1\1!11�, '. , I ,, tliZICK. ! r COqN vPJi,' ; i' MndhalmlBWonlistedlwnwnand - t :,,,, / _ , to the assignees of the lending heti. • -- - �I ._ ...r 4 ! ;�, ,/ , Wm.Guarantee.am no trandstabta I yC I.; / t4 additional tnstgrgiery oraebtequer,t .. .� :I' �;.. TITLE NO. JZ1T.SOQ- 1 f .,,r.c'.�'' I' - ' -- . ' 1 '' ' 1 : - l h 1 ' 42' ,. 1 J� ,` ,t.r::, I. I,f- k, '•k tet,'[J1 ''''.—....-'2....:.:—....,.........--:.' L74L ' 1. 1 ;', �:� T. .-,7"147 --::' ' .' , ' :!7' t:'- 'Al «a ,SEC 7 iiI i_;'ri' ., '� ) . . ' )+,.;i. . , j.f= .•OifJCE.�.Af-MAP,-.7.s,• . 1 ' - �� ,' , ' .., • ',. . r 1, - { ! , .r00 �� , ' :siIAl:-kKI i:* •F., '' '1: riTi 1''t=t),,A.A,P4I"t:k:,..wt:', , i I , h4 ' M WWW!� �, :.i.-1I. r. ,Yjl t l/IC ,h' Iir'.j1�14, {. l•'v clt% .•^ ' i' `` i' Lr,•n .. i.,. .... l , . Sr . , :.. .r. .� , t '� Page 15,June 7,2001 s \Qf ZBA Public Hearing Transcript PXTown of Southold \, MARIE BENNENATI: Yes you did. Thank you. CHAIRMAN: You're welcome. Hearing no further comment I'll make a motion to closing the hearing reserving decision until later. SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION * * * 7:20 P.M. Appl. No. 4962—ROGER J. and LESLIE WALZ. This is a request for a Variance under Article XXIV, Slection 100-242A,based on the Building Inspector's May 2, 2001 Notice of Disapproval regarding application's proposed second story addition to existing dwelling. The Notice of Disapproval states that the existing structure has a nonconforming setback of three,feet from the easterly side lot line and 9.9 feet from the west side line, and as a result, the addition of the second-story represents an increase in the degree of nonconformity. Location: 2505 Old Orchard Road, East Marion,NY; Parcel 37-6-5, Fairweather-Brown Architects. CHAIRMAN: How are you tonight? What would you like to tell us? AMY MARTIN: I'm Amy Martin, part of Fairweather-Brown,representing Roger and Leslie Walz. Unfortunately, they are not here tonight they had to be out-of-state. They have owned this property since approximately September 1980. They wish to add a second-story to this home, as they hope to retire in the near future. As the Board knows that the area of Gardner Bay Estates in the waterfront area is a jungle of very strange and • N unusual lots. A lot of cottages are on small non-conforming properties. This one in particular is quite irregular in shape; it's a line#1238 lot with only 20 feet . On the right side where the kitchen is proposed, there is there now and it's sufficient to the propertylline. The addition that is proposed is a second story, yet there is no change to the footprint, at all (inaudible) line#1278 . The 6.2 property line and flat area around where proposed will remain a one single story structure. The U shape will change a shed was making it 10 %2 feet from grade. Where it's presently 14.6 feet to the ridge edge at the sound. So it comes out from the house, instead of going across. This whole section of area that they wish to remodel is in the center of the home on the one side lot, in neither of the side yards. On the east side there are a few feet from the'property line and the neighbor told me that it angled and that it ranged from 5 %2 feet from his property line to about 12 feet on the water end. Change in elevation on the part were irregular. We are adding approximately 7 feet to the garage end. lines from the two other sections. Basically the west end of the Martin house will be, I'm sorry. The Martin house to the west is a 1-1/2 structure as it exists and in the area there are other two-story structures. Up until recently to add on to, a second floor to a home on the same footprint, it would have been allowed but the law has been reinterpreted in a different direction. CHAIRMAN: Mrs. Martin, you Low me as not the person that would ever say derogatory things, but this a phenomenally large structure. I think that in that realm, it's hard to understand how large this structure is going to be without looking at it in some way manner or form. I don't know what to suggest to you at this point, other than the fact e , } n f Page 16,June 7,2001 ZBA Public Hearing Tianscnpt Town of Southold --,) that we understand that the house is a ranch now, a one-story structure. I stood at both the base of the garage, the foot of the garage, and I stood at the area which is most closely related to the beach; and I had trouble understanding the height and the magnificence of what this house is going to be, as you are proposing it or your client is. I just don't know how to deal with it at this point, and that's not a derogatory statement. MR. BROWN: (inaudible) CHAIRMAN: Somehow, Mr. Brown, we never miss you at one of these hearings. You've been very busy, haven't you? MR. BROWN: Very busy. The footprint, in terms of the second-story addition, is that when we started the design and well into the work going into the design, we had every reason to believe that the Building Department was continuing to interpret this portion of the Code involved here, in that, as there were no changes to the footprint, there was no significant difference in terms of the NAH pre-existing non-conforming conditions of the structure. It wasn't until we were almost finished with the 0 that we were informed by the Building Department that they had decided to reinterpret that portion of the code. In terms of the size, it is a very long house; there is no question about that. It's a very narrow house. It's literally, in some respects a railroad car design. The addition that we are proposing is purely two bedrooms and a recreation room on the second floor. We've kept the roof as low as possible and still conform to State Codes in terms of habitable space. In fact on the east side we are forced to provide a dormer situation in order to maintain appropriate headroom for the egress window. We have kept; we changed to a to a minimum, in order to allow, in order to provide second floor habitable space. The addition, basically, runs straight through the center of the long portion of the house. There is a small L at the south end, where we are actually moving a reversed . gable and providing a one-story shed roof, one story shed roof. Which actually reduces the immediate impact on the neighborhood. CHAIRMAN: Well the neighbor is the one that has the greatest setback is that correct? MR. BROWN: Yes. We have been informing our clients that the neighbor to the East has had no objection. And they are the ones who to my knowledge, will greatly impact CHAIRMAN: The problem I have is he issue of the East side, and the height of the roof, where the drainage calculations from water, torrential rain, could in effect over shoot the gutter and end up on the neighbors property,just because the height of the roof. I realize that this is a fairly, it's not a low pitched roof, but it's a pitched roof now, and I assume that's what's happening now. I just, in even looking at it, I don't want to further exacerbate that situation. MR. BROWN: I think it's necessary to exacerbate the situation. Certainly, while I haven't, at this point, calculated the size of the gutter,based on rainfall, certainly there is room for, in terms of the size of the gutter. Beyond that we have in the past employed i / ,______ n - ,m111 Page 17,June 7,2001 ZBA Public Hearing Tianscript Town of Southold what's called a French Drain, which is a trough built below the foundation of the building, dug to a depth of usually 18", filled with gravel and a perforated pipe which would run the drainage that was missed by the gutter off into a drywell. We have done that in the past. We've done it in place of gutters in the past. This procedure is fully approved by the D.E.C.and any other agency. Quite honestly, in terms of the footprint, once again, there would be no increase in the amount of runoff; because we're not changing the footprint one square inch. CHAIRMAN: I understand that, but still, the pitch could be changed on the roof line which could cause that aggravated situation. MR. BROWN: Which could be regulated by type of CHAIRMAN: Right, let's further see what happens. Mr. Dinizio any questions? MEMBER DINIZIO: No questions. CHAIRMAN: Miss Collins? MEMBER COLLINS: I don't have questions. I'm just concerned that the Building Department, having decided to take this position on interpreting the Code Section increasing the degree of non-conformity puts us into a situation of almost judging design. Under their old interpretation, if you had the setback, you could keep the setback and people did humungous things with their existing setbacks. MR. BROWN: You could even increase a footprint as long as you didn't MEMBER COLLINS: As long as you didn't go any further than where you already were. Some of the results of that were fairly awful. Now in your case they've taken a different view, and I haven't really figured out how I'm going to sort it out. I'm not sure where we are headed on this. I do share the Chairman's view, that I found standing there with the blueprints and looking at the building, I was finding it very, very hard to see how the new building, the new roof line and details fit with what was there already. I couldn't picture the new building inside the old building. MR. BROWN: It is difficult because of the position of the house on the property. The only thing that I can suggest is that we could prepare a rendering of the proposed structure based on a point of view of someone standing in front of the garage. CHAIRMAN: It maybe helpful, because we may have to reduce some of the roof lines. MR BROWN: As I've said, we have worked very hard on keeping,understanding the situation. We realize the house is tight enough. We did everything we could do to minimize any change in the profile. t Page 18,June 7,2001 Iry ZBA Public Hearing Tianscnpt Town of Southold -) CHAIRMAN: While you're doing the rendering, could you do two other things too? Could you use either a one by two or one by four and in both situations affix that to the ridge end of both sides of the house, so we know what the total maximum height is, when we go back and look at the property? MR. BROWN: Okay. CHAIRMAN: Just tell us when that is. I mean nothing to deface the present house, a couple of nails, possibly spruce so it won't waiver in the breeze. Mrs. Tortora? MEMBER TORTORA: One of the things I guess that we've been seeing as a Board increasingly over the last couple of years is just this kind of a proposal where someone has non-conforming setbacks and they have a ranch house, in your case, you're three feet from the property line, and they want to go up or they want to expand or whatever. It's very difficult to tell what it's going to look like, although, I'm getting educated pretty quick on this. The reason why is very simply, the results of some of the structures, and I would have to red flag this one as one that could have that potential. It can be humungous when you are putting two stories, huge structure on a very, very narrow lot, three feet from your neighbor's property line. Your neighbor may not object now, but when he sees it he may feel differently. But, Ican tell you one thing, we have been very surprised at the results of some of houses;particularly these two-story houses, when they are enlarged to such magnitude, particularly when you're looking at three feet from the property line. Big house, small lot or long lot, one way or another it can be over- ) powering. MR. BROWN: I would only say, I understand your concerns. Of the four houses from the beach, the four houses starting from the road, starting from the neighbor to the west; one is already one and a half stories, and one is already two stories. This would be another two story out of the four houses, as you can see fairly clustered together. MEMBER HORNING: I would say the Building Department is throwing it on our laps to deal with a new way of interpreting. MR. BROWN: I'm sure you can understand our sense of frustration about having figured the plans and discovering when I went back a new interpretation changing the whole field that you're planning on. MEMBER HORNING: So do your plans have any alternative design plans? MR. BROWN: At this point, I can't imagine that they did, because as I said, we had, it was very hard from the very beginning understanding the circumstances that we were in. To minimize the impact of this addition,by, as I said, keeping the roof line as low as possible to be able to provide habitable space on the second floor; and, in fact, not incorporating the second floor onto the L-shaped portion of the south side. } 1' t 1 Page 19,June 7,2001 ZBA Public Hearing Transcript Town of Southold MEMBER HORNING: So what you are saying is that the overall proposed building J height is the minimum? MR. BROWN: The minimum we felt we could provide and still provide habitable space upstairs. CHAIRMAN: So, in reality, what you're going to give us is a rendering of, you're going to affix those boards so that we can see what the height situation is. My question is, what is the timeliness of this application? Can we deal with this application in August? MR. BROWN: Obviously, the only concern that I would have regarding that is that, under normal circumstances I would say, if we were able to get a variance from you in August, successfully, and have the Building Permit by September so that the work could be done through the winter with no impact on the community, I would say great. But as I understand it right now, the Building Department has a backlog of approximately four months. CHAIRMAN: But, you're still in line, even though you don't have MR. BROWN: That may be, but I'm sure, you understand my concern and frustration. CHAIRMAN: The problem I have is that the July calendar is oh-la-la. MR. BROWN: Certainly, I don't want to make your lives any more difficult. If August is better for you, then August it is. CHAIRMAN: All right, we'll take some testimony tonight, if you would bring us the rendering or we can have it that night. But if we could study it at the same time. MR. BROWN: You'll have it before the August hearing. CHAIRMAN: Give us a call when you have the boards up, and we'll go back and take a look. We always love to go to Gardners Bay Estates in the summertime. It makes you feel like summer. Okay, we thank you. I have to tell you sir, that you and Miss Martin are wonderful ladies and gentleman, wonderful to deal with and, as always, in the past. You are a true gentleman, it really is a pleasure. MR. BROWN: Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN: Is there anybody else that would like to speak in favor of this application? Anybody like to speak against the application? Yes, ma'am? Good evening. NORMA MARTIN: Good evening, I'm Norma Martin. We live directly to the west of the Walz's home, and I have some comments and concerns I'd like to voice regarding this pending decision. Because of slope in the way of the land, with their house being on the highest portion of this slope, the height of their single-story house is approximately the - - e Page 20,June 7,2001 YP ZBA Public Healing Transcript Town of Southold same height as our house, which is a story and a half. I feel that adding a second story to this existing single level structure will result in something that far exceeds the height and detracts from the look of the surrounding dwellings. Granted as you look at the first four homes on the beach, ours being a story and a half, theirs being a story and then the other two-story house belongs to the fourth and it is on a considerably larger piece of property than is the Walz house. Also to be considered, I should think, would be the impact from the cesspool that would result in two bedrooms and one bath, that I understand are included in the plans. This addition would mean that there would be five bedrooms and two baths in this house. With our house situated directly next door on the downward side of the slope from their existing cesspools, I wonder what affect it will have on us. I am sure that when the Walz purchased this house, one of the things that impressed them was the look of Gardners Bay Estates. This traditional and understated private community, which has been in existence for approximately 72 years, has been achieved and maintained through the years by the diligence and cooperation of the homeowners and the Association. Although we have a Real Estate Committee, it is my understanding that the Walzs have yet to submit these for review and consideration. I am concerned as to why they bypassed this most important step. It insinuates to me that they are not concerned with what effect they have on their neighbors. When you become a resident of Gardners Bay Estates and a member of the Homeowners Association, it is assumed that you will abide by the guidelines that have been agreed upon by all; not develop your own agenda and expect to be allowed to be exception to the rule. We already have a very, very visual example just down the street on Old Orchard Lane; designed by the same architects, I might add, of what can happen when a homeowners vision and architects view of what is appropriate collide with what the neighbors feel looks best and is in the best interest of the appearance of a community as a whole. It is for the above reasons that I am opposed to these plans. Thank you for listening. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Good evening Mr. Martin, how are you? RALPH MARTIN: By having this house with a second story on, will affect the cut-off of any and all air circulation of our bedroom which are secured to the east of my home. My bedroom,my grandchildren's bedroom, and the guest bedroom. By going up, you limit the air; you lose some of the sunlight you might get. If I wanted to live next to a wall, I would have lived in New York City perhaps. I came out here, my wife and I did, for just the way this Town of Southold is and was; and I hope that this Committee will realize the fact that, that's the way I think our houses should be done, try and keep our rural atmosphere. I remember we had two traffic lights in town, now we have four or five. It seems to me that people like to move out here to the East End because of the rural atmosphere and the way people are. Many times, often times, I won't say many times, when people do move out here for what we have after they get settled, they want to start to change and bring the West end into our community. It doesn't really fit, and it happens it seems to me more so than not. We were never even addressed by the Walzs when they thought they might wish to put a second story on the house, but that's their business. But I still am a neighbor of theirs directly to the west, and my property line to my chimney, the property line, is about three feet. So that gives us nine feet between houses. It's 6.6 from their house and my property line; and I believe from my chimney, which is next to 1144 Page 21,June 7,2001 ZBA Public Hearing Tianscnpt Town of Southold two bedrooms, is about three feet, three and one half feet. Then to go up two stories with a bit more, I think it's just a little bit too much in my opinion. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Martin, I would like to see this, your house and what you're saying upstairs if you don't mind me making an appointment with you. Could I just have your telephone number? RALPH MARTIN: 477-0428 CHAIRMAN: They're going to put these ridge markers up, and once they're up, I'll give you a call and I'll come over some Saturday or whatever at your convenience. Okay. RALPH MARTIN: Fine, Mr. Chairman. I thank you very much for your time. CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone else that would like to speak against? Yes ma'am. JOAN A. BRIDGET EGAN: I have been a homeowner in Gardner Bay Estates since 1964. I couldn't agree more with Mr. and Mrs. Martin, and I think one of the most important highlights of what he said, is the fact that what happened with real estate changing and the fact that a lot of people bought these summer homes, now they're getting a little bit older, they sell the house west and they move here. Which is understandable, I did the same myself. We couldn't go wide, we couldn't go deep, and we went up a story, a half a story. These changes and overpopulation and the progression of these things. Hopefully the Walzs will live a long, long life and we don't have too many children in Gardner Bay Estates that we have to educate. But if these things go on, and they become year round homes, which is what I think is what Mr. Walz wants, you're going to have more, more, more. I think that the changes that have happened in Gardner Bay Estates, some of them, I don't know how they passed Zoning, that would be Mr. Frenzel's property that is on Old Orchard Lane. It is a horror, an absolute horror. There is nothing we can do about it,but I think somewhere along the line here you have to say stop. I think here, Mr. Martin and the other people tonight, including myself. I have served in every capacity in Gardners Bay Estates before it was homeowners,before, before. Mr. and Mrs. Walz have never even participated in any way, in any community activities that I know of and I think I would know of it. So all of these things can give me a very sour grapes. I think it's important that we maintain what we have and I'm sure there's some solution to this. I've been in the Walz house several times, when the Vanripers had it, and I don't know,maybe they could do better with a basement, putting things in a basement rather than going up. I think it would also effect the air corridor as far as ventilation for the homes going north, that might be Mrs. Frazier and it could go on to the Collins home. I think they're a lot of things other than just where the rain falls. I think the weight, also, of putting this structure up there on a slope like that, it can have a mud slide and it certainly could affect the Martins and I don't know the name of the people who live in the small home which could eventually effect our roads. It's a progression of things and I say stop. Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN: Anybody else, we are going to recess? Go ahead sir. Page 22,June 7,2001 ZBA Public Hearing Tianscnpt Town of Southold FRANK THORP: I am Frank Thorp; I live at 180 South Lane, two houses to the east of the Walzs. I also represent my brother Edward and his wife Virginia at 80 South Lane who is the immediate house next to the Walzs. A couple of things, my house, which is the two-story house referred to, is only five feet from the property line. The Walzs deed does not require them to submit an approval of plans. That was in the original deed. Some of the original deeds to the Gardners Bay Estates Company did not require certain things, including 8-foot setbacks from the side yard. Obviously, in this particular deed did not require the approval of the company for building plans which were then passed on to the Association. My brother and I strongly approve of the plans that have been proposed, we feel it will greatly enhance the community and will maintain and, perhaps, even add to our property value. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Hearing no further comment, yes, you have one thing you want to say? AMY MARTIN: Just wanted to give you one thing. We had our draftsman acquire the properties of the surveys of the two adjoining properties just to show you. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Hearing no further comment at this hearing, I make a motion recessing until August 16th, 2001. SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION 8:00 P.M. Appl. No. 4953 —HENRY L. FERGUSON MUSEUM, INC. This is a request for Variances,based on the Building Inspector's April 11, 2001 Notice of Disapproval which states that a permit for an addition to the existing museum building is denied for the following reasons: (a) Article III, Section 100-32 requires a minimum front yard setback of 60 feet; and (b) Article XXIV, Section 100-243A.1 a for the reason that the proposed addition will increase the size of this nonconforming nonresidential building, resulting in an increase in the overall building footprint of more than 15 percent. Location: Equestrian Avenue, Fishers Island,NY; Parce19-4-11.1 Stephen L. Hamm III, Esq. BARBARA HAMM: Good evening, I'm Barbara Hamm and I represent the Ferguson Museum. I have an Affidavit of Sign Posting for you and five (5) sets of papers. CHAIRMAN: I knew you looked familiar; from the Lynch application. BARBARA HAMM: I'm on that tonight too, and Steve still isn't coming back after the Southampton Lumber fiasco. MEMBER COLLINS: Tell him we miss him. k IJ \, PiIge 15,June 7,2001 ® 6� ZBA Public Hearing Transcript6Itr Town of Southold MARIE BENNENATI: Yes you did. Thank you. CHAIRMAN: You're welcome. :I-Tearing no further comment I'll make a motion to closing the hearing reserving decision until later. SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION * * * 7:20 P.M. Appl. No. 4962—ROGER J. and LESLIE WALZ. This is a request for a Variance under Article XXIV, Section 100-242A,based on the Building Inspector's May 2, 2001 Notice of Disapproval regarding application's proposed second story addition to existing dwelling. The Notice of Disapproval states that the existing structure has a nonconforming setback of three feet from the easterly side lot line and 9.9 feet from the west side line, and as a result, the addition of the second-story represents an increase in the degree of nonconformity. Location: 2505 Old Orchard Road, East Marion,NY; Parcel 37-6-5, Fairweather-Brown Architects. CHAIRMAN: How are you tonight? What would you like to tell us? AMY MARTIN: I'm Amy Martin, part of Fairweather-Brown,representing Roger and Leslie Walz. Unfortunately, they are not here tonight they had to be out-of-state. They have owned this property since approximately September 1980. They wish to add a second-story to this home, as they hope to retire in the near future. As the Board knows that the area of Gardner Bay Estates in the waterfront area is a jungle of very strange and unusual lots. A lot of cottages are on small non-conforming properties. This one in particular is quite irregular in shape; it's a line#1238 lot with only 20 feet . On the right side where the kitchen is proposed, there is there now and it's sufficient to the property line. The addition that is proposed is a second story, yet there is no change to the footprint, at all (inaudible) line#1278 The 6.2 property line and flat area around where proposed will remain a one single story structure. The U shape will change a shed was making it 10 1/2 feet from grade. Where it's presently 14.6 feet to the ridge edge at the sound. So it comes out from the house, instead of going across. This whole section of area that they wish to remodel is in the center of the home on the one side lot, in neither of the side yards. On the east side there are a few feet from the property line and the neighbor told me that it angled and that it ranged from 5 1/2 feet from his property line to about 12 feet on the water end. Change in elevation on the part were irregular. We are adding approximately 7 feet to the garage end. lines from the two other sections. Basically the west end of the Martin house will be, I'm sorry. The Martin house to the west is a 1-1/2 structure as it exists and in the area there are other two-story structures. Up until recently to add on to, a second floor to a home on the same footprint, it would have been allowed but the law has been reinterpreted in a different direction. CHAIRMAN: Mrs. Martin, you know me as not the person that would ever say derogatory things,but this a phenomenally large structure. I think that in that realm, it's hard to understand how large this structure is going to be without looking at it in some way manner or form. I don't know what to suggest to you at this point, other than the fact I • Page 16,June 7,2001 ZBA Public Hearing Transcript Town of Southold that we understand that the house is a ranch now, a one-story structure. I stood at both the base of the garage, the foot of the garage, and I stood at the area which is most closely related to the beach; and I had trouble understanding the height and the magnificence of what this house is going to be, as you are proposing it or your client is. I just don't know how to deal with it at this point, and that's not a derogatory statement. MR. BROWN: (inaudible) CHAIRMAN: Somehow, Mr. Brown, we never miss you at one of these hearings. You've been very busy,haven't you? MR. BROWN: Very busy. The footprint, in terms of the second-story addition, is that when we started the design and well into the work going into the design,we had every reason to believe that the Building Department was continuing to interpret this portion of the Code involved here,in that, as there were no changes to the footprint, there was no significant difference in terms of the NAH pre-existing non-conforming conditions of the structure. -It wasn't until we were almost finished with the 0 that we were informed by the Building Department that they had decided to reinterpret that portion of the code. In terms of the size, it is a very long house; there is no question about that. It's a very narrow house. It's literally, in some respects a railroad car design. The addition that we are proposing is purely two bedrooms and a recreation room on the second floor. We've kept the roof as low as possible and still conform to State Codes in terms of habitable space. In fact on the east side we are forced to provide a dormer situation in order to maintain appropriate headroom for the egress window. We have kept; we changed to a to a minimum, in order to allow, in order to provide second floor habitable space. The addition,basically, runs straight through the center of the long portion of the house. There is a small L at the south end, where we are actually moving a reversed gable and providing a one-story shed roof, one story shed roof. Which actually reduces the immediate impact on the neighborhood. CHAIRMAN: Well the neighbor is the one that has the greatest setback is that correct? MR. BROWN: Yes. We have been informing our clients that the neighbor to the East has had no objection. And they are the ones who to my knowledge, will greatly impact CHAIRMAN: 'The problem I have is he issue of the East side, and the height of the roof, where the drainage calculations from water, torrential rain, could in effect over shoot the gutter and end up on the neighbors property,just because the height of the roof. I realize that this is a fairly, it's not a low pitched roof,but it's a pitched roof now, and I assume that's what's happening now. I just, in even looking at it, I don't want to further exacerbate that situation. MR. BROWN: I think it's necessary to exacerbate the situation. Certainly,while I haven't, at this point, calculated the size of the gutter,based on rainfall, certainly there is room for, in terms of the size of the gutter. Beyond that we have in the past employed • h • Page 17,June 7,2001 • ZBA Public Hearing Transcnpt Town of Southold what's called a French Drain, which is a trough built below the foundation of the building, dug to a depth of usually 18", filled with gravel and a perforated pipe which would run the drainage that was missed by the gutter off into a drywell. We have done that in the past. We've done it in place of gutters in the past. This procedure is fully approved by the D.E.C.and any other agency. Quite honestly, in terms of the footprint, once again, there would be no increase in the amount of runoff;because we're not changing the footprint one square inch. CHAIRMAN: I understand that,but still, the pitch could be changed on the roof line which could cause that aggravated situation. MR. BROWN: Which could be regulated by type of CHAIRMAN: Right, let's further see what happens. Mr. Dinizio any questions? MEMBER DINIZIO: No questions. CHAIRMAN: Miss Collins? MEMBER COLLINS: I don't have questions. I'm just concerned that the Building Department,having decided to take this position on interpreting the Code Section increasing the degree of non-conformity puts us into a situation of almost judging design. Under their old interpretation, if you had the setback, you could keep the setback and people did humungous things with their existing setbacks. MR. BROWN: You could even increase a footprint as long as you didn't MEMBER COLLINS: As long as you didn't go any further than where you already were. Some of the results of that were fairly awful. Now in your case they've taken a different view, and I haven't really figured out how I'm going to sort it out. I'm not sure where we are headed on this. I do share the Chairman's view, that I found standing there with the blueprints and looking at the building, I was finding it very, very hard to see how the new building, the new roof line and details fit with what was there already. I couldn't picture the new building inside the old building. MR. BROWN: It is difficult because of the position of the house on the property. The only thing that I can suggest is that we could prepare a rendering of the proposed structure based on a point of view of someone standing in front of the garage. CHAIRMAN: It may be helpful,because we may have to reduce some of the roof lines. • MR BROWN: As I've said,we have worked very hard on keeping,understanding the situation. We realize the house is tight enough. We did everything we could do to minimize any change in the profile. S 1 Page 18,June 7,2001 ZBA Public Hearing Transcript Town of Southold CHAIRMAN: While you're doing the rendering, could you do two other things too? Could you use either a one by two or one by four and in both situations affix that to the ridge end of both sides of the house, so we know what the total maximum height is, when we go back and look.at the property? MR. BROWN: Okay. CHAIRMAN: Just tell us when that is. I mean nothing to deface the present house, a couple of nails,possibly spruce so it won't waiver in the breeze. Mrs. Tortora? MEMBER TORTORA: One of the things I guess that we've been seeing as a Board increasingly over the last couple of years is just this kind of a proposal where someone has non-conforming setbacks and they have a ranch house, in your case, you're three feet from the property line, and they want to go up or they want to expand or whatever. It's very difficult to tell what it's going to look like, although, I'm getting educated pretty quick on this. The reason why is very simply, the results of some of the structures, and I would have to red flag this one as one that could have that potential. It can be humungous when you are putting two stories,huge structure on a very, very narrow lot, three feet from your neighbor's property line. Your neighbor may not object now,but when he sees it he may feel differently. But, I,can tell you one thing,we have been very surprised at the results of some of houses;particularly these two-story houses, when they are enlarged to such magnitude, particularly when you're looking at three feet from the property line. Big house, small lot or long lot, one way or another it can be over- t powering. l MR. BROWN: I would only say, I understand your concerns. Of the four houses from the beach, the four houses starting from the road, starting from the neighbor to the west; one is already one and a half stories, and one is already two stories. This would be another two story out of the four houses, as you can see fairly clustered together. MEMBER HORNING: I would say the Building Department is throwing it on our laps to deal with a new way of interpreting. MR. BROWN: I'm sure you can understand our sense of frustration about having figured the plans and discovering when I went back a new interpretation changing the whole field that you're planning on. MEMBER HORNING: So do your plans have any alternative design plans? MR. BROWN: At this point, I can't imagine that they did,because as I said, we had, it was very hard from the very beginning understanding the circumstances that we were in. To minimize the impact of this addition,by, as I said,keeping the roof line as low as possible to be able to provide habitable space on the second floor; and, in fact,not incorporating the second floor onto the L-shaped portion of the south side. 0 AI ,, , Page 19,June 7,2001 ZBA Public Hearing Transcnpt Town of Southold MEMBER HORNING: So what you are saying is that the overall proposed building ,----) height is the minimum? MR. BROWN: The minimum we felt we could provide and still provide habitable space • upstairs. CHAIRMAN: So, in reality, what you're going to give us is a rendering of, you're going to affix those boards so that we can see what the height situation is. My question is, what is the timeliness of this application? Can we deal with this application in August? MR. BROWN: Obviously, the only concern that I would have regarding that is that, under normal circumstances I would say,if we were able to get a variance from you in August, successfully, and have the Building Permit by September so that the work could be done through the winter with no impact on the community, I would say great. But as I understand it right now, the Building Department has a backlog of approximately four months. CHAIRMAN: But, you're still in line, even though you don't have MR. BROWN: That may be,but I'm sure, you understand my concern and frustration. ` CHAIRMAN: The problem I have is that the July calendar is oh-la-la. ®) MR. BROWN: Certainly, I don't want to make your lives any more difficult. If August is better for you, then August it is. CHAIRMAN: All right,we'll take some testimony tonight, if you would bring us the rendering or we can have it that night. But if we could study it at the same time. MR. BROWN: You'll have it before the August hearing. CHAIRMAN: Give us a call when you have the boards up, and we'll go back and take a look. We always love to go to Gardners Bay Estates in the summertime. It makes you feel like summer. Okay, we thank you. I have to tell you sir, that you and Miss Martin are wonderful ladies and gentleman, wonderful to deal with and, as always, in the past. You are a true gentleman, it really is a pleasure. MR. BROWN: Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN: Is there anybody else that would like to speak in favor of this application? Anybody like to speak against the application? Yes,ma'am? Good evening. NORMA MARTIN: Good evening, I'm Norma Martin. We live directly to the west of the Walz's home, and I have some comments and concerns I'd like to voice regarding this pending decision. Because of slope in the way of the land, with their house being on the highest portion of this slope, the height of their single-story house is approximately the a Page 20,June 7,2001 ZBA Public Hearing Transcript Town of Southold same height as our house, which is a story and a half. I feel that adding a second story to this existing single level structure will result in something that far exceeds the height and detracts from the look of the surrounding dwellings. Granted as you look at the first four homes on the beach, ours being a story and a half, theirs being a story and then the other two-story house belongs to the fourth and it is on a considerably larger piece of property than is the Walz house. Also to be considered, I should think, would be the impact from the cesspool that would result in two bedrooms and one bath, that I understand are included in the plans. This addition would mean that there would be five bedrooms and two baths in this house. With our house situated directly next door on the downward side of the slope from their existing cesspools, I wonder what affect it will have on us. I am sure that when the Walz purchased this house, one of the things that impressed them was the look of Gardners Bay Estates. This traditional and understated private community, which has been in existence for approximately 72 years,has been achieved and maintained through the years by the diligence and cooperation of the homeowners and the Association. Although we have a Real Estate Committee, it is my understanding that the Walzs have yet to submit these for review and consideration. I am concerned as to why they bypassed this most important step. It insinuates to me that they are not concerned with what effect they have on their neighbors. When you become a resident of Gardners Bay Estates and a member of the Homeowners Association, it is assumed that you will abide by the guidelines that have been agreed upon by all; not develop your own agenda and expect to be allowed to be exception to the rule. We already have a very, very visual example just down the street on Old Orchard Lane; designed by the same architects, I might add, of what can happen when a homeowners vision and architects view of what is appropriate collide with what the neighbors feel looks best and is in the best interest of the appearance of a community as a whole. It is for the above reasons that I am opposed to these plans. Thank you for listening. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Good evening Mr. Martin,how are you? RALPH MARTIN: By having this house with a second story on, will affect the cut-off of any and all air circulation of our bedroom which are secured to the east of my home. My bedroom, my grandchildren's bedroom, and the guest bedroom. By going up,you limit the air; you lose some of the sunlight you might get. If I wanted to live next to a wall,I would have lived in New York City perhaps. I came out here,my wife and I did, for just the way this Town of Southold is and was; and I hope that this Committee will realize the fact that, that's the way I think our houses should be done, try and keep our rural atmosphere. I remember we had two traffic lights in town, now we have four or five. It seems to me that people like to move out here to the East End because of the rural atmosphere and the way people are. Many times, often times, I won't say many times, when people do move out here for what we have after they get settled, they want to start to change and bring the West end into our community. It doesn't really fit, and it happens it seems to me more so than not. We were never even addressed by the Walzs when they thought they might wish to put a second story on the house,but that's their business. But I still am a neighbor of theirs directly to the west, and my property line to my chimney, the property line, is about three feet. So that gives us nine feet between houses. It's 6.6 from their house and my property line; and I believe from my chimney,which is next to 111 0 • Page 21,June 7,2001 ZBA Public Hearing Transcript Town of Southold two bedrooms, is about three feet, three and one half feet. Then to go up two stories with a bit more, I think it's just a little bit too much in my opinion. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Martin, I would like to see this, your house and what you're saying upstairs if you don't mind me making an appointment with you. Could I just have your telephone number? RALPH MARTIN: 477-0428 CHAIRMAN: They're going to put these ridge markers up, and once they're up, I'll give you a call and I'll come over some Saturday or whatever at your convenience. Okay. RALPH MARTIN: Fine, Mr. Chairman. I thank you very much for your time. CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone else that would like to speak against? Yes ma'am. JOAN A. BRIDGET EGAN: I have been a homeowner in Gardner Bay Estates since 1964. I couldn't agree more with Mr. and Mrs. Martin, and I think one of the most important highlights of what he said, is the fact that what happened with real estate changing and the fact that a lot of people bought these summer homes, now they're getting a little bit older, they sell the house west and they move here. Which is understandable, I did the same myself. We couldn't go wide,we couldn't go deep, and we went up a story, a half a story. These changes and overpopulation and the progression of these things. Hopefully the Walzs will live a long, long life and we don't have too many children in Gardner Bay Estates that we have to educate. But if these things go on, and they become year round homes,which is what I think is what Mr. Walz wants,you're going to have more, more, more. I think that the changes that have happened in Gardner Bay Estates, some of them, I don't know how they passed Zoning, that would be Mr. Frenzel's property that is on Old Orchard Lane. It is a horror, an absolute horror. There is nothing we can do about it,but I think somewhere along the line here you have to say stop. I think here, Mr. Martin and the other people tonight,including myself. I have served in every capacity in Gardners Bay Estates before it was homeowners,before, before. Mr. and Mrs. Walz have never even participated in any way, in any community activities that I know of and I think I would know of it. So all of these things can give me a very sour grapes. I think it's important that we maintain what we have and I'm sure there's some solution to this. I've been in the Walz house several times, when the Vanripers had it, and I don't know, maybe they could do better with a basement, putting things in a basement rather than going up. I think it would also effect the air corridor as far as ventilation for the homes going north, that might be Mrs. Frazier and it could go on to the Collins home. I think they're a lot of things other than just where the rain falls. I think the weight, also,-of putting this structure up there on a slope like that, it can have a mud slide and it certainly could affect the Martins and I don't know the name of the people who live in the small home which could eventually effect our roads. It's a progression of things and I say stop. Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN: Anybody else,we are going to recess? Go ahead sir. • 7 111 Page 22,June 7,2001 ZBA Public Hearing Transcript Town of Southold FRANK THORP: I am Frank Thorp; I live at 180 South Lane, two houses to the east of the Walzs. I also represent my brother Edward and his wife Virginia at 80 South Lane who is the immediate house next to the Walzs. A couple of things, my house, which is the two-story house referred to, is only five feet from the property line. The Walzs deed does not require them to submit an approval of plans. That was in the original deed. Some of the original deeds to the Gardners Bay Estates Company did not require certain things, including 8-foot setbacks from the side yard. Obviously, in this particular deed did not require the approval of the company for building plans which were then passed on to the Association. My brother and I strongly approve of the plans that have been proposed,we feel it will greatly enhance the community and will maintain and, perhaps, even add to our property value. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Hearing no further comment, yes, you have one thing you want to say? AMY MARTIN: Just wanted to give you one thing. We had our draftsman acquire the properties of the surveys of the two adjoining properties just to show you. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Hearing no further comment at this hearing, I make a motion recessing until August 16th, 2001. SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION 8:00 P.M. Appl. No. 4953 —HENRY L. FERGUSON MUSEUM, INC. This is a request for Variances,based on the Building Inspector's April 11, 2001 Notice of Disapproval which states that a permit for an addition to the existing museum building is denied for the following reasons: (a)Article III, Section 100-32 requires a minimum front yard setback of 60 feet; and(b)Article XXIV, Section 100-243A.1 a for the reason that the proposed addition will increase the size of this nonconforming nonresidential building, resulting in an increase in the overall building footprint of more than 15 percent. Location: Equestrian Avenue, Fishers Island,NY; Parce19-4-11.1 Stephen L. Hamm III, Esq. BARBARA HAMM: Good evening, I'm Barbara Hamm and I represent the Ferguson Museum. I have an Affidavit of Sign Posting for you and five(5) sets of papers. CHAIRMAN: I knew you looked familiar; from the Lynch application. BARBARA HAMM: I'm on that tonight too, and Steve still isn't coming back after the Southampton Lumber fiasco. MEMBER COLLINS: Tell him we miss him. • 6 PAGE 52-SEPTEMBER 20,2001 - - ZBA PUBLIC HEARING TRANSCRIPT TOWN OF SOUTHOLD still one parcel. That's Lydia's point and that's very interesting that it didn't occur to us when were looking at the next-door property. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: Jim that email message is not part of the file. You've got to decide on whether that should be put in the file. CHAIRMAN: Put it in the file. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: You want to put it in. CHAIRMAN: It was comment regarding this piece of property, this application that's before us and therefore we should make it part of the file because that's caused some inquisitiveness on our part. There's nothing wrong with your application. We understand the situation; there are just some issues that are raised there regarding this. So what I would like you to do is take this to the Planning Board, we'll just recess it without a date and we'll re-advertise it. MEMBER COLLINS: We'll talk to the Town Attorney to find out if we're doing the chicken before the egg or the egg before the chicken and so on and so forth. I'm not sure because this is only the second one we've actually had. CHAIRMAN: So, we'll just go from there. If you would do that we would appreciate that. JAMES FITZGERALD: Okay, sure. CHAIRMAN: Is there anybody else that would like to either for or against this application? Seeing no hands, I'll make a motion recessing it without a date. SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION * * * 10:09 P.M. Appl. No. 4962 — ROGER AND LESSLIE WALZ. (Carryover from prior - • hearing calendars). This is an Appeal requesting a Variance under Article XXIV, Section 100-242A; based on the Building Inspector's May 2, 2001 corrected Notice of Disapproval. The Notice of Disapproval states that the existing structure has a nonconforming setback of three feet from the easterly side lot line and 6.5 feet from the west side line, and as a result, the second-story addition represents an increase in the degree of nonconformity. Location of Property: 2505 Old Orchard Road, East Marion; Parcel 1000-37-6-5. CHAIRMAN: Who is representing whom here? Mr. Bressler, twice in the same night? ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: There's a rarity isn't it. I'm here on behalf of the applicants. I understand that we have a carried over hearing. C „ PAGE 53-SEPTEMBER 20,2001 - ZBA PUBLIC HEARING TRANSCRIPT TOWN OF SOUTHOLD CHAIRMAN: Is there a great possibility that we could carry this over again? I mean you're certainly welcome to bring in your witnesses and so on and so forth, but anything you could do to expedite this we would appreciate. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: You know that's in my nature. Yes, we shall I understand Mr. Chairman and it may be necessary to take special steps but I understand the objectors are here. You adjourned this specifically to give them an opportunity to be here. So I think they ought to have the opportunity to hear what we say. Here we go. Mr. Chairman and Members of the Board, this is an interesting application I think. I think it's a significant application. I think the application consists basically of two parts. Notwithstanding the way this thing was initially styled and brought on. I think it brings up two issues and I would urge you to consider it on this basis and if you need any amendatory papers. This is a highbred application in fact. What we are dealing with is an Appeal from a Determination of the Building Inspector. That determination resulted in a denial of an.... application to increase the size of a nonconforming building by going up. So the issue' before the Building Department and before you tonight in the first instance is whether or not under the relevant Section 100-242A whether going up is something that results in an increased nonconformity. It's my understanding that up until extremely recently the answer to that question was no. Because as long as you stayed within the footprint or indeed as long as you stayed within an area that was defined by a line that ran through a point which closest to the lot line, as long as you stayed within that envelope there was no greater nonconformity or degree of nonconformity. Indeed very recently that was just what this Board held. I'm sure the Board is familiar with, what I'm familiar with and for the record I would like the Determination of the Findings and Facts. In that particular case there was a building situation upon a lot that was nonconforming and the building was situated at an angle such that the greatest nonconformity occurred and they heard which was real nonconformity and was more determined when as long as a structure stayed within an envelope which was measured by a line parallel to the boundary that went through that point everything was okay, and that to my understanding in the twenty-. five years or so that I've been doing it is the way everything looked. The Building Department did it that way and this Board did it that way and I've been given to understand that before my time and since the inception of Zoning it is done that way too. - Ekerybody understood just what that meant. It's been brought.to my attention as a result ' j.• •lirthedenial we got here and in conversaion•ith members .of the'Building Department where very recently there has been what is to me an Inexplicable change after roughly fifty years that the Building Department's Determination as to how they're going to deal with these things and now, if you stay within the envelope and go up you will be disapproved. I'm not sure why, I'm not sure how; but we find ourselves before this Board seeking relief. I don't know of any reason why that should necessarily be so at this particular time. There has been no change in the Ordinance and a model of any change anywhere that would lead to this result. The first wrong of this application is reversal. Do what this Board has been doing consistently and indeed what the Building Department has been doing consistently for all these years. There's been no change in the Ordinance and I think it would not be rational to adopt some sort of change in the absence of some sort legislative action. I've not been able to determine any valid reason why there should be that kind of a change. I don't believe that the Building Department s PAGE 54—SEPTEMBER 20,2001 - ZBA PUBLIC HEARING TRANSCRIPT TOWN OF SOUTHOLD was in error all those years, and while I may disagree with the Board from time to time, certainly my position tonight is that the Board was correct in adopting those determinations. And we urge the Board to adhere to its precedents and apply a uniform rule to my client that's been applied in the past. CHAIRMAN: Let's just leave that issue right there. What you really need to do is to file an Interpretation with us if you want us to over claim that issue. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: I've sent in a reversal actually. CHAIRMAN: I mean you need to file an Interpretation to actually have us file us a reversal, in order words, at the eleventh hour you can't bring that issue in. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: No, that was my application to amend, Mr. Chairman to bring that since you indicated at the outset that there was no debt before the proceedings my application is to file with you the necessary papers to bring that within the purvey of this Determination so as not to duplicate the efforts of the Board. And have everything under one umbrella. CHAIRMAN: So you will do that now? ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: I will do that. I make the oral application and I represent to you that I will follow up with the necessary papers to bring that to you so we don't waste time and effort here. And that's all I've got to say about that application at this time. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: I have a question, would that have to be advertised? CHAIRMAN: The Interpretation has to be advertised. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: That's going to take time. • EIiiIC•-BRESSLER, ESQ.: I'm asking for a Reversal, which would necessarily require you.to interpret, right.. That's all I think what I want to say, or can say about at this, s` particular' time. Assuming atrgued 'that they get the house back I would like to briefly address the second prong of the application. Should you chose to agree with that the Building Department's Interpretation, which obviously I urge you now to; but should you chose to do that there's a second prong to the application and that is if that's going to be the rule down there, then we're in front of you for a variance. That has been properly advertised and we are here seeking relief. I read the initial presentation so I won't go over that material again. What I would like to do is to address in the first instance, I would like in that regard to put before the Board I've actually go two of these. CHAIRMAN: What are we looking at here? PAGE 55-SEPTEMBER 20,2001 0 ZBA PUBLIC HEARING TRANSCRIPT TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: You are looking at a map of a community called Old Orchard, Gardiners Bay. CHAIRMAN: We knew it was Gardiner's Bay. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: That's what it says, this is Gardiner's Bay but it says there so you can identify it for the record. It says in the upper right hand corner Community called Old Orchard. And you are looking a blow-up of the tax map and you are looking at a number of homes that are marked in blue and each of those lots including the ones not marked in blue that are on the waterfront are enabled with the names of the owners. What I'd like to do is match up, if I could, each of those parcels with a photograph which are labeled on the back. What is the purpose of all that? The purpose of all that is to demonstrate to the Board what the nature of the waterfront lots, the thirty-seven waterfront lots in Gardiner's Bay are. And if you look at these blue ones and you count them you will see two-level homes. That's what this is designed to demonstrate. This means that by far the large majority of these homes are two-level. Why is that important? It's important because that's what we're asking for, and it will not change the character of the neighborhood. It is similar to most of what's there. Now there was an issue where at the last meeting, concerning the impact of this particular project on one of the neighbors. The Board has in its file based upon my review a series of letters from people in the area. One of which from an immediate neighbor, he is alleging that there is going to be an impact on light and air. This project was designed to have minimal impact on that neighbor to the west. I'm going to ask Mr. Brown to come up and just address you briefly with a couple of exhibits and what he's going to be doing is truthful. He is going to be showing you photographs of the south and north elevations of the house with the new constructions superimposed. And what this is going to show you is that roof line on the west side of the house, has been designed in such a manner as to soften the impact of the neighbor from what currently exists. Specifically on that side of the house there is an extension that comes out in a triangular fashion and it is of a height that goes out to the entire edge of the house. We're proposing to eliminate that and gradually go up from the first floor, up a little•bit higher with a gradual roofline. It would actually result in less impact to the neighbor than gburrently exists. So this house has been designed in a manner , to minimize impact while at the-same time giving to these people it is essentially no . - different from what most of their neighbors already have. You're also going to set.from Mr. Brown two studies that he has prepared. One on light and one on air.' 'Fascinating things, really I saw them outside. The light is going to show you that there is no impact on light on the neighbor except for the briefest period of time on calendar basis at a time prior to 5:00 a.m. in the morning. There is a tiny, tiny sliver when there is a tiny bit of impact and you will see how that works. So in essence there is no limitation on sunlight reaching this house. Why is that? Well that house is in front of ours. And can't move the sun means that they get better sun that we do at least in terms of when the rays arrive first. So there's no blockage. You're also going to see in terms of breeze, air; you're going to see a chart that has been prepared by Brookhaven National Lab, which indicates where the wind comes from on a daily basis. He's charted that out in terms of the compass. And again, because their house is in front of ours they get the benefit of the prevailing southwesterly and there's no adverse impact. In fact the only adverse impact PAGE 56-SEPTEMBER 20,2001 ZBA PUBLIC HEARING TRANSCRIPT TOWN OF SOUTHOLD on the air and the wind, if you want to call it adverse, is that they're sheltered from the nor'easters' because our property is more to the east of theirs. If you want to call that a detriment I guess we'll live with that. I would think of it as, a benefit, I don't want the nor'easters' coming down on my house. So in terms of light and air, there is no negative impact, in fact, there is a positive impact on the neighbor in terms of shelter from the nor'easters'. That having been said I ask Mr. Brown to come up, show you the demonstrative evidence and put it in your record. ROBERT BROWN: May I approach? CHAIRMAN: Sure. ROBERT BROWN: I realize some of these may be difficult for you all to see at once. CHAIRMAN: For anybody in the audience we, of course, are not going to close this hearing. Everybody has the right to look at it and so when we're done with the presentation we may reserve any discussion that we have with it after we study them. ROBERT BROWN: I just want to start with a photograph taken in front of the Waltzes house towards the west. So I think this clearly. CHAIRMAN: Where is Mr. Martin, he might want to come up and see this. Is Mr. Martin in the audience? Anybody else that has an interest? Mr. Martin why don't you stand over there and watch the whole thing. Mrs. Martin how are you? Anybody else have an interest in this issue on the opposition side? Or on the for side, you're welcome to stand over there. Okay, let's go. ROBERT BROWN: In view of the question that the Walzes house is facing me west, it is my opinion that this photo clearly shows that when you consider that the second floor addition only starts at this point off the Walzes house and goes up here that the impact on the vast majority of the neighbor's house is, in my opinion, insignificant. We go then to, yqu asked at our,last meeting for some presentation of the actual impact and I realize that thPse.:aft. fairly faint, but .av*rplayed on these photographs is what the proposed • construction.would look like. The roof peaks are taken, you can see in the photograph, are the poles that rest on the structure to show the peak of the roves. CHAIRMAN: Could you mark that one up a little bit more? MEMBER TORTORA: That's the top of the roofline there? It's very hard to see. CHAIRMAN: Could you mark that one up takes that one back tonight and mark it up a little bit more? ROBERT BROWN: I'm not quite sure what you want. CHAIRMAN: We'll take C.,3/D PAGE 57-SEPTEMBER 20,2001 ZBA PUBLIC HEARING TRANSCRIPT TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ROBERT BROWN: You want the roofline marked up? CHAIRMAN: Yes. ROBERT BROWN: I'll do it right now if somebody has a pen. This is where there is a gable end roof that we are replacing with a shed roof that you can see that much of roof is being removed from the west. CHAIRMAN: The cutout still stands there right? ROBERT BROWN: This portion of the cutout? • CHAIRMAN: No the cutout down below where the tree is, in back of that tree. Is that in front of that house? ROBERT BROWN: This is the'part of the house that will remain, and the roof, instead of going up to here, will now come across here. CHAIRMAN: Again, you have plenty of time to comment on, this is not a quiz situation. ROBERT BROWN: Let me explain this briefly, this is centered on the center of the house to the west to show where the impact is. These arched lines represent the sun in the sky on the 21st of any specific month. The months denoted by the roman numerals on the. So the highest the sun is in the sky in the morning because the Walzs house is to the east, you can see that on June 21st from 4:45 to approximately to 5:00 a.m. this portion of the Walzs house in fact does shade the center of the neighboring property. After that point and on any other time in the year, there is absolutely no sunlight impact from the house to the northeast. And finally, in the upper left hand corner is a sample from Brookhaven National Labs, this was just a few days ago, the top to bottom indicates degrees of the compass. You can see from the outline of this house that it blocks air from approximately 355 degrees to 60 degrees. That is indicated by the red on the chart. I think its fairly clear from this being recordings of wind direction according to the angle from which its coming that the vast majority on this day and on other days that I sampled, even more so in some cases, the vast majority of the wind is coming from directions other than the northeast. But I don't think it takes Brookhaven National Labs for us to know that the wind comes off the water in the summer, it comes from the northeast, northwest rather on a winter day, and if its coming from the northeast, I'd just assume be blocked. I hope that helps you. CHAIRMAN: We will certainly study it Mr. Brown. We'll certainly study these there's no question about it. And if we have any question on it ROBERT BROWN: If you have any questions please feel free to call me. If you need any calculations. PAGE 58-SEPTEMBER 20,2001 ZBA PUBLIC HEARING TRANSCRIPT TOWN OF SOUTHOLD CHAIRMAN: We'll do it at the next hearing, Eric is going to modify this and we're going to open them together. Thank you. What else do you have to say Mr. Bressler? ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: At this particular time, and keeping in mind, we will be back once more, given the lateness of the hour. CHAIRMAN: Okay, Mr. Martin and Mrs. Martin you will study these, you'll have questions and we'll quiz the applicant's counsel and architect at the next hearing. We just have to determine when the next hearing is going to be. Our problem Mr. Bressler is that we are absolutely loaded for the October meeting. So we are loaded as we are tonight. You can't get more saturated than this. I have a feeling this is going to be part of the November calendar. That's the only way I can suggest here. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: If that's your first available date, we'll take it Mr. Chairman. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: It's the fifteenth. You're going to get it in next week I guess right? CHAIRMAN: Yes. So hearing no further comment from anyone, I'll recess the hearing and we will then take both issues and if we have any questions on those issues at that point, we may also request a member of the Building Department to come in and discuss that. Since we have a unique situation, we have Mr. Forrester who actually did the Notice of Disapproval but now holds another position in the Town, we may ask him to come and now Mr. Verity holds that position and we may ask them both to come, we don't know, we'll see what happens. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: I had previously contacted Mr. Verity, but due to the lateness of the hour, he was able to stick around and I'm not sure if he did you would want to hear from him now. CHAIRMAN: So, I offer that as a resolution, ladies and gentlemen. • SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION • * * * Recess for five minutes . 10:48 p.m. Appl. No. 5003 —KACE LI, INC. This is an Appeal requesting a Reversal of the Building Inspector's Notice of Disapproval dated August 13, 2001, denying an application for a building permit for two-family dwellings under Article IV, Section 1000-42A.2. The reason stated in the Notice of Disapproval is that the proposed project indicates several two-family dwellings on a single parcel, and that the Code allows only one such structure per lot as a permitted use. Zone District: Hamlet-Density (HD). Location of Property: South Side of North Road (a/k/a/ C.R. 48) (now or formerly referred to as "Northwind Village" site), 500+- feet east of Chapel Lane, Greenport; Parcel#1000-40-3-1. SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS TRANSCRIPT OF PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD MARCH 28, 2002 (Prepared by Paula Quintieri) Present were: Chairman Goehringer Member Tortora Member Oliva' Member Orlando Board Secretary Kowalski Absent was: Member Horning(as agreed) PUBLIC HEARINGS: 7:05 p.m. Appl. No. 4962 — ROGER J. AND LESLIE WALZ. This is request for a Variance under Article XXIV, Section 100-242A, based on the Building Inspector's May 2, 2001 Notice of Disapproval regarding the proposed second-story addition to existing dwelling. The reason stated in the Notice of Disapproval states that the existing structure has a nonconforming setback of less than 10 feet and 15 feet o the side yards, and as a result, the addition of the second-story represents an increase in the degree of nonconformity. 2505 Old Orchard Road, East Marion; 37-6-5. (The hearing was concluded on November 29, 2001, and reopened at the request of applicants.) CHAIRMAN: Mr. Bressler we received your letter. We, of course, spoke to you prior to the letter and we're waiting to hear what you have to say regarding this application. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: Well, Mr. Chairman, I think we're at the end of the road here. You have ruled the way you have ruled on the first half of the application; and, at least for the time being, that is the rule that applies to these particular projects. That being the case, my comments tonight will be addressed toward the application of that rule to this specific project. Hard cases make bad law, am I adding to the law. And I think if we were to examine this particular application we'd all be constrained to agree. I think the important thing to focus on at this particular juncture is measured against that particular rule, what is the relief that is sought by the applicant in this particular case. It is beyond argument that the applicant is entitled to something, even under the rule that this Board has announced. In fact, the applicant is entitled to build with 15 feet on one side and 10 feet on another side. That is so. So the question before you is, is that the best possible result of this situation. We have said from the beginning, even before the pronouncement of that rule, that that is not so. That is not the best possible result for the applicant; it's not the best possible result for the neighbors. It's not the best possible result for anybody. Now why is this so. This is so because the neighbor to the east has no objection to moving the bulk of the second story next to him. The neighbor to the west has an 1110 U Page 2,Mai ch 28,2002 ZBA Public HeaiingTiansciipt Town of Southold objection to what I can see to virtually anything, and doesn't want anything near him. So, as a result of this, the proposed plan calls for the bulk of this second story to be next to the neighbor who doesn't object, and as far away as possible from the neighbor who does. That's what the plan proposes. As of right, all the applicant can do is build in a position that is further away from the neighbor who doesn't care and is closer to the neighbor who does object. This is an irrational result. All we have done, in order to aid the Board in looking at what the application and this new rule would require and why it doesn't really work in this situation, I've asked Mr. Brown to draw up the building as it exists, the building that could be built, absence relief from the Board, and the building that is proposed to be built far away from the object ant and close to the neighbor who doesn't care. I've also asked him to calculate what the effect of the proposed project would be on the objecting neighbor and he has calculated that there would be a reduction in bulk or volume within the nonconforming zone close to the objecting neighbor. And he has calculated that in cubic feet. So the net result of all that is, there is a reduction in bulk close to the objecting neighbor, it is further away from the objecting neighbor and it's near to a place where nobody cares. You will also hear from Mr. Brown, that architecturally this is the best possible design, given the lay of the land. You will hear from him architecturally it's the best possible design, given the interior design of the house. In short, this maximizes the benefit for everybody and it minimizes the detriment for everybody. There is no reason not to grant this. Mr. Brown do you have these drawings? CHAIRMAN: Good evening Mr. Brown, how are you? ROB BROWN: Good evening. Fine thank you, how are you? If I may? CHAIRMAN: Surely. ROB BROWN: I would just like to add a bit of history for the newer Members of the Board. In fact, when this design was conceived and actually well until the working drawing phase, this design was based on an Interpretation of the Code by the Building Department which made this design perfectly legitimate and acceptable. It was not until the working drawings were almost completed, that the Building Department changed their Interpretation of the Code. That's just a little background. What I have here is a simple diagram, which shows, if I may explain it on the top, is the existing condition. This shows the three properties contiguous. This is viewing from the north, looking the last house from the center. The fourth house to the west is to the left, and the Martin residence to the right is to the West, the fourth house is to the east. The top shows the existing conditions and directly below that is the proposed plan. As you can see the reduction of the gable roof on the west side of the Walz residence, as proposed, would reduce the volume of structure in the nonconforming area by 120 cubic feet. There are three reasons, three basic design concepts behind this original proposal. The first is when you're dealing with slope terrain you want to move the mass, the large proportion of mass upslope for the simple matter of visual stability. In this case, the second factor behind this design was the fact that its structurally logical and, therefore, economical to build a second floor directly over a first floor rather than having to suspend over air, which . Page 3,March 28,2002 ZBA Public Hearing Tiansciipt Town of Southold would be the case below. The third, and I think you might see some irony in this, is that the design, if we were to conform to the setback regulations, actually has a far more significant impact on the house to the west than the proposed design. You could, of course, put the 15 feet on the east side, I'm sorry the 10 feet on the east side, and the 15 feet on the west side. ROB BROWN: Certainly, and you will understand that this diagram is showing a worst case. MEMBER TORTORA: It's not to scale. ROB BROWN: The fact of the matter is the preponderance of the mass would be closer to the house to the west than to the east. MEMBER TORTORA: The dwelling is not to scale. ROB BROWN: It's roughly to scale. MEMBER TORTORA: The three feet that you're showing from the property line on the east. CHAIRMAN: He just showed you there's a 15 on that side. MEMBER TORTORA: No, I mean on what's existing. MEMBER OLIVA: The proposed, Mr. Brown, I mean Mr. Martin's complaint it seems to me with your roof line the way it is, all that run off, unless you do some gutters and leaders and putting some drywells in there, all that soil and everything else is running right down into his property and the property that is today on the west side of the Walz property is eroding. ROB BROWN: Well, if I may, first of all. MEMBER OLIVA: Because of just runoff, not property. ROB BROWN: But if I may, we've never stated any objection to gutters, drywells, French drains or any other matter. We felt that that was not a matter for this Board, but for the Building Department. Secondly, the proposed design does not have a single square inch more of roof area than the existing house does. And certainly we would do anything to mitigate runoff, but we didn't feel that was an issue to this Board. That's between us and the Building Department in my opinion. MEMBER TORTORA: About a year, not even a year, about at one of the earliest hearings, I was going through the files today and I noted that you said that you were applying to the Town Trustees because the project is within their jurisdiction. That's in Page 4,Maich 28,2002 ZBA Public Healing Tiansciipt Town of Southold the minutes of one of the meetings and yet I don't see any Trustee permit or Letter of Non-Jurisdiction. ROB BROWN: That I'm sure is a clerical situation if we applied, I'm sure its been approved. I mean we're going back a very long time now. We've been at this ten months, just with this Board. MEMBER TORTORA: You're quite right ROB BROWN: To my knowledge you have whatever documentation was needed. If that's not the case, then obviously anything you do would be subject to. MEMBER TORTORA: The only reason I ask this, Mr. Brown, is because genuinely the Trustees do, are very concerned about matters of runoff, particularly when it involves wetland areas and waterfront area, as they are very concerned. ROB BROWN: And we take it very seriously too. MEMBER TORTORA: Yes, it can have a tremendous impact and that's why generally, these applications are reviewed by the Trustees first and we take very seriously their comments. ROB BROWN: Well, again there is zero difference in the roof area between the proposed plan and the existing structure and if there were any concern, I mean aside from any concern that any Board might have, this is something that as any responsible architect, designer or engineer would consider, runoff is an issue under any conditions in any situation and its something to be dealt with. Certainly, if this Board wanted to make that a condition of their approval we would welcome that, but it certainly wouldn't make us any less or more interested in doing that, that's something that we have to do. MEMBER TORTORA: I'm sure if you could just show us either the Trustee permit or Letter of Non jurisdiction, and put it into the record we would appreciate it. ROB BROWN: I am certain we can get that for you. MEMBER TORTORA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Brown it would be very interesting to see this from the opposite side, from the waterside. Is there any possibility of you assembling that from the waterside? ROB BROWN: Mr. Goehringer the plans that I presented many months ago, that showed a photographic rendition of the existing with an overlay of drawing, of the proposed was from the other side, I really, with all due respect that's kind of beating a dead horse. CHAIRMAN: Okay. Any other questions of Mr. Brown? IIP 411P Page 5,Match 28,2002 ZBA Public Heating Ttanscttpt Town of Southold MEMBER ORLANDO: No questions. CHAIRMAN: Okay, thank you. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: In closing, I would just like to say; it has been an extremely long for my client. He's retired. Despite all this, he still wants to retire out here and build and he needs to have a decision. With all due respect, I don't feel that another rendition form the waterside is going to change the facts. The facts are what they are. The proposal has minimized the effect on the west side, we all know that; the bulk was moved over to the east. If that's something that the Board thinks is a good thing, then we urge you to approve. If you don't think that that is a good thing, under the circumstances, then don't approve it. And we either build as of right, take an appeal or both, I don't know. But give us a decision. The Martins have been here objecting for months. You can now see there is nothing else we can do. And everything else that we might consider, whether its 10 or 15 on one side and the other, it doesn't really matter, its going to be worse. CHAIRMAN: But, you asked for this re-hearing, we didn't ask for it. But, we're here ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: Let me just clarify that. You asked whether I would waive something, and the answer is no, I'm not going to waive it. The fact that I'm here, I think is a good thing, I think especially the new Members of the Board needed the opportunity to hear what this was about. I think because the Board announced a new rule, it would be not a good thing to rule on the variance without taking into account what the new rule's impact was on this particular project. In particular, Mr. Brown's computation of the reduction in volume on the Martin side I think is something that the Board can rightfully take into account in terms of evaluating the project. I think that's important and I think before the rule is announced nobody even knew that that was even marginally relevant. Well, now it is and we've introduced evidence to the Board to show that there is a reduction and that is the amount of reduction. We've also shown you that we've moved it as far away as we possibly can and anything else is going to be closer to them. Whether it's a foot, two feet, three feet, whatever it is, its going to be closer to them and its going to end up in something less desirable for them. That's where I think the bottom line is, given the fact that the neighbor to the east doesn't object, we urge you to look at this plan and see whether or not you agree with us that this is the best possible resolution for everybody in the neighborhood. Or would I send Mr. Brown back to the drawing board and think about doing something else. • CHAIRMAN: Mr. Bressler, the neighbor to the east told us that when they laid out the sub-division, and that neighbor is here tonight, that he agreed with a 6-foot by 8-foot side yard, this Board has never agreed with a 6 foot or an 8 foot side yard. You are telling me that he is, this house is 3 feet from the property line on that side and he is 6 feet from the property line, or how close is his house from the property line? MEMBER OLIVA: 6 feet. CHAIRMAN: 6 feet, okay. So 6 and 3 is 9, we're talking 9 feet between the two houses S Page 6,Match 28,2002 ZBA Public Healing Transcupt Town of Southold ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: He has no objection. CHAIRMAN: I don't care if he has any objection. I have an objection. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: Wait a minute Mr. Chairman, you said two things; the first, I take issue with and I find it totally unacceptable that you have stated on the record that you don't care what the neighbor thinks. I think that's wrong. I think you have to care to a degree. Now you might. CHAIRMAN: Let me rephrase my question. Just a minute (raising his voice) I have ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: May I finish my sentence? CHAIRMAN: No I'll finish. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: No, I can't finish my sentence? CHAIRMAN: No you can't finish your sentence. No. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: What kind of a ruling is that, that I can't finish my sentence? CHAIRMAN: Because, pardon me Mr. Bressler. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: Mr. Chairman, I have never been treated where I have not been able to finish a sentence. Please. Now you say that you care, yes I agree. That what you think matters a lot. You are on the Board, what all of you think matters. But to say that you don't care that the neighbor doesn't object I think is unfair. That's my point. I'm not saying its determinative, I'm saying that you ought to take it into account when one neighbor says I object a lot over here, and the other one says I don't. That's my only point. No one says you're bound by it, but I think you have to, as reasonable people, listen to what they say in the neighborhood, that's all. CHAIRMAN: I never said I would not listen sir, all I said was that I still contend that 9 feet between these two houses, at the height that is going to be constructed, is too close and that's my opinion. I'm not thrusting that opinion on anybody else, that is my opinion as a fireman for thirty-four years in the Town of Southold. That's all I'm telling you. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: My only ploy is, I don't think its fair for any Member of the Board to say that they don't care what a neighbor says. You may not be bound by it. CHAIRMAN: I will change my statement. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: But, I object to that. Page 7,Match 28,2002 ZBA Public Healing Tianscnpt Town of Southold CHAIRMAN: Well, you can object to whatever you want, I said I will change my statement. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: Okay, fair enough. My point is we've done everything in accordance with what we think the neighbors will live with and what they want. And if this Board doesn't want to do that, then we will be guided accordingly. And if we need to move this over, closer to the Martins, then that's what's going to happen. We're here at the end of the line, as I said at the beginning, its up to you people to decide what you're going to penult here and what you're not going to permit. My job is only to tell you the way I see it and that's the way I see it. The man to the east doesn't care. The man to the west has a vital objection and wants it as far away as he can, and we've tried to meet that. MEMBER TORTORA: Mr. Bressler,just a quick question? I went back to the transcript to get, to try, one of the transcripts it was INAUDIBLE, some of the parts were inaudible and that happens sometimes when people move away from the microphone. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: And talk over one another, and I do apologize for that. MEMBER TORTORA: Yes, gentlemen. CHAIRMAN: Did I stop him, he continued. MEMBER TORTORA: Okay. Just to get some stuff on the record here that we kind of lost in the transcript. What is the square footage of the ground floor of the house now? ROB BROWN: We can certainly get that for you, I didn't bring that information with me. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: Keep going, if we can't answer it. MEMBER TORTORA: I know there's a two-car garage and there's, on the bottom now of the house? ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: Yes. MEMBER TORTORA: And that would remain correct? ROB BROWN: Yes. MEMBER TORTORA: I was trying to figure it out, it's about 1800 — 2000 square feet now, I don't know? I'm sure you have that information. ROB BROWN: Not with me I'm afraid. I thought that that was old news. Al) Page 8,Maich 28,2002 ZBA Public Hearing Transcript Town of Southold MEMBER TORTORA: It would be old news if we had a perfect world where nobody jiggled papers and everybody spoke into the microphone and everything could get transcribed, but it was not picked up in the transcription. ROB BROWN: I'll see if I have it with me, if not I will certainly get that to you as quickly as possible. MEMBER TORTORA: Just one thing I want to note, Town Law has not changed. Our Interpretation will still consider and be focused on the criteria set forth in New York State Town Law. That the criteria are, will it be a detriment, benefit to the applicant versus the detriment to the community, correct? ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: Absolutely, the only thing that's changed is your Interpretation of what can be done with the nonconforming uses. MEMBER TORTORA: That does not change New York State Town Law and the criteria under which we're supposed to look at a variance. It changes nothing. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: Oh no, that doesn't change. What changes is what you're looking at, not what standards you apply. You are now looking at something which you've called a nonconforming area, but yes, you must apply the same factors absolutely. MEMBER TORTORA: And as to the degree of the variance, I don't care what method you're using, the Code requires 25 foot total side yards ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: That's correct. MEMBER TORTORA: and by any measure, a request for 9 feet is substantial. There is no disputing that. What I see here is you're trying to mitigate that. I see that you are trying to mitigate that. This is a very old sub-division. The lots, in my opinion, its my opinion, its not a statement from the Board or anything else, its my observation. The lots are substandard, they're small, and they're tiny little lots. Mr. Martin, the neighbor who is the objector, his property is 6 feet from yours. Unfortunately, his property is underneath your property, so your property is here, and Mr. Martin is here. So when you want to put a two-story house on, there is a towering effect. And that is a fact. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: It's a fact. MEMBER TORTORA: When we walked around the property I was struck by one thing, I was struck the fact that the brick patio on the, I'm trying to think, the Martin side is the west? Okay, the patio on the Walz property is next to the Martin property is actually sloping like this. It's looks like it's falling. And we see things like this. This isn't something that you can put in a report or any type of textbook, this is something that you visually see, you see that the property is eroding and it's eroding onto the Martin property So, I would hope, that you would be able to devise a plan that would prevent your soil from ending up on the Martin's property. Just as I'm sure, if the situation were . fid ` Page 9,Maich 28,2002 IP4110 ZBA Public HeanngTiansciipt Town of Southold reversed, and Mr. Walz house was where Mr. Martin's is, he would want the same and you, as his attorney, would ask for the same. So that's a consideration. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: I don't think that there's any doubt that Mr. Brown will design this in such a manner that erosion, at least from the water, will not be a factor here. MEMBER TORTORA: Could we throw in soil too? ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: I don't know what you're suggesting? MEMBER TORTORA: In other words, when a ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: The only thing that we're doing is going up and we're not changing the roof area, so what is it that you're proposing. MEMBER TORTORA: I know, you have one piece of property that's like this, and another that's like this. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: Are you proposing some sort of bulk heading, along that line to prevent MEMBER TORTORA: I'm no expert and I don't intend to be. I think you have, at your expertise, people who could suggest ways to mitigate that. I'm not an expert. I am only telling you what I saw in personal inspection. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: We certainly don't have any objections to that, it's just without any guidance, it raises a whole of issues, but I don't have any real objections to. MEMBER TORTORA: Just think about. As I mentioned to Mr. Brown, the other thing is, we do rely on the Trustees to review the projects and, in reviewing them, to issue a determination based on their criteria of wetlands, decking and everything else. So I would like to see their permit and/or their Letter of non-jurisdiction. That's all. ROB BROWN: We can certainly get that to you. To be very honest with you, in clerical terms, I don't deal wit (inaudible). MEMBER TORTORA: See you're going to be lost in one of these transcripts. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: We're not picking you up. ROB BROWN: I personally did not handle all of the paperwork involved with all the permits that we deal on a regular basis. I have every reason to believe that we did make that application and we have the documentation, if that's not the case, I will certainly get it for you. But one way or another, I will make that available to you. And certainly in answer to your other question, and your comment, the Walzs asked me from the very 11111 Page 10,Maich 28,2002 ZBA Public Heating Ttanscnpt Town of Southold beginning of the design of this to take into consideration the fact that the Martins house is lower than theirs and to design it in such a way as to minimize the impact. I must say, from the bottom of my heart, that is exactly what we tried to do. I don't know if there is any other way that we could've designed this that lessened the impact the Martins have on anything at all and that's from the bottom of my heart. MEMBER TORTORA: The height of this is 21 feet? The one that, not the new one, is very tall. ROB BROWN: The final height to the ridge or to the. CHAIRMAN: Main roof. ROB BROWN: The main roof I believe is about 21 feet yes, to the best of my recollection. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Bressler I would like to afford Martins a copy of what Mr. Brown has given, if you would please and let them concentrate on that for a couple of minutes. And we'll see what develops throughout the hearing here. We'll now ask if there's anybody else that would like to speak in favor of this application? Mr. Thorpe how are you tonight? FRANK THORPE: My name is Frank Thorpe, I represent my brother Edward and his wife Virginia who are the people are immediately to the east. I would just like to clarify something; I never said that there was an 8-foot setback with this particular lot. These original deeds did not have the 8-foot setback the subsequent deeds in Gardner's Bay Estates did. My deed, my brothers deed, the deed to this particular house, the deed to the Martins particular house and the deed to the east of the Martins house did not contain those restrictions at all. Subsequent deeds sometime in the later 30's did. The map of Gardners Bay Estates was filed in 1927 with the County of Suffolk. That map of Section II and I. That's what set up all these particular lots as such. Section III is half acred zoned. CHAIRMAN: So where did the 8 feet come in then? FRANK THORPE: The 8 feet came in CHAIRMAN: I mean in your discussion? In your opinion? FRANK THORPE: I believe later, mid to later 30's. CHAIRMAN: Now that was a covenant in the deed saying that that's what you had to have as a minimum side yard? FRANK THORPE: Correct. 1101 Page 11,Match 28,2002 ZBA Public Heating Tianscript Town of Southold CHAIRMAN: Okay, and your side yard presently on the house that you're representing for your brother is 6 feet, is that correct? FRANK THORPE: No, 5 feet. CHAIRMAN: 5 feet. FRANK THORPE: At one point. And when it was added on to, in 1976, did not require any subsequent thing, because it was no closer than the original 5 feet. CHAIRMAN: Okay, thank you. Is there anybody else that would like to speak in favor? Mr. Martin? RALPH MARTIN: Good evening ladies and gentlemen of the Board. I feel like a soldier in a foxhole, all these big guns shooting at me. Nonetheless, I shall carry on. On Saturday, March 2nd at 7:30 in the morning my wife and I were served with a request for judicial intervention by Mr. Eric Bressler on behalf of the petitioners Roger and Leslie Walz on which we were named as respondents, along with the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Southold. Our involvement with the Walzs application has been the result of our being advised and invited by registered letter of the Zoning Board of Appeals to attend the application hearing and to express our objections if any. We had voiced our objections in a businesslike way and have not slandered or nor have made ourselves, and have made ourselves available to the Walzs, their attorney and their architect to discuss amicably why we are not in favor of their proposed second story addition. Apparently they were not desirous of any such discussion since a meeting was never arranged. We have a right to our opinion and have expressed it before this Board in the proper manner. Therefore, we are puzzled as to why we have been named in this lawsuit. However, since there are new Board Members, and this application hearing has been re-opened, we wish to request that our previously submitted comments and photographs, which are all part of the file, be considered during your deliberation. To reiterate briefly, their lot is less than 47 %2 wide on which has been built an approximately 38 foot wide, single-story house. The addition they propose will loom overwhelmingly large on a small, narrow piece of property with the exception of one, we know of no other two-story home in the community that is built on such a narrow lot. Also, since there are house is at the highest elevation of the slope of the land between the two houses we are very concerned about the additional drain on and possible overflow of their septic system. llasmuch, as there will be an increase in the number of bedrooms and bathrooms, should the existing septic systems fail and all overflow, the affluent could not our property but possibly leach into the nearby shallow waterway as well. The Suffolk County Department of Health has very specific regulations regarding sewage disposal systems and minimum septic tank areas and capacities. And you would hope that the Building Department would seek the County's approval of the septic system. It would appear that in order to be in compliance with the current County of Department of Health Regulations a new and/or enlarged system would be required. However, we can't imagine where it would be constructed on a small lot. We would also like to know if the Town Trustees have made a determination of jurisdiction regarding this construction due r ill S . ., Page 12,Maich 28,2002 ZBA Public Healing Tiansciipt Town of Southold to its closeness of tidal water. The size of the house they are proposing is more in keeping with the south shore than Gardners Bay Estates. One has only have to ride around in some of the smaller more established waterfront communities in Southold to see what happens when residents whether full or part-time decide that they should be able to do whatever they wish and the Building Codes are made for everyone else but them. Ladies and gentlemen I thank you for your time and I will give you a copy of what I have just said. CHAIRMAN: Yes, Mr. Brown? ROB BROWN: I would just like to clarify one point. I've had several conversations on the phone with Mr. Martin requesting a meeting with him to discuss plans and how they came about and they how they affect him. And he declined to meet with me if the Walzs were not present. Thank you. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Martin, let's just wrap this up please. RALPH MARTIN: I wish to rebut that. We did call the gentleman and ask for a meeting with the Walzs. The Walzs apparently could not attend, for whatever reason it was, and I wanted them to be there as our neighbors to see if this could be worked out amicably. It never happened. LESLIE WALZ: Mr. Chairman, you should know that we were asked to meet with Mr. Martin. I'm very sorry we didn't meet. My husband was in the hospital, I wonder why! CHAIRMAN: Mr. Bressler is there anything you would like to wrap up with? ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: Yes, thank you. Thank you Mr. Chairman, I think it is evident from what you've heard by way of objection tonight, that the principle issues before you are not really addressed by those objections. What the Trustees do, the Trustees will do. What the Health Department does, it will do. And they are charged by law of doing certain things, as are you. So those objections don't really go to the heart of this particular application. What I heard is that there is an objection to having a second-story. We all know that the Walzs are entitled to something. Something that's going to be less desirable for the Martins, than what is proposed, and I think that's the issue here. I think when you consider what you're going to do about this you ought to take into account the fact that from the very beginning this project has been designed to provide the maximum relief given the lay of the land, the location of the dwellings on the land, and now we're before you asking for that type of relief. I'm fond of saying from time to time, that no good deed goes undone and no good deed goes unpunished. Now I feel that this is where we are, we designed this thing the way we designed it. I know, Mr. Chairman, you asked, is there anything that we could do? I think, for the Martins, I think that the drawings make it clear that we have moved as far away as we can. We have reduced by 120 cubic feet, the volume of structure that is on their side. There is not greater roof area. The runoff will not be any greater since the roof area is not increased. There will be gutters, leaders and drywells and anything else that we can do to mitigate whatever 4 \. , , , Is.a,,,,,I ~ + 400 SIP Page 13,Match 28,2002 ZBA Public Healing Tianscupt Town of Southold effects there may be. What we propose, we think is a reasonable plan given the nature of the opposition and given the nature of the agreement and we would urge you to afford us that relief measured against the standards that this Board has announced, the program that we have designed for this building meets the spirit of that particular ruling in beauty and the light of the neighbors concerns and I think that's what we're looking at here and that we would urge you to grant relief and we urge you to do it in an expeditious manner so that the Walzs now know what they're going to do since Spring is upon us. They would like to retire here and we would like to know what we're going to do if anything. Thank you. CHAIRMAN: Seeing no hands and hearing no further comment, I'll make a motion closing the hearing reserving decision until later. SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION * * * • ' 03/29/2002 11: 21 6314770973 FAIRWEATHER BROWN PAGE 01 tk- 3)2 . -61 794 )t,je,cu DESIGN ASSOCIATES,INC. P.O.Box 521 413 Main Street Greenport,N.Y. 11944 631-477-9752 (fax)631-477-0973 March 29, 2002 Zoning Board of Appeals Southold Town Re' Walz SCI'M# 1000-037-6-5 Following are the Measurements requested: First floor(existing) livingspace 1087 square feet Second floor(proposed) livingspace 1615 square feet Proposed total living space 2702 square feet Existing Garage 722 square feet Re ir,. ctfutly submitted, 0!r1 own awl awl aull auli -cloJcl loecpaG ../ loecips -cloiel I I I ,11-1DRI AO SV, ODUOpIGVN ZIOAA POUgplGgej OCLIOLli 07UgPIGgN LliveN I-1121 0 N 1; ff ii , . CEO ODZI W : if—. 3 3 f 5 i ' .....-- , ------1 --7-Z-, --f7 _, ..-:::--; --..N. A., i "'Z''''' -,,.:_,,,_ .A-7...„----..:=, -----:".--, ...-7,-_,1‘, ."--." --,../. 21111 01.11I 2U11 OR -cioJcl loeci4as pecnas -cloJcl I I I I CES0c1011d .111,•11 gIVOC 00U g P IG72,1 1.114.1e1A1 3.311°I91" Z I eM I-1.IA 0 N aougpiGaN ackloqi •1 "r-1.11_,,„,.. _4 r,. !t . i 02021 CI:JD COD , I 11 ---.'••---.7:-=-=-E-4 ------ -,q1z,.44 -"-4---Zi-,, MOM MOM MIMI MEM 2111M MOM , • , .v. ' 11:1---'-'"-2'7 f 4g2}olcinn oz I -xcucicie I - --NI-", sum mos sin• Ael/9/1.11J011J02-1.10LI 4c,0 11.11110A GO GlIpJ _ gull gull owl gull •cioJci recpas =Pec140G •do.icl I I I I -DNILSDCH augpisoN zieArk `""'"'" aouapisaN aciJou gouapiGasd u14...JetAl 1-1 121 0 N 7,....___ ,-; r., _ ,• :- ;; .;,.. •—ltultu -`,-,-, g-L1=4 1 i---7-----`_----1• L :. '.3 i '5---'4:, if z 3 •1 ,- =.F. 1'' € • _L,.,,,„ 1 tfi .d 1 1, 4111, f. • GJ '/9C 2 Ref: Roger&Leslie Walz--Appl. #4962 Presented to ZBA 3/28/02 On Saturday, March 2, 2002, at 7:40 in the morning,my wife and I were served with a "Request for Judicial Intervention" by Mr. Eric Bressler, on behalf of Petitioners Roger and Leslie Walz, on which we were named as respondents, along with the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Southold. Our involvement with the Walz' application has been as a result of our being advised and invited, by registered letter, from the Zoning Board of Appeals,to attend the application hearing and to express our objections, if any. We have voiced our objections in a business-like way, have not slandered or libeled and have made ourselves available to the Walzes,their attorney and their architect to discuss, amicably, why we are not in favor of their proposed second-story addition. Apparently,they were not desirous of any such discussion, since a meeting was never arranged. We have a right to our opinion and have expressed it before this Board in the proper manner. Therefore, we are puzzled as to why we have been named in this lawsuit. However, since there are new Board members and this application hearing has been re-opened, we wish to request that our previously submitted comments and photographs, which are all part of the file,be considered during your deliberation. To reiterate briefly: Their lot is less that 47.5 ft. wide, on which has been built an approximately 38-foot wide, single-story house. The addition they•propose will loom overwhelmingly large on this small,narrow piece of property. With the exception of one, we know of no other two-story home in the community that is built on such a narrow lot. Also, since their house is at the highest elevation of the slope of land between our two houses,we are very concerned about the additional drain on, and possible overflow of, the septic system, inasmuch as there will be an increase in the number of bedrooms and bathrooms. Should the existing septic system fail and overflow,the effluent could not only spill over onto our property,but possibly leach into the nearby shallow waterway as well. The Suffolk County Department of Health has very specific regulations regarding sewage disposal systems and minimum septic tank area and capacities, and we would hope that the Building Department would seek the County's approval of the septic system. It would appear that, in order to be in compliance with current County Dept.of Health regulations, a new and/or enlarged system would be required. However, we can't imagine where it could be constructed on this small lot: We would also like to know if the Town Trustees have made a determination of jurisdiction regarding this construction, due to its closeness to tidal water. The size house they are propgsing is more in keeping with the South Shore than Gardiners Bay Estates. One has only to,ride around some of the small,more established waterfront communities in Southold Town to see what happens when residents,whether part- or full-time, decide that they should be able to do whatever they wish and the building codes are meant for everyone else but them. Thank you. Ralph Martin, Jr. __J �U� —•mac_.. �� of Reference: Reference: Roger&LesLog of telephone convemations with Mr. Brown Li Appl. #4962 for ZBA 11/29/01 << �(1 On Wed., 11/21/01 (the day before Thanksgiving) at 1:44 in the afternoon, Walz' (c�'tk, architect,Robert Brown, called and left a message indicating that he had been advised by the vx,(tj• chairman of the ZBA to contact us in..4.a..4.aeffort to set up an appointment to discuss the "Walz project" and answer any*estions we may have. He concluded his message with"perhaps I will call back on Monday". On Friday, 11/23/01 at 9:40 a.m, we returned his call (477-9752) and indicated that we would be more than happy to meet with him and the Walzs (and Mr. Bressler, should they so desire) at their earliest convenience. We asked that he let us know when would be a good time for them and we would make every effort to be available. At 1:45 p.m. Mr. Brown called us back and advised that the Walzs were unable to come `out since they had "closed up the house for the winter" and "have other plans". If they have, in fact, "closed up for the winter", it will be the first time we can remember that they have left furniture outside,have not put up the storm shutters and have left the kitchen window ajar. Mr. Brown said he was their representative in this matter and Ralph replied that he would discuss it with his wife and also seek advice from another party. Tuesday, 11/27, is OK with Mr. Brown. We are to call him and let him know what we decide. On Monday, 11/26/01 at 1:15 p.m.,we contacted Mr. Brown and advised him that we saw no point in meeting with him without the Walzs being present. We explained that, inasmuch as they are the applicants for the variance and we are their next door neighbors with whom it was suggested they open a line of communication and respond to whatever questions we may have, it seems reasonable-to expect that they would want to participate in whatever discussion took place. Also, it's possible that we may have some questions that Mr. Brown may not have the answers to. We have indicated our willingness to sit down and discuss this in an effort to resolve the problems that exist,but it seems pointless to take up everyone else's time at a meeting that the Walzs have declined to attend. Ralph Martin, Jr. 2555 Old Orchard Lane East Marion,NY 11939 631-477-0428 ,1 •APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS • ct„fiFfO( ' to itkovSouthold Town Hall Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman ���/1 0A: 53095 Main Road Lydia A.Tortora t y P.O. Box 1179 \)a i George Horning Southold,New York 11971-0959 c\ 0,, Ruth D. Oliva �� ®�•11 ZBA Fax(631)765-9064 Vincent Orlando : RI •,.•i Telephone(631) 765-1809 .....�'� http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD February 27, 2002 Fax 298-8565 \Eric J. Bressler, Esq. Wickham Wickham&Bressler, P.C. Main Road Box 1424 Mattituck, NY 11952 Re: Appl. No. 4962—Roger Walz Variance Request • Dear Mr. Bressler: As a follow-up to our telephone conversation today, this will confirm that the Board of Appeals adopted the following Resolution at its meeting held Thursday, February 21, 2002: RESOLVED, that the hearing be reopened and scheduled for March 28, 2002, with all notices as required under Chapter 58 to be provided by the applicant; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the applicant furnish a letter in detail explaining the grounds for a reopening of the hearing. This Resolution was duly adopted (5-0). Very t .. Gerard P. Goehringer r Chairman • NSMISSION VERIFICATION REPORT TIME : 02/28/2002 09:57 DATE,TIME 02/28 09:56 FAX NO./NAME 2988565 DURATION 00:00:30 PAGE(S) 01 RESULT OK MODE STANDARD ECM LAW OFFICES WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER, P.C. 10315 MAIN ROAD, P.O. BOX 1424 MATTITUCK, LONG ISLAND WILLIAM WICKHAM NEW YORK 11952 MELVILLE OFFICE ERIC J. BRESSLER 275 BROAD HOLLOW ROAD ABIGAIL A.WICKHAM - SUITE III LYNNE M.GORDON 631-298-8353 MELVILLE, NEW YORK 11747 JANET GEASA TELEFAX NO. 631-298-8565 631-249-9480 TELEFAX NO.631-249-9484 February 19, 2002 VIA FACSIMILE Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold,New York 11971 Re: Walz application for reversal/variance Dear Mr. Goehringer: Thank you for your letter of February 11,2002 regarding this matter. After careful consideration we believe that it would not be appropriate or beneficial for the newly reconstituted board to determine this matter without the new members having the opportunity for the give and take which inevitably accompanies the hearing process. The recently adopted interpretation invites input and analysis of the application as measured against this standard. We understand that the matter can be accomodated on the March 28, 2002 calendar and ask that you do so in the interests of resolving this matter. Please do not construe this letter as a waiver of any right or remedy of the applicant. Thank you for your consideration. Very truly yours, Eric . Bressler EJB/al cc: Mr. &Mrs. Walz EJB/zbaltr FEB-19-2802 10:37A FROM: TO:7659054 P:2%2 /71' -I LAW OFFICES u WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER, r.c. 10315 MAIN ROAb P 0. BOX 1424 wll IaFI w1cKlIAM MATTITUCK. LONG ICI AND CRIT,1 ijREssL:R NLAN YORK I I9�,i2 MELVILLE OF�IGE ADIGAII A WICKMAAq s'J`v BROAD HOLLOW ROAD aUITE III LYNNE M GORDON 631 29 -13.353 MELVILLE, NEW YORK 11747 JANCT QCASA TrLEFMX NO, 53I-2S18-13565 631 ,'4.y-:3480 TELCFAX NO 41::1 E47-2$484 February 19, 2002 VIA FACSIMILE Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Southold Town Zoning hoard of Appeals 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold,New York 11971 Re; Walt application for reversal/variance Dear Mr, Goehringer: Thank you for your letter of February 11, 2002 regarding this matter. After careful consideration we believe that it would not he appropriate or beneficial for the newly reconstituted board to determine this matter without the new members having the opportunity for the give and take which inevitably accompanies the hearing process. The recently adopted interpretation invites input and analysis of the application as measured against this standard, We understand that the matter can be accomodated on the March 2g, 2002 calendar and ask that you do so in the interests of resolving this matter, Please do not construe this letter as a waiver of any right or remedy of the applicant. Thank you for your consideration. Very truly yours, Eric, . Bressler LJtl/nl cc; Mr it Mrs Walz h;117/�hcrllr FEB;1,9-2002 10:37A FROM: T-c't`',659064 P: 1/2 WY-m1AM, WICKHAM & l3RESSLER, Y.C. P.O. Box 1424, 10315 Main Road,Mattituck, New York 11952 Phone(631) 298-8353—Fax(631)298-8565 To:-14 , eA1fl1í, Fax No.: 705 Ciocpq From: Includes: .tak.. -_ Date: 2. j q/ ("1i #of Pages including cover sheet: 1 This transmission contains information confidential and/or legally privileged. It is intended for use only by the person to whom it is directed. If you have received this iciccopy in error,please _ notify us by telephone immediately so that we can arrange for the return of the documents to us at no cost to you. If you do not receive all of the pages indicated,please call as soon as possible at the number referenced above, J . iNSMISSION VERIFICATION REPORT S • TIME : 02/11/2002 16:36 DATE,TIME 02/11 16:36 FAX NO./NAME 2988565 DURATION 00:00:40 PACE(S) 01 RESULT OK MODE STANDARD ECM AFPEMS BOARD MEMBERS �i��''"���� SVFF®`� = Southold Town Hall 1sI • Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman ���h�®� ®may 53095 Main Road • P.O. Box 1179 Lydia A.Tortorat Southold,New York 11971-0959 ® ZBA Fax(631)765-9064 George Horning ® ii�� Telephone(631) 765-1809 Ruth S. Oliva •- Vincent Orlando BOARD OF APPEALS i'll° � 0 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD February 11, 2002 Fax 298-8565 Eric J. Bressler, Esq. Wickham,Wickham & Bressler, P.C. Main Road P.O. Box 1424 Mattituck, NY 11952 Re: Appl. #4962—Walz Setback Variance Request Dear Mr. Bressler: This letter is a request regarding the above pending application,which, as you know, has been pending reviews under the procedures required by New York Town Law. Recently, two Zoning Board positions were filled by new individuals, Members Ruth Oliva and Vincent Orlando (filling the positions held by Lora S. Collins and James Dinizio, Jr.). Before a vote of the Board may take place and a determination rendered on this application, the two new members will be conducting full reviews of the record and familiarizing themselves with the property and areas under consideration. Would you please confirm whether or not the applicant will approve of a determination procedure, with a vote of the Zoning Board to include the two new Zoning Board Members, after familiarization of the entire record, without opening the hearing, re- noticing a new hearing, etc. In either event, would you please sign below, noting the applicant's answer, and returning the original to us? Your approval is an authorization for the above procedure, which would authorize a waiver of re-opening, re-noticing and holding a new (additional) hearing, but which will not affect the actual decision resulting from the votes in the near future. Your disapproval also will not affect the actual decision resulting from voting in the near future. If you have any questions, please feel free to call our office. Thank you. Sincere y yours, r y Gerard P. Goehringer Chairman ( ) Yes, I approve of the procedure to waive a new hearing procedure as noted above, or ( ) No, I disapprove of the procedure and request a new hearing procedure. Signed: kei '0 (0 Joseph T. Trencheny 120 South Lane East_M, ri n, NY 11939 j q [Moir: 1 '7.0179 \:,\ I JUL 9 2006 July 6, 2001 ` 1\ Mr. Gerard Goehringer, Chairman Southold Town Board of Appeals 53095 Main Road Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971-0959 Dear Mr. Goehringer: I write with interest regarding the proposed home renovation by Roger and Leslie Walz of Old Orchard La. East Marion,NY. After speaking with them this past weekend,they informed me that their plans are on hold due to necessary approval by the Town of Southold. Upon reviewing the plan with them,I see that the renovation calls for the addition of a second story with added bedrooms,bathroom and recreational area with no expansion past the existing footprint of the house. Please keep in mind that the vast majority of the homes in this area are two-story situated on non-conforming lots used for both seasonal and year round occupancy. My concern in this postponement lies in that many homes in this area,including mine, are in need of renovation and updating. To have this plan stalled or possibly disallowed and have precedent set due to an individuals' desire not to allow change is certainly not in the interest of this community. I have been acquainted with the Walz family for the better part of twenty years. I am confident that the plan as well as the finishing work proposed will not only enhance their property, but those surrounding it as well. Truly,they are neighbors that have continued to improve their home over the years and this plan for renovation should be granted for their enjoyment. Additionally, please notify me of any additional public hearings as I will be interested in attending and m, -hanks for your attention to this matter. 4-- ` : ren••eny 1 .1ti 09/1012001 09:56 6314770973 FAIRWEATHER BROWN PAGE 01 4 AMWEAlliE"WIWN -ft DESIGN ASSOCIATES,INC. C r _s F-O.13ox 571 SEP 10 2001 l i i 11 413 Maio Street 1 1! Greeopert,N.Y. 11944 _ I f 631-477-9752 (Poi)631-477-0973 j September 10,2001 Chairman Goehringer Zoning Board of Appeals Southold Town Re: Walz Appl, No, 4962 SCTM# 1000-037-6-5 in response to your"reminder" of August 31st: The "ridge poles" have been attached to the above named residence to indicate the proposed heights of the renovation. This is in response to your request at the hearing of June 7th. (To have been reheard August 16th but was post-poned by your letter of June 20th until this hearing of September 20th). • Respectfully submitted, Amy M n permit Agent 6 , 1 10) ii b C7 ,..-r- g1 VAgYp edy.- ---- :,------ - 25 01 \( a--/--/ ) e ,, )(. //937 ( \ S ? 6____:__j ,Zrig-,,ae ?.°.e/ %,..)210- C, 4,A46e ,..0, , 4.f.e.z.,-/4ia_z.,.‘ //79 \v-:zit- -e--/---L-z-, )-(,7, //57 /- zgie-i --- 2 1,i.---(-4-,, z,/: .. _.....4,,z_e_. ....../....e_v_6".Le_eL tie,- "e**4.."151A.e.40Z _ --/--6,.'--- , ( ',;,o...4•1.--,e_ .... -,/ a, , ,.1--2), -- ,,,-.,/ za4-,--1:4-e.-e" (7ea--xz ,;214--,a ea-e-,--04-x-ee....- ..e-.4- --7A-e---e--4-1-1 - /.....4...,<_ ef--a-e- oee- 1 (_,(.,,,.._ _,„,......6_,,,„e ,zez-e) ,...„.... . ,.__ , 4,-- e-40,-- ,..-.'- ..„.• ......4.-„,...,,,_ ' _e-d .-- , *4 mi';4,-,iNI."'.4..; 4:,•,:,'; -...."' ., , Ilk ,. .' :' .- , ' .''''':•11; ";-+ *. - ," .- I. ;... • rilq . --.)., i , .. - v., i- -. (/ - iiilto- • (, ' /- '`*-- -I 1 . .--- ":01:f.:e L , • . .,. .- _ .,.0 ... Hi ' ' . _ i , _3,, . Alb 111111) 5 - 4 (2-kut/o C rt:July 31, 2001 Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Board of Appeals ! 2°1_,,,,,°19.....2.L1,11 WO to Town of Southold _1Southold Town Hall c\\4 pO 53095 Main Road [11.0_1J/U2.13 '�°r� P.O. Box 1179 Southold,New York 11971 Re: Walz Residence 2520 Old Orchard Lane Gardiner Bay Estates East Marion Dear Chairman Goehringer, I am writing to you in reference to the application before the Board of Appeals concerning the renovation/expansion of the residence immediately adjacent to me on the south. I have reviewed the plans prepared by Fairweather-Brown Design Associates,Inc., on behalf of Roger and Leslie Walz;I also attended the Board of Appeals meeting in Southold Town Hall on Thursday,June 7, 2001. The plans do not enlarge the footprint of the existing house and appear sensitive to neighbors on all sides. The second floor addition has been added in such a way as to minimize its impact on the neighbors and any limitation on our views. I find it attractive and a plus for the neighborhood. As one of the neighbors most affected, I want you to be aware that I am supportive of their application. If you have questions regarding my thoughts,please feel free to contact me directly. Sincerely, eeLi,aixz49 N, 7-1,5 ,e-e--z.- Elizateth H. Frazier 2415 Old Orchard Lane East Marion,NY Cc Gardiner Bay Estates Architectural Committee Roger and Leslie Walz -TRANSMITTAL MEM iw TO: ZBA Chairman and Members FROM: ZBAOffice Staff DATE: �'o210( SUBJECT: ile Update With reference to the above application, please find attached the following new information added to the official ZBA office file: • Comments: Number of Pages)ttached: c_ TrMemo.doc --,TRANSMITTAL TO: ZBA Chairman•and Members FROM: ZBA Office Staff DATE: ;00l / SUBJECT:- rile Update With reference to the above application, please find attached the following new information added to the official ZBA office file: • • Comments: Number of Pages Attached: L TrMemo.doc ` � - - ) di ���� `~� --( }�`- . OrlfirtJ6-1-30) , . / / « q � ,`kIttlo � ~ 180 SOUTH LANE ^m�7r � P .O . BOX 5 *' U . EAST MARION , [� �� h� oug W 11939-0C, !:- JULY 26,2001 JUL 27/UU .. �� ~ ii . GERARD P . GOEHRINGER , CHAIRMAN [/ SOUTHOLD TOWNBOARD OF APPEALS "•BOARD �� ° ' SOUTHOLD TOWN HALL ' - J -�l " P.O . BOX 1179 SOUTHOLD , NY 11971 � . RE : APPEAL OF ROGER AND LESLIE WALZ DEAR MR . GOEHRINGER , . . � I AM WRITING IN SUPPORT OF THE BUILDING APPLICATION APPEAL OF ROGER AND LESLIE WALZ FOR THEIR RESIDENCE AT 2505 OLD . ORCHARD LANE , EAST MARION. , ' . , MY HOUSE TO THE EAST IS LOCATED FIVE FEET FROM MY PROPERTY LINE , WITH MY GARAGE ONLY TWO FEET FROM THE LINE . THE HOUSE NEXT TO ME IS ONLY THREE FEET FROM MY PROPERTY . THE HOUSE JUST EAST OF THE WALZ HOUSE IS FIVE FEET FROM THEIR LINE , AS IS THE HOUSE TO THE WEST . IT IS THEREFORE NOT UNUSUAL IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA TO HAVE HOUSES CLOSE TOGETHER . . THE HOUSE TO THE WEST OF THE . WALZ HOUSE IS A TWO STORY ' STRUCTURE AS WELL AS ALMOST ALL THE HOUSES TO THE EAST . THE WALZ PLAN WOULD CONFORM WITH THE OTHER STRUCTURES IN THE AREA . MANY OTHER HOUSES IN THE AREA HAVE BEEN ALLOWED ADDITIONS ' AND ALTERATIONS AS LONG AS THEY STAID WITHIN THEIR FOOTPRINT . I BELIEVE THAT ROGER AND LESLIE WALZ SHOULD BE ALLOWED THE SAME PRIVILEGE . , SINCERELY � °' �� ' � . FRANK o . THORP , JR . , , , ^ . . , (4,;_j � . , , BUN Fh' PF 401 '1) • /0 - r-•eleaC" k/ • • APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS •i �1 Southold Tbwn Hall " ' ` 53095 Main Road Gerard P. GoahriRger, Chairman � ,„ 4� �• 4./. /� �� t �� L. V I P.O. fox 1179 James Dinizio, Jt , .Z• Lydia A.Tortola \.11' x"{s �� �' :" II$'ID Southold, New York 11971 Lora S Collins _ �� 1° ZHA Fax (631)765-9064 George Homing l `a�.•' �1 v }Telephone(63 1) 765-1609 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN Or SOUTTIOLD FINDINGS. DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF JUNE 8, 2000 • Appi No 4804 -q$TRID GAQDiS 1000-126.11-8 STREET& LOCALITY: 7020 Pe0Ork Bay Boulevard, Laurel DATE OF PUBLIC HEARiNr3• April 8, 2000, May 4, 2000 EINDfNGS Offer PROPER Y FACTS/DESCRIPTLQN; The applicant's property consists of a total lot area of 19,227 sq R , lot depth of approx. 340 feet, width of 82 feat on Peconlc Bay Boulevard and 68 56 feet on Peconrc Bay. Applicant demolished a 1-1/2 story house under B P 128308-Z, in order to rebuild on Its foundation with en expansion. According to the survey of John Fetrantello dated 0/28/93 and updated 8/31199, the foundation of the former house was sM at a 45 degree angle to the east and west lot lines Because of its orientation, the closest points to the lot lines were at comers, 14 9 feet on the west end 4 feet on the east The foundation setback from the bulkhead as 70 2 feet_ An open patio extended about 18 feet from the house toward the Bay, to a setback of 52.5 feet from the bulkhead At the time the property was first viewed by Board members, the former house had been demolished and the existing foundation had been expanded by new foundation work. @ASISQF AF_TIJCATlON. This is a request for a Variance under Article XXIV, Section 100-242A based on the Building inspector's February 14, 2000 Notice of Disapproval wtilch states that: (1) the proposed covered deck 10 Meet deep, to replace the open patio on the Bay side, would have a setback of 81 feet from the bulkhead, and its construction would violate the 76-foot setback requirement of Code Section 100- 239.48. (2) the corner of an addition at the northwest corner of the house would be 10 feet from the westerly property line, less than the existing 1449" nonconforming setback of 14 9 feet and thus in violation of Code Section 100-242A. AREA VARIANCE RELIEF REQUESTED' Applicant requests a Variance authorizing covered porches on the Bay side and northwest corner of the house. The revised site plan submitted Apnl 27, 2000, date stamped by the Board on May 1, shows the waterside porch to be 31.2 feet from the outer edge of the bulkhead, and the northwest corner porch to be 13.1 feet from the property line at the closest point. The latter porch has been reduced from the original proposal, vottich entailed a 10-foot setback .s . e : lb. : . e L e, . 1 : s :, e,. • Based on the testimony and record before the Board, and personal inspection. the Board makes the following findings. (1) The house is less flan 75 feet from the bulkhead Therefore, any construction above grade on the Bay side requires a vanence The former patio was at grade level at ■ setback of'52 5 feet from the bulkhead Th® proposed porch would be on plies up to 1a Mees above grad., and covered (2) The proposed covered porch facing the Bay, although less deep then the former open patio. would be a much more massive structure and would add significantly to the bulk of the house The 60 'd (i)-27) dLV : ai 00-Et - Lnr -. -- 0J10l1 /187 .IFFF BUT' FR PE glibPA(?[ 63 Pacje 2- )une 8, 2000 28A App! No 4804 -Astrid Caddis Partici 1000-126-11-6 at Laurel Code requirement for a setback from a bulkhead serves not only to protect the shoreline physically but also to prevent the intrusion of building mass into open shore areas. The size and bulk of the proposed covered porch facing the Bay would produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood and detriment to nearby properties (3) The pre-existing northwest comer setback of 14.9 feet is nonconforming and thus sets the limit for westerly setbacks under Code section 100-242A, anything less requires a variance Applicant's original plan called for an addition to the house footprint with a corner only 10 feet from the westerly line. The revised site plan received on May 1, 2000, shows a covered porch at this corner with a setback of 13.1 feet This is nota substantial reduction from the pre-existing setback, and will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or detriment to nearby properties. (4) Applicant purchased an older house, demolished it, and is budding a much larger, more massive structure Applicant was able to plan the new structure starting from the pre-existing foundation, and the difficulties applicant has encountered In complying with the Zoning Code are essentially self created (5) There is no evidence that the action set forth below will have an adverse effect or impact on physical or environmental conditions (8) The action set forth below is the minimum necessary and adequate to enable applicant to enjoy the benefits of a new house of the sort he has planned while preserving and protecting the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community. RE$OLUTION/AcTIgN: On motion by Dinizio, seconded by Chairman Goehringer, It was RESOLVED, to DENY the requested variance for a covered porch set back 61 2 feet from the bulkhead, and further RESOLVED, to GRANT the requested variance for a covered porch at the northwesterly corner with a setback of 13 1 feet as set forth in the revised site plan received by the Board on May 1, 2000 VOTE OF THE BOARD. AYES: Goehringer, Dinizio, Co • . . YS. Tortora and Horning (suggesting denial as alternative). GERARD P GOEHRI ER, CH RMAN For filing about 6/15/00 111?-'sp,) Ot ' d d817 : at 00-£I - 1 - - TRANSMITT L MEMjj al TO: ZBA Chairman and Members FROM: ZBA Office Staff DATE: 7tsl4I SUBJECT:• File Update With reference to the above application, please find attached the following new information added to the official ZBA office file: id-; 4419&02 _ yov. f r41-6,-.5/1124, Comments: Number of Pages Attached: L I TrMemo.doc to/ 4 1111 , e GARDINER'S BAY ESTATES HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION INC. P.O. BOX 4, EAST MARION, NY 11 3;•M ©1 -vi7 July 2 2001 I ;\ JUL 7 eao, Boa-rdYof-%Appeal s Town of Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Re:--- Apel ica-tion--No: -4962-Roge-r- J. -and Leslie Walz Honorable Board: Gardiner ' s Bay Estates Homeowners Association Inc. does not have a Building Code and refers homeowners to conform to the Town of Southold Zoning Code and the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building COde . However the GBEHOA Inc . has a real estate committee which requires a person to submit plans for any new construction, alterations , additions as a courtesy for suggestions . There is no convenant in deeds or excerpts of the deed that a two story residence cannot be built in the Estates , so long as it conforms to the Zoning Code of the Town of Southold. The GBEHOA Club which proceeded the GBEHOAInc. allowed two story residences to be constructed in the ' 30s to ' 60s . Statements have been made with reference to the above application that a second story to the existing residence will interfer with air, light, view. The applicants residence is located on ahiah_er ' elevation than the adjoining residence and will not interfer with air, light and view as it will not be added horizontally. Back in the ' 20s a sub-division of various odd shape lots was approved and no thought was given to side yard set backs, front and rear yard set backs and percent of occupancy of property. Small summer cottages were builton odd lot shapes and sizes and now home owners are retiring to their ideal location and would like to have larger homes for family and friends . The Real Estate Committee neither approves or objects to the application for expansion. SIncer�e1y, 6 6 ) Harold challer "/' Warren A. Sambach Sr. APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Iii,��'���®� ®� ��- Southold Town Hall rard P. Goehringer, Chairman ��0 A4. ` r . ®� 53095 Main Road James Dinizio,Jr. 0 1 t�; , P.O. Box 1179 Lydia A.Tortora � ,fit,,,„ ? Southold,New York 11971-0959 )i) ,,ILora S. Collins , 4.� , ��� ZBA Fax(631)765-9064 George Horning Telephone(631) 765-1809 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD August 31, 2001 By Fax Transmission 477-0973 Fairweather Brown Design Associates, Inc. Attn: Rob Brown/Amy Martin P.O. Box 521 Greenport, NY 11944 Re: Appl. No. 4962 — Roger Walz Application Dear Mr. Brown/Mrs. Martin: This letter replaces yesterday's August 30, 2001 sent in error to your office. Board Member(s) are requesting the status regarding possible placement of ridge markers (by your office other individuals). It is possible that if this is not available for viewing starting about September 10, 2001, the hearing may be re- calendared for the following hearing calendar (tentatively October 16th) Thank you. Sincerely yours, #410„. „., ,: , P, :., , ., Gerard P. Goehringer Chairman (771,-- -1 , -. Ilk 10 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS �i,'',,,� /�,•11(k VFF®`j'`, 1.°01.4•Y , Southold Town Hall Gerard P Goehringer, Chairman ��• ®G�; 53095 Main Road James Dinizio,Jr. % o • . % P.O. Box 1179 %Lydia A.Tortora ,? Southold,New York 11971-0959 Lora S. Collins :0 •' IO ZBA Fax(631)765-9064 p\\3eore Horning *f4 Nig `0®.0i' Telephone(631)765-1809 ))\''9 � BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD K ' / ,,,1v ) August 30 2001 st or,\ o, P 1 By Fax Transmission 477-0973 l' 6/ "" Fairweather Brown Design Associates, Inc. kli h" Attn: Amy Martin P.O. Box 521 Greenport' NY 11944 Re: I. No. 4962 — RogerWalz A plication PP 9 Dear Mrs. Marti ,: The Board Me beg T-9_ re u ti g the status in placement of proposed ridge markers by a 1.an w ,0 er or not they have been placed on a map r er referenc� Boa d Members have indicated that if this is not as mak available on or aboutt"�September 0, 2001, the hearing will be re-calendareTor a later date (October 16 ©ossibly) Thank you. ` Sincerely yours, #4-sufze-t.ZP - - - /, Gerard P. Goehringer Chairman SMISSION VERIFICATION REPORT TIME : 08/31/2001 11:22 DATE,TIME 08/31 11:21 FAX NO./NAME 4770973 DURATION 00:00:30 PAGE(S) 01 RESULT OK MODE STANDARD ECM ANSMISSION VERIFICATION REPORT! TIME : 08/30/2001 11: 02 DATE,TIME 08/30 11:02 FAX NO,/NAME 4770973 DURATION 00:00:29 PAGE(S) 01 RESULT OK MODE STANDARD ECM TRANSMITTAL MEW) 1 r` TO: ZBA Chairman and Members FROM: ZBA Office Staff DATE: 01.2//o SUBJECT: File Update With reference to the above application, please find attached the following new information added to the official ZBA office file: •i4.(6.,6 • Comments: • Number of Pages Attached: TrMemo.doc • APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS1'SUFFO(,(co - 1110 ,0 Gy ; Southold Town Hall Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman �� c ; 53095 Main Road James Dinizio,Jr. t y Z P.O. Box 1179 Lydia A.Tortora V36' 0 Southold,New York 11971 Lora S. Collins ;= 1�ljo 40*/ ZBA Fax(516)765-9064 George Horning * �; �'� Telephone(516)765-1809 ..... .iii BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD June 20, 2001 • • Fairweather-Brown Design Associates, Inc. P. 0. Box 521 Greenport, NY 11944 Attn: Mrs. Amy Martin RE: Appl. No. 4962—Roger and Leslie Walz Dear Mrs. Martin: Enclosed please find copy of a letter from Ralph Martin, neighbor to the Walz property. Mr. Martin has requested a postponement to this hearing of September 20, 2001. Please be advised the hearing will be continued to the September 20th meeting date. Thank you. Very truly Gerard P. Goehringer Chairman GPG:pq Enc. } -- z45 P 4110 ilE © RUED tikti-EIV 200:j (dt' J POB 203 I East Marion,NY 11939-0203 June 18, 2001 Mr. Gerard Goehringer, Chairman Southold Town Board of Appeals Town Hall 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Re: Roger J. and Leslie Walz Southold,NY 11971-0959 Appl. No. 4962 Dear Mr. Goehringer: May I respectfully request the August 16, 2001 re-hearing on the above application be postponed to September 20, 2001? Since I am a most interested and affected party,I wish to be in attendace,however the original date is in direct conflict with my being out of town. Thank you in advance for whatever consideration you can give to this request. '671-1P," - RMJR:ntm Ralph Martin,J1C-.7.-- _ (2D / ADDITIONAL INFO F( 3OARD MEMBERS 4/S97 /�'fO/ ‘\Q) � Re: Appl. of-- L�`„c� , Hearing Date: 6/VD/ From: UU 12. E '3 ,p aciv. 0,6r, 0�� (3j -/ FAIRWEATHER-BROWN DESIGN ASSOCIATES,INC. P.O.Box 521 413 Main Street Greenport,N.Y. 11944 631-477-9752 (fax)631-477-0973 May 14, 2001 Zoning Board of Appeals Southold Town Re: Walz SCTM# 1000-037-6-5 Attached please find our application for an appeal to the disapproval received from the Building Department. The Walz's would like to expand it "up" not "out". The existing footprint is 3' from their east property line and 6'6" from their westerly line and these current foot print set backs does not meet the zoning code. A second story is their only option for increasing the living space. Respectful) submitted, • y M. Permit Arent A off 644, a ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE / ®#� Town Hall, 53095 Main Road TOWN CLERK ; P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRIAGE OFFICER "- � `� �1 Fax (631) 765-6145 RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER �_ Tj� rr�� •s11°. °1� Telephone (631) 765-1800 FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER ��� OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD TO: Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals FROM: Elizabeth A. Neville, Southold Town Clerk DATED: May 16, 2001 RE: Zoning Appeal No. 4962 00_ Transmitted herewith is Zoning Appeal No. 4962 by' Amy Martin of Fairweather-Brown for Walz for a variance. Also included is: Notice of Disapproval dated May 2, 2001; copy of Application for Building Permit; letter from Amy Martin to ZBA dated May 14, 2001; ZBA Questionnaire; survey; and plans. \ - r \ ,. oe° t. PROPOSED 2ND FLOOR (')?) \ D� ADDITION TO EXISTING 0, �`� �.G� I STORY FRAME HOUSE. N o \ GP O \ \ .\ 7,44 -.57/L A CI \ 1 -V,<\ \ 0 \ o \ \ <` \ , \ 3✓ \ 2 \ , \ \ \ . \ ' \ , S \ "7 -57 \ , / -- c` / \ BASED ON 4. // \ MAP SURVEYED FOR \ ROGER J. - LESLIE WALZ AT EAST MARION \ / TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, N.Y. SUFFOLK COUNTY TAX MAP INFO: , / 1000-037G-5 LOT NO.'S REFER TO MAP OF GARDINERS \ BAY ESTATES SECT. 2, FILED IN THE SUFF.CO.CLERKS OPFFICE AS MAP 275. \ \ \ S O, � c SITE PLAN SCALE: I"=20'0" r 1 Y ft FORM NO. 3 P-4 11 W7 Olrei TOWN OF SOUTHOLD II BUILDING DEPARTMENT MAY I O 2001 ,, ccs P;a,-4,10 5 SOUTHOLD,N.Y. \,I iL)1 „'-r 64 5 ,uoLu� `�°��• ��a � 1NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL DATE; May 2, 2001 TO Amy Martin A/C Walz PO Box 521 Greenport NY 11944 Please take notice that your application dated March 16, 2001 For permit for 2nd story addition to one family dwelling at Location of property 2505 Old Orchard Road East Marion County Tax Map No. 1000 - Section 37 Block 6 Lot 5 Subdivision Filed Map # Lot# Is returned herewith and disapproved on the following grounds proposed addition not permitted pursuant to Article XXIV Section 100-242A which states; Nothing in this Article shall be deemed to prevent the remodeling,reconstruction or enlargement of a nonconforming building containing a conforming use,provided that such action does not create any new nonconformance or increase the degree of nonconformance with regard to the regulations pertaining to such buildings. Existing structure has non-conforming setback of 3 feet from easterly side lot line and . feet on westerly side line, the addition of the second story represents an increase in the degree of non- conformity Authori:-• Signature i NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS THURSDAY, JUNE 7, 2001 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Section 267 of the Town Law and Chapter 100 (Zoning), Code of the Town of Southold, the following application will be heard at a public hearing by the SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS at the Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York 11971, on THURSDAY, JUNE 7, 2001, at the time noted below (or as soon thereafter as possible): 7:05 p.m. Appl. No. 4962 — ROGER J. and LESLIE WALZ. This is a request for a Variance under Article XXIV, Section 100-242A, based on the Building Inspector's May 2, 2001 Notice of Disapproval (as corrected) regarding applicant's proposed second-story addition to existing dwelling. The Notice of Disapproval states that the existing structure has a nonconforming setback of three feet from the easterly side lot line and 6.5 feet from the west side line, and as a result, the addition of the second-story represents an increase in the degree of nonconformity. Location of Property: 2505 Old Orchard Road, East Marion, NY; Parcel 1000-37-6-5. The Board of Appeals will hear all persons, or their representative, desiring to be heard at the hearing, or desiring to submit written statements before the conclusion of the above hearing. This hearing will not start earlier than designated. Files are available for review during regular Town Hall business hours (8-4 p.m.). If you have questions, please do not hesitate to call (631) 765-1809. Dated: May 25, 2001. GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS Town Hall 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 `,jam . QUESTIONNAIRE FOR FILING WITH YOUR Z.B.A. APPLICATION A. Please disclose the names of the owner(s) and any other individuals . (and entities) having a financial interest in the subject premises and a description of their interests: (S parate sheet may be attached. ) . B. Is the subject premises listed on the real estate market for -. salr being shown to prospective buyers? ( ) Yes ' • ( ) No. (If Yes, please attach copy of "conditions" of sale. ) C. Are there proposals to change or alter land contours? ( } Yes ( No - D. 1. Are there any areas which contain wetland grasses? /141 2. Are the wetland areas shown on the map submitted with this application? /Y2 3 . Is the property bulkheaded between the wetlands area and the upland building area? / 4. If your property contains wetlands or pond areas, have you contacted the Office of the Town Trustees for its determination of jurisdiction? /11/ 96L-4-'4 E. Is there a depression or sloping elevation near the area of proposed co truction at or below five feet above mean sea level? 1l0 (If not applicable, state "N.A. ") F. Are there any patios, concrete barriers, bulkheads or fences which exist and are not shown on the survey map that you are submitting? JY® If none exist, please state "none." G. Do you have any constru ;fin taking place at this time concerning your premises? /V,, If yes, please submit a copy of your building permit and map as approved by the Building Department. If none, please state. H. Do you or any co-owner also own other land close to this parcel? /Y) If yes, please explain where or submit copies of deeds. I. Please list prese• use or o era 'ons conducted at this parcel �- -i and proposed use r r . / & _, 257/0/ Au . . zzed ,, -.. -ture and Date 3/87, I0/90Ik /oz)4410 Illr APPLICANT TRANSACTIONAL DISCLOSURE At • The Town of Southold ' s Code of Ethics' prohibits conflicts of interest on the part of town officers and employees. The purpose of this form is to provide information which can alert the town of possible conflicts of interest and allow it to take whatever action is necessary to avoid same. YOUR NAME: 1 ® " ���/ e-- (Last 'nan(e, fir t name,„ m dle initial, unless you •are applying in the name of someone else or other entity, such as a company. If so, indicate the other person 's or company ' s name. ) NATURE OF APPLICATION: (Check all that apply. ) Tax grievance Variance Change of zone , Approval of plat Exemption from .plat or official map Other (If "Other, " name the activity. ) • Do you personally (or through your company, spouse, sibling, parent, or child) have a relationship with any officer or employee of the Town of Southold? "Relationship" includes by blood, marriage, or business interest. "Business interest" means a business,, including a partnership, in which the town officer or employee has even a partial ownership of (or employment by) a corporation in which the town officer or employee owns more than 5% of the shares.. YES . NO - If you answered "YES, ". complete the balance of this form and date and sign where indicated. Name of person employed by the Town of Southold Title or position of that person Describe the relationship between yourself (the applicant) and the town officer or employee. Either check the appropriate line A) through D) and/or describe in the space provided. The town officer or employee or his or her spouse, sibling, parent, or child is (check all that apply) : A) the owner of greater than 5% of the shares of the corporate stock- of the applicant (when the applicant is a corporation); $) the legal or beneficial owner of any interest in a noncorporate entity (when the applicant is not a corporation) ; . C) an officer, director, partner, or employee of the applicant; or D) the actual applicant . DESCRIPTION OF RELATIONSHIP • K ' T2) / Submitted th -. / 0 day of ./I. ...(900 // • Signature ; L 1 i 411" Print name 0 6 e - -' Town Of Southold P.O Box 1179 f -.- Southold, NY 11971 * * * RECEIPT * * * Date: 05/15/01 Receipt#: 7454 Transaction(s): Subtotal 1 Application Fees $400.00 Check#: 7454 Total Paid: $400.00 Name: Walz, Roger& Leslie 2505 Old Orchard Rd East Marion, NY 11939 Clerk ID: LINDAC Internal ID:32112 i , *. SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS TRANSCRIPT OF HEARINGS HELD DECEMBER 13, 2001 (Prepared by Paula Quintieri) Present were: Chairman Goehringer Member Dinizio—arrived at 6:43 p.m. ii")°11( Member Tortora Member Horning Board Secretary Kowalski Secretary Quintieri1-71-rilve/aP DRAFT COPY dated 1/23/02 (to be inserted) 8:38 p.m. —Appl. No. 4998 —ELIZABETH SENT. L (continued at applicant's request). This is a request for a Variance under Article X ' V, Section 100-242A, and Section 100- 244, based on the Building In, ector's Jul- 27, 2001 Notice of Disapproval. The applicant is proposing additions t. existdwelling with side yard setbacks at less than 10 feet on one side and less th. 15/feet on the other. Location of Property: 220 Lakeview Terrace, East Marion; Par c 1000-31-9-16. G. Strang, Architect CHAIRMAN: We're ready for/ou sir. Are you going to give us your presentation tonight? GARRETT STRANG: Yes, think I'd like to :. that for several reasons. One, obviously the last time we were together on this applicatio ' back in October it was assumed at that time the Board would ,ave time to deliberate and make a decision on a similar application which woul impact this one which due .• the complexity in Town it has not been able to happen. R ther than wait for that to go through and if a decision is such that it requires us to col-M.1 e this action, we would need additional time. So I would rather make this presentation onight and if your decision on the other application is such that it makes this moot then it can just go to the wayside. CHAIRMAN: Could I just hold you up at that point one second, Mr. Strang? I just want to mention to the Martins in back of you that we have not made a decision, nor are we making a decision on either one of those two applications that are adjacent to your house tonight. We only started deliberating last time about two words, and now we're moving forward with them at that point. i iy ;Y'1 T , { :1,,=:_11,,,1:, _ 1',T : ,,I-4:f ;!yis E? z- u=-- is] c . t. u ember 13,2001 FJt 'i 9' - of ZBA Public Hearings ;,: :,:-.:' f Southoldi `- BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: Are you removing it from the agenda Jerry on - ::7 Walz? r CHAIRMAN: Yes, tonight we're removing it. ' BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: No, right now are you? CHAIRMAN: I am removing it from the Agenda as a deliberation item tonight. Pardon me sir, go ahead. GARRETT STRANG: That's quite all right. As I was saying, after I make my presentation, I'm sure y u won't be deliberating or making a decision on this until sometime in the future, so when your other decision comes down it may impact , but at least I'll ave a copy of the information in front of you so that if you need to make a decision on this application you will have what you need. Specifically, the application is presented which is for an addition to an existing small cottage on a small parcel. The existing pr mise is a one-story single-family dwelling; it consists of a bedroom, a bathroom, a kitchen, a living room and a porch, which is approximately 560 square feet. It is about sixty years old. My client purchased it earlier this year with the intention of making it a vacation\home for themselves and their family. They live out of the area, so when they come theX come with their children, their grandchildren. Their needs, they understand that the lo is small, the house is small and they are limited to what they can do. Their needs speci ically include having a three bedroom, one and a half bath house to accommodate their n-eds for their family. We are proposing a five-foot addition on the waterside porch and that's pretty much the limitation on the waterside. But in addition, obviously, we're prop•sing to add a one and a half story addition to the roadside of the house, which would en ompass the additional bedrooms and baths. The existing structure that's there presently ill remain in its existing size and configuration, it will only receive cosmetic improv: ents, specifically the roof, the siding and windows, and things of that nature and whatever the Code requires to improve this structure. There will be a new sep is system installed on the roadside and there will also be connected to the Suffolk Count Water Authority duly installed water main. The setbacks to the proposed construction, hich is slightly greater than those, that are consisting presently, which we know are non- •nforming. The total size of this dwelling, completed with the proposed addition is to b- approximately 1350 square feet, total. Which is from my research pretty much in ke:sing with the neighbor's parcels in the immediate area. We have presently in hand an approval from Southold Town Trustees, which I will submit to the Board. In meeting with he Trustees and meeting with them at the site, and making a presentation and listening to their concerns at a public hearing, they were in favor of the proposed one and a half stvry addition to the rear of the house and maintaining the existing one story structure on the waterside of the house. They felt that that was the right way to go. They felt that that wo,.ld be preferable in putting a two- story structure there, or a second-story on the existing o .e story house. Which is also my and my client's feelings as well. They felt that the small .,•dition on the waterside of the house is really a non-issue and made no impact on the n-'ghbors or on the site. The c.) . . • 4 ,. o I I --t-4-1---- ..rit - ? ,p. t.....,;1,,, i . 0.. . - , • •,.. . • .,.• e, Nor!. „Ai ,,,,, ,..3 k . .•;r 4., :c- ... Oir!,.'‹, -.k i dor" iir---:,< ,,,,..;...“ , -..--•0 , , i..!, .,, .1 .. , . ..:: 0„,,,,!,,difk,,, v,, '.- • .; . i , , i . ? ,..,A- ' r,..... PA • Yoli -...,.. k t -4 A .11.,:41 .fi,i..... Iv r%item, '„,i,t.‘, ., ...-•::. .4! • ! 1 .. ..:. • st., , , , 1 I... .. ._,.„ ,,„,,,,... , . .,...,. ...„ . ._7\pA, ...„., .....,„..,4,, • -,,, ,,, • „,..„,. . .. ,,,. f4 ilf , .- le i'.91- ----- 'Tv i• ers-,-.:::.f.11-,=:11,5•.: , =7- ,:. - ' • "...' *. I air 1 -.„' t , _._:___-------- ..• .. , . .,- . ,# , —,'-..-4-.'• ,.i,..i.,;1.0f,..,..,l..-,..4...1- i' -..'.''- ,• A_-,i:"•• ....,,,.v,...... 4. . ',f i,,..Iv i.l;v•k.P.t•.i.r..-..s. ..., .‘,"'... . iiA. ,.:., 17. 1 % ._ .',.;4I,f,,..i:Z...:4;-:,4 41.-' ‘, .al-l•'i.4- ,-,'. i • • .--- — . — -_ . ti Ilk‘r, ,4 . , .-1, • • 1 1 ' • t 14 t . I .e y ,Itivek , ' IF , - ii. --.1 ! ,• •-•f _ " =-nb.. • do; 1 — iii r ' ... -... s /„...„.. If - - t A... Ilk, . .hes.„. /1,1 .1. - , , ,, " III • . \ - -- ''• • . . •T.-111A; , •-•.. .--- - ilk . ... ...714 ha N! .s... , *EA • _.:___ _ ii.... --wiermik‘al •••,........- 41: . . . .0, i V 1111111-3 ---- - .....=_-_ ...: i. Ty iti slij . _ 9\'' Y''.: yve _-...----.. ...... • '' 'y •''' ... ---111114'... ... iiiilik d t - ''.... 11,115Lto-41-§OH'. • ri . - - '. -----\ - _'-;.": -:_--0:ip 11-, ''''1. .741t, it_ -4r.-.:.10. ..1 .i .-• ----"A ii. -4 ,.. i' 1,,,Illit. ) • • ii•44^-,dmir 6%. '----:.7........',7-l'..• _ : . .-, .44... .•' .,, , ' t, Isil .,—,. -A •••-•'.- - . . 4 jirg‘,f111111-- '''&.--Ir ,, ,.7 IllitilirIllt,, ? • , , 1 . . i . . _ • .... , . ...„„....:. Akill.k.„.; 1..,..... .. .. . _ * .. . ...._ • • 4 'IM."..' `' v. -- ., .. ,I., ' ,1 '' . ---4 1 I I . .,... .... ,. •J. At.s..:,.. ..., 1 "....-,..,_,,,,,,,,, ' ir-•-• - . ' . 4 Ist.--' a , ......._ •- 1... "........ . .. 1 •••• ....• , , . . .• ot •1 •-• . - ... ...-... .... , ' • '• . ...„ • ..... • ,.. ..a.'. 11,1fts.... ,.. • ,. ,--- 'r \_"--s....,,, , P^ ..--, --' , / 4-. , - s - , , . 'i ' "-- =.--•,' ' P,;- __, ,. .,,- Mint;,_ iA4. .•-/ . - . . . . , • I . . ...N.- • --A ' '1 -,- _ . -,...---- _ ... \ - -- - -•-i•N,. ) i !.. I tilt - , A 411--i---:- T\. .111111 . 11447. .ht* .. ...„, ..., It, __ ,/_—•..,,,..7-----".;*Y;-.,---,-.,-,i2'--`.,i;-it:t(1''-1:-.,'-';—---,-,..•.... „.... .,-.N./:.-_,i,p.--;i,f-4 t.•,,(..,, '..•,.--,..'...•,. , , I R .,,,,-,..1,i.!-.1,-*•5'I,." . V :' .-t 2-.-4-• .•• . •, ,1 A i . E ..,i,i,.I-j•v,,.*w-:i.,f _t..z•,-a,--.,..).1..,t4,1,..-in..,i.._.t.,.,t'i...,.i.t,.s-.,,.:xi.t,.k.,.'1-_.-,4.:--4P"41:iiI.O.-i.4..7.6i°.-4 .,.,2-ir,i7..,..f7•14.;4..--;1.$v`„.,,•.6 : -- . ,- .d',...''•.,,,,,-,,„-,,,-1,,,.:w',fAY1'.0v ,.,:•...-7-'--'-_-,--'..:.r.ri-t,---'I:-:t',_-_',r..'__:,__-___41_:":.",.'".•-4._-= ..- f-•,,,•..•••.:•,. •-•',..-•._'.4.,,--_.-..,-----'-- ,7 . 14-•-• ....*.effl”"",4. , , : i a 4111 Ei T., -.. •:, ,.., ,,,, - , . . ..:44,2=Wt.ilk.2'....-:- 1 , . '''r' ' .' ! q ." i' . -tam . . ... , ,_ --, ,,,,,s-„A.,•,:-•2--7. ,A=. ! • -.•• - 1.,. . :•: ‘ :... .,,. - - .. . ...- - : ,..„.,.--'4'•.• • . \ ....4* , 4 - _ _ , .....„. , ' 4 _...7iei .fc-*A.,-.. .,,,,10:4,ts th ,,.i.i;•:, . ,„ . _ - .-. ..,.• 1",i..15," '':M,I:0'. , k'. •A„:;* / i ,' •.... ,, , .. - ' '' . . .4.1sg4 '-1:41.,"`"?;.- - .„,,,..-re•10,-,:t.).Y.:,st,.:,;,.... . .. .... .: ..,, .--, -.'.?;!,4-,,,,L,:,..,....*; ...._. 1 ...._ _ ,..„..;,, ., A. f..i,....!';:4 )..4, . _ . . " • ' • - • • . n.!':.1-",,,t VIr-,;‘,i-- _ .--- •,, =.---- - - i ,,,..A. ,,i:,;4 .; , T. 1 f • 301 . ---. ..------------ ...-. i-- '" - '• ' . •'..,4,',!*'..;47.- . , • .. • -•,. . , ---• . ... ,. , ... . . ' . -, .....,-• • - - . . ,-..,........--,.. . , _ ..• .___ - ............ --- - -- -- - , •if' , -4.,. .............— ...,. . 4- -- Art ......., . ..... __ .. -v.-„ .- . - -„,„....„.......... .r... , .. — , -;--4: .igi, - - ---' ..,- _ iroo. '%..x, •,), e. 1 �� j ,P1► J � 116. ad 1. T : . 410'-‘14t %A gia, � iA ..401eft i \ + 44 ' /1' .` Ir Itik- is '` y6; r �R ii ".`,"a v . y ltA 4 fir. `M` mar "r+. > _ .i 4 . . r' *- N • it t ` a ; 1 ,T� . ,.. _. _7_.,-- ... , ._.1 _ _ ,_...._ .......4 1 -. _ • • .2-. rr--...,,_''•-ii_t_ff--- •- -- - IP} -I)( ' (g) ' '1..1 ‘,..,4. .. c. ' -' ' N 4. , f.V1 I ,7;`,',*\ -* 'if k ire tet` etc ` l �1. alt r. 4`� /. 1 - !r 11. t� ii -; - ♦ ,. I �} ___4{{{* � .' • 199 • f ', - Z / -.' �{"',�,t, { ,',�a% '� , .rx Sad` � � 0,, ..,...-„,...4.: ,£ " yr ,' ,-- 44-.i.- `'; t,. L • ' ' I sok ! .7 r1i �1_r •x�r, il!! 1. ill W ' . - :.r. .•-- '' - . . ICI 1 I II ' ii 7nv Ilk-. - 11 t, tit ...• _ ,..0,_ i...,__ _ 6......--...-- • ,.. -i4 .., as_ .-.7":-7,i- 0H- if-- li t } e 'v � II -i _ J ti ti • [ 1 , .......",tiii,.........‘" ,, • . APP-114 , - trilip ,,_... ss% . ., ‘ ' ", , „te ,.. / . .,,/k , ,1 ...,it., iar .,•••• S P . " 41i a ."' ii j '� • V\. .//,- _ 1T•'' ,r'i- . .w ms`s. . ,'.;'-. j /� / 4. = : cis� . •;?". . , NCI:- -_ tea+f "--- f p ' l " . �'� �1 l l r +6� ��r.r.2 ,' a+ .4# !r -.1. + �r—_ a '• '' a `'{ • i. .: . M �..',,,f-,-.-4.,' 'i f - ' - . •,,1„,,,1„....4.-i.,,,,, ,,..._.. _1 • !moi$ y, { i1 T7 i Ili 1.1 i ;' 44 mow_ a3M F; = - ' _ !NM 1 _ a totadibi '.':li: .,,,J-idiell.41110 --- — ---- _ i�416. i -I , - .,111,11: .fl . ..„. .,itt.....7.4‘i ,...... .... , H Jyyy''' l a\ , • ''"�! `' -- ate. . * a $ r ( , r ► •1 _ :HP L k iy / ` 410641, _ ,y4.',� ',gr -t.a �` 9 { .�' a - ./� - 4k r !.:: ter- :, e` ' 3 ' 1 .r 9 n � ;1 ° -� _ * 1. • �4A� ./ y .: ' E ! III '••f. -, . , _,....-N--,I t" N t iF i? i1 { j � a ) ' ea 4'7 z f R e J 1. ,�_1•.-- --- a ' • ' — '", 1 1 ,1 k r�11 V a' Imo' : I -s -a Y^e. .- i • ..7 -,• "F I'I Y.S ♦ '.'�'7 'Is.... 'a +{.. r:fa �.1/� *.;-:,�t r '�. S ��. '‘‘...4w,,,•::.,,-,•-.1.,, ,,,e,,,,,,- ' ti • . • ' yam; i 7 t • '' tp 111 t. r :, 4 , ;. 'Z" - } • -'~� (- �1Ve r '� tiyr�jt + ,q£ � �l• «'t' '1�V�'73. -1:';:•3/4-1144.1•1‘",,,I, v�� �'k dr`ya\}i fi v.. �•" ! `+� \ • 1�7'•� I. , _ --- ,:-. Si .-:: h .. 34, . •, _. .,,•,,h,., ; o.:, ,i,...,, , ,.,.„,;1..., ,..[.. 1. , • „,„ ,.i, . . • : __,....... . . ,„_._ , ,..... , , 41 dif jFil " ;, i : _ 1 ' 11,"r . X11 l (--,.._..P41 -„::' l r" .• .. 11.-\''''''''' '''' __ . _ . • . , •• _ _ • ilir — _ _ filikiliar-4r*- '.. Jr . di 4 -i i :,,i i A - i -- _--. ..e - ..,__„.._ --AlPii4;;ii10004111,.. - ''''''' 1 ..! • . , 1.0111 11 iii- i _ -pec At--: _: - -t.. lir . • P 14'.*: , r . ...„..r:;10:rr.,. ± 46: �� I '►t Vii. ..��� , ra" �.'.��4 1 �i. t"....".%)••• t / 311' ....kr• I ,.4., . ilipA . . :.. . ., L ., _ j / .. • . . , .. .2 , ..._ , ...., • , . . .. ..,, „„L, .... • • , i„.. •• • , „...., ............:......, , ,., . ii,.. ‘• , .,.... A . $• l!Fad«:...T.-fi • '• 'w+i r r - wit . Iliteito 4„,,. 1. 4 }' , • '; 41E1,7. `~yam•,o ,0It'd r� }* -o • ',.... ...*. , . If, ow, ..-,...4.4y v,/if.opf .. , : _4:004, ,.., • 7 , . .... , .,,,,,Tr: ... ,/. 44$44...i ''441/ or'4”. ' ,..• ,,„," ',` .. Z !, 4*,::„.4110. 4. , 14 . . ., Aig 4t +mll .� ; 1� ¶lk I f4iii ft _ ,....... .. a ._ ,,/,.. . . a s ... . , 4,... 1 olik 1 , : — _ ,. - ,..... 1„„,_ , , E1, :--,..---.....- , , .„, ,1„.... ,__,,.. .�i liA"‘irri ma .•- +n . . '�4-11,_ � t _ i ' i • • 7 ' viienwo.....„:vate .. s . . . , , , .*. V . „,a.. .. 10, „ ,;, ,,,,,.4,' d * .'•.-: 't "l' •, 44•444 4 • T .• .*".00•Ve_ .°' ' ,„„„ •• . ••s- . . • '. • y- ... - . , .. ,,,, , . \r-1) • r i 111 ,y � . ill �+ �I. , • -r` `* ►. L .1..,,...., `,.1- •. X11. a _ _ i ate ,: , Yl ` ,,„, - iiii-'' `.- ' -".�."... - �- ill .. �..1;ice` . - - - -_, '' k -r _ � � 0wr• • . -v d•-•-,. flit.. )4' f. '„.4it 4fri .•. - '/• - • /P-.- ."411.., • r i • t '� •a i', •. a 'R'',�. r • Y , • • r- - t1. Ittil _ . 4" Mit • ._• ' Iiii ,‘ , r . 4._ , .A', ' - . 11K , . ......(0 meimonsoi , :: ;AO:: il.,:,...„.. ,,.. -. - Y !?:1'....4 .`ale?1%7- t +J� ,� ' i lit ...0005:0101400..„... _-. , '—i• • - 4•4•4 ' • • •., �+ 1- f , ^. - " toy`l f .`4?� • • • • .440:: • . \ cTi. - . wig . w _ � 3 -. � . • :' ' ..T • S....." y _ , .... . - .... -,.,. )4,- ,,. 1 .. , . . . • . $ . . , .. , ip. i 4.... _. .. .. . ., ...,... . •:'• • Al a _ , r •. , ... •• • , ... ‘ : . `1• SIM- r ''. , M .-n/` 1 ^I4, 411 it: A. ' t .`, a i '. ► 4, „ ' w� • ` / . it , ..�W1,,t • r 4, ', 'M'. • •par• � ' + +- ,,,, ,,'‘' ...r .tk .,n.,,,.a n .141.4 . ' . , ,./ ' • vel I 1 •� as '„ tr, "4 , e Nr• I lit, {y ' J ,.� , �e 4, I , A.*. 44, 40: , ' , .01 i �' Gni s i '7 ' .d bl aM ,1 JY _ 1 % •1113th ' II - •', '. .�� rt ..amb., Q , s . 1 r• N i, nom► `•m911 , • • r • • ' III --x -. �� # it 0 ,. +4111,"V 11k6aigar t 11611111.10 ' It -.... r:.,.‘ ,..„) u 4 A * . 'sr - . • € . . . I r i'l I I I I 4.1 -4 ‘ lik$ . .... • e .t. ..... 4.. .4 . . . . , . _ . , „. . ., , 214 rillt lii,...• , f • lb' iq _• I., 1 •I .M 11111 ``. X191 j r \...,00 Y ' • 6 k o- ,..11111: ,,,07,, . .rrA -i;' ' �m 911 � ' . SII°'4t, - iLir,, \ All +rte • • 'r ` II 4.i r, , _'how r ` p1 '� , S I• 'VIII' , .10 illibeie •,;01,.,41111‘.. • 4't• . .------ ---- , ---- l i - / . + / h,,,. I,11 Yl '.Y'II II11 ,y.N - - ij .._ - ____ _________ ,400 , .... LEGAL NOTICE - STATE=OF NEW YORK) NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF )SS: APPEALS MARC CO OF y�UFFO�LK) THURSDAY,MARCH 28,2002 �" i, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pur- s,3.tJ ,e1,1� a4 -of Matfityck, in said f,• suant to Section 267 of the Town Law } . and Chapter 100(Zoning),Code of the county, being duly sworn, says that he/she is Principal Town of Southold,the following appli- clerk of THE SUFFOLK TIMES,a weekly newspaper,pub- by y the SOUTHOLD be heard duringHOLD TOWN public hear- ingslished at Mattituck, in the Town of Southold, County of BOARD OF APPEALS at the Town Suffolk and State of New York,and that the Notice of which Hall,53095 Main Road,Southold,New York 11971,on THURSDAY.MARCIi the annexed is a printed copy, has been regularly pub- . 28.2002,at the time noted below(or as fished • in said Newspaper once each week soon thereafter as possible). j , 7:05 p.m. Appl. No. 4962-- 1 ,for / weeks successively, ®commencing ROGER J.and LESLIE WALZ This + on the �D day is a request for a Variance under Article , XXIV Section_100 242A,based on the of sioe6.i7 20002 Building_Inspector's May- 2, 2001 -Notice 1,of Disapproval regarding the ' proposed second-story addition to exist- ing dwelling. The reason stated in the / 'rinClpal Clerk I Notice of Disapproval states that the 1-existing structure has a nonconforming I • setback of less than 10 fee[and 15 feet -'(,� on the side yards, and as a result, the Sworn to before me this ? addition of the second-story represents day of 114-41/1-CA 20 0 of , an increase in the degree of nonconfor- mity. Location of Property: 2505 Old .a ' /)- nAckuk : Orchard Road,East Marion,NY;Parcel ` , 1000-39-6-5.(The hearing was conclud- LAU RA'E. BON DARCH U K ed on November29,2001,and reopened Notary Public, State of New York at the request of the applicants' attor- , No 01806067958 ' neys.) Qualified in Suffolk County OS- 7:45 p.m. Appl. No. 5058 — I My Commission Expires Dec.24,20.- PETER 0.,PETER & VAL LEONIAK -'-"-__ •' ' ' (Continuation from February 28,2002). This is a request for Variances under 'Zoning Code Sections 100-30A.3 and 100-31 based on the Building Inspector's November 29, 2001 Amended-Notice-of-Disapproval-The I applicant proposes Parcels 1 and 2,each} with less than 40,000 sq. ft. in size. Parcel#1-will also contain less than 125 ft.of lot width(frontage),and includes the existing accessory garage on a lot, presently vacant and without a principal use. Location of Property: 2040 Pine Tree Road, Cutchogue; 1000-98-1-15, 16 and 17(approx. 1.5 acres as-exists). The Board of Appeals will hear all persons,or their representative,desiring to be heard at the hearing,or desiring to submit written statements before the conclusion of each of the above hear- ings.The hearing(s)will not start earlier than designated.Files are available for review o :gular-T_own?-fall business .ys between 8 and 3 p.m.If you have questions,please do not hesitate to call (631)765-1809. Dated:March 19,2002 GERARD P.GOEHRINGER,CHAIR- MAN SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF -APPEALS Town Hall 53095 Main Road,P.O.Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971-0959 2266-ITM28 l:S. Po tat Y •l= -a, C R. ED MAIL RE E0.1"\ (Domestic MaillOnly;Na'Insurance CI, a•e Provided ru 'n- 0 t,44: , II (I' s g lE MI / Postage $ **[? ' 'UNIT ID: 0952 a rs- Certified Fee � h MA Return Receipt Feb •Th44.4,::# UT (Endorsement Required) t !_.CJ 1p Restricted Delivery Fee, .. AO (Endorsement Required) �yj O Total Postage&Fees' $ �+ Al J4; e Y ; 2G® rtl -CSI. o� m Sent ToDa flax— n Street,Apt N,, �_ `! ti 2,9 - L allll-- Li or PO Box No P x ' I� r/ p city,State,ZIP+I0 -F •l/ tor) iq IIP -t PS Form 3800,January.2001 11 - ' 6. IS See Reverse forinstruc Pi a • 7a iV/[K '(Domestic.Mai)Only;No Insurance d a.a 'row.e•- ru rn iy) Postage $ , g r>;� '' 'o y. Certified Fee -'i;1_ ' `1L 7� *4 Postmar /"- Return Receipt Fee �r--,�r� Here u7 (Endorsement Required) _ �V '� �� Z O aAll p Restricted Delivery Fee V :P IN; O (Endorsement Required) t.. O Total Postage&Fees $ e3Atf "i,,,,... 4,,-.:- N ti R1 Sent To --" C„ctw o0- +Vi(9)(1ia Thorp Street,Apt No, O ,12.._ � 11_J—v-V4-/� or PO Box No Nv-o orCss c p - ' O City •tate,ZIP+4 `` .►. Cu Ile ' 11 " N 116-70 PS Form 3800,January 2001 O U See Reverse for Instruc:s CERTIFIED MAIL RE. • (Domestic Mail Only;No Insurance Ce a•e Provided ►11.1 o _ � FAM t R:TI1 (? 974AflAi'ce. �' ,2 ni Postage ,$ . -411 4 ,!'"r. ID: 0952 , Certified Fee , , 0:) ,.,0. Postmark Lnn Receipt I � ( orsemeturnteceRequired)Fee I ` 7�n Here IP O Restricted Delivery Fee r c Cl- �:e KVD81,3 p (Endorsement Required) J r CI Total Postage&Fees $ ,.4-'7 ` ' 03/19/02 mO Sent To j1Of Int('S_ "�1-_C_ .S CI ftb,Inc. a Street,A/hilt No, // 11.{'� ' or PO Box No P•6,�_60x ! O Ciry,State,ZIP+4 of Mari i „ l'.3'.., '5 �. r PS Form 3800,January 2001 F --R-v-r'-f.r In truc . 1. . 'ostal - 7 - -, ® T . . (Domestic Mail Only;No Insurance C6 .ge Provided— ...0 IT' 1-r) a. il ___,,f,,-,, �f_ IT Postage Ipt',T 11l O 5 r'•U 6,0 k, Certified Fe:ie r"" t rL. Postmark Return Receipt Feet Art?4.,- Here u7 (Endorsement Required)V4 , !�' CI O Restricted Delivery Fee •/„- ° K.K.3 O (Endorsement Required) O Total Postage&Fees 19/4 rU f�1 Sent To alaril h_ �)fir' 0 Street,Apt No% Ir/-yI ^ / p p j /� '- or PO Box No 2-5556lo4_��/,� c yyy,_/E1 Po.8 {�3 l7 City,State,ZIP+4 L r Wt� Vl-Lot t I� ' 4`, 11 I I _g N I 1'i 3• PS Form 3800,January2001 --R-v-r - . . tree; .1.116111MME:i4 nisi: - ' -T A ' 4111110 • (Domestic Mail Only;No Insurance Cc:, -•e Provided a- V7 it) 1t_= i ii tE� q A i7 n ,EI �L.a t � VERB•-BEACH,i(FL u ."96 s ix 1. a L !S. c-? tr.-, P1 Postage $ /^/1 (-1. q UNIT III: 0952 t� e 'Certified Fee /2„,„ v .124, 0Q -D VVV l� {{�i` Postmark eturn Receipt Fee 'I� Here Lri ( ndorsement Required) 1 $ .dY CI v O Restricted Delivery Fee ('I C1er e K Tl8Ki p (Endorsement Required) 1 .Q Jnr O Total Postage&Fees $ -. ©�J�T/Q'ru ' rtl Sent r i" r �C,A) 0l :.*1;'''') -„.`., U Street, No,) ail CO or PO Box No.1 j Ij p00 1►at Dr. r O City,State,ZIP+¢►U� O pita G i/ ' PL ?�^b3 t,- Urir Wflni (� PS Form 3800,Janua 208 ED MA R • ' (Domestic Mail Only;No Insurance C4) a.e Provt.e. ru IJ7 -i`• r.:-=' 1:�`' f,' h '.! n Q-; ' ROCKVILLE 'i7<,,, i ►.� t 1.:_a ��'+ lc rn •ostage UNIT IUe 0952 • t�1) C+`ified ftMak l.i 1'1 Postmark Return R= eipt Fee 11�'� b Here O (Endorsement',quire. i IJ Restricted Delrve F' Clerk: KVUBK.7 p (Endorsement Requi.:,...4`'` , �1 O Total Postage&Fees Iffigra.: 03/19/02 IU Sent T • CI dwUn .P-.4-Vl Cqia1_a.7 CACP a Street,OApt Noo. I (Oy�r /�� � or PO Box No. V\VI .]� \ �� O City,State IPP+Q �,�1 J I aorta) N U 115 70 h- l/Ay" II'lOr VISIT Yc7I1Irll1- .M •� IT4 MTX&IIfiMITIT oas num owl ii7=viret till F\111X0 - Domestic Mail Only No Ins r., - ilikragimmtm Q- - - i {su +;µ- t-n VEl;MEACH z'F L S 329631 Ir 1 .i .-( �% c?; ''7: a ///ttt,,, Postage $ ^ 1;s,3f; UN ,J; ��¶ Certified Fee / , l 04� i'r ` `�Q { Postmark J2 u7 R rn Receipt Fee /i Here 173 ( rsement Required) I 1 g� 'L 0 Restricted Delivery Fee ;e KZ3 H 1� (Endorsement Required) ill: V�� CI Total Postage&Fees $ �,�� 01042,n ru 2 Nal rn / o >N al d-14't 0i 1 24.170h • fr l eA- ,, Street,Apt No; O or PO Box No 12._i flf obrl,no1 ��l 3F City State,ZIP+4` 'eM 0 ,,a ll it FL 32,6 PS Form 3800,January 200011 _ ee.•everse or nstru i.iv Mil tl•1ir• . ERTIFIED MAI RE ='' - • • (Domestic Mali Only;No Insurance :•e Provt•e. N ` rTn EAST-MARION, -Y 11919 - ' --Q . m Postage $ „}' �w"! /jt 0952 r- /He Certified Fee N '-� i3_`4: • ark Return Receipt Fee ,; a He'_ 11-11 (Endorsement Required) '� O . t_] Restricted Delivery Fee C1> z7,IN O (Endorsement Required) g. ,_!,, _ -/18/02.. '/� `�"C/ T'�� O Total Postage&Fees $ RI Om Sent To��/(}l(�i(_ Street,Ap( No,��I r- - -` -F " Ci IMl� / c_ 0 or PO Box No T "BOX O City,State,ZIP+4 ,11 ' / r V►I o_(1\1r )1q3°Iq3 PS Form 3800,January 2001 See Reverse for nsttuction- a: n Complete items 1;2,and 3;Also complete A Sigr1aiure item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. ( ❑ gS II Complete • Print your name and address on the reverse X J �� Addressee so that we can return the card to you. B Rec.iv..by(Printed Name) C pate of o livery IN Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front if space permits. Litt 3 DO 6 1 Article Addressed to D. Is delivery address different from item 1'9 0 es If YES,enter delivery address below. 0 No Ralph Martin, Jr. 2555 Old Orchard Lane , P.O. Box 203 • East Marion, New York 11939 3. Service Type • Certified Mail 0 Express Mail 0 Registered S Return Receipt for Merchandise ❑ Insured Mail 0 C.O D 4 Restricted Delivery'?(Extra Fee)_ _._— 0 Yes 2. Article Number --- (Transfer from service label) '--—7 00 1 Q3 20 0 0 0 5_ 6 ],3__5 5 6 PS Form 3811,August 2001 • :,Domestic Return Receipt 102595-01-M-250e UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE I _I I First-Class Mail Postage&"Fees Pani • USPS I II II I Permit No.G-10 • Sender: Please print your name, address, and ZIP+4 in this box • WICKHAM, WICKHAM &BRESSLER, P.C. MAIN ROAD, P.O. BOX 1424 I RE res N_ 1952 �1 e 2002 " :1 i,2�ii�„iiiti►lsi�i,=�i,iii,�►iii=�i,I i36i,�iii Eli�it�ii k(IVO' :14 I04:14M111r4111:1&%1 �31LTCOMPLETE THIS SECTION ON D I194:1' • Complete items 1,;2,and 3.AIso completir A Signature item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired ��/ 7 ❑Ag. II Print your name and address on the reverse v (Ge,u.•ti + , e— I t - �A Addressee so that we can return the card to you. B. Received by(Printed Name) C Date of Delivery ■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front if space permits. F. I+P�S S .3l 20 ID-2- D Is delivery address different from item 19 0 Yes 1 Article Addressed to: If YES,enter delivery address below: El No Gardiners Bay Estates Club, Inc; P.O. Box 4 East Marion, New York 11939 3. Service Type • Certified Mail 0 Express Mail Ik‘ rl ❑ Registered girReturn Receipt for Merchandise ❑ Insured Mail 0 C.O.D. 4 Restricted Delivery (Extra Fee) ❑Yes 2. Article Number --_--- -- (Transfer from service label) '__7 001 _0320 0005_6_7_13____S_602 PS Form 3811,August 2001 , Domestic Return Receipt 102595-01-M-2505 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE I I FirstUSPS Class Mail Postage&i Y411 T4aL • ► • • • ► COMPLETE THIS SECTION • Complete items 1,2,and 3.'Also complete i•'ature item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. ❑Agent • Print your name and address on the reverse 0.41A4.._`'� ` "t ❑Addressee so that we can return the card to you. B. Received by(Printed Name) C Date of Delivery • Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, , �, � / �T/v 2 9 or on the front if space permits. D. Is delivery address different from item 19 0 Yes 1. Article Addressed to. If YES,enter delivery address below: ❑ No Ralph Martin, Jr. 2555 Old Orchard Lane P.O. Box 203 East Marion, New York 11939 3.pS..�ervice Type • • -tit—Certified Mail ❑ Express Mail ❑ Registered '(3eturn Receipt for Merchandise ❑ Insured Mail ❑ C.O D. 4. Restricted Delivery?(Extra Fee) ❑Yes 2. Article Number (Transfer from service label), ? ,;._T7 01i 0 3 2 Q ;;H4-5 6711i3.752 _s PS Form 3811,August 2001 Domestic Return Receipt 102595-01-M-2509 _■ POSTAL SERVICE First-Class Mail 11 P6stage&Fees Paid USPS Permit No.G-10 • Sender: Please print your name, address, and ZIP+4 in this box • WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER, P.C. - -- MAIN ROAD, P.O. BOX 1424 MATTITUCK, N.Y. 11952 • • C -- ,r f RECFAirn PIAR 2 0 2002 iiSE:2+0g54 OS i ii ilii l i i lil ! -111 E»MK•/17/l:J441r41/0/AS:140ROMCOMPLETE THIS SECT!. •4 • Complete items 1,'2,and 3.•Also complete® Signature item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. - � ❑Ay,, • Print your name and address on the reverse X Ar / .0-i 1.4i2 ❑Addressee , so that we can return the card to you. B Received- (Printed Name) C Date of Delivery • Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front if space permits. 1. Article Addressed to. D Is delivery address different from item 17 0 Yes If YES,enter delivery address below 0 No Donald H. & Elizabeth H. Frazier .et 7E, 1821 Mooringline Dr' .'\\ 3F N 1.1 Vero Beach, FL 329.m'� : s Service Type ,:t%) 4R-Certified Mail 0 Express Mail `❑ Registered Return Receipt for Merchandise OP� ®IA 0 Insured Mail 0 C O D 4 Restricted Delivery'?(Extra Fee) 0 Yes 2 Article Number 7001__0320__ 0005_671.3_ 56],`9 (Transfer from service label) , PS Form 3811,August 2001 Domestic Return Receipt 102595-01-M-2509 _,sTAL SERVICE First-Class Mail Postage&Fees Paid USPS Permit No.G-10 • Sender: Please print your name, address, and ZIP+4 in this box • WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER, P.C. MAIN ROAD, P.Q. BOX 1424 '. MATTITUCK, N.Y. 11952 1- . RECEIVED MAR 2 6 2002 R!)11,;;5 II11 I1111IIII II I•M•III,!1111111111III1111111111111111111111� ' l2 14 NBA Mreeirlial*IVIIMIcj of/Lo COMPLETE TH , • Complete items 1,2,and 3.Also complete n re item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. /7 • Print your name and address on the reverse , so that we can return the card to you. Received by(Panted Name) CRat • Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front if space permits. - - 4/!/4 D. Is delivery address different from item 19 ❑Yes 1 Article Addressed to. If YES,enter delivery address below. 0 No Edward A. & Virginia Thorp 12 Norcross Street 'Rockville Centre, New York 11570 3 Service Type ® Certified Mail ❑pLr�,E_,xpress Mail ��� 0 Registered Return Receipt for Merchandise 0 Insured Mad 0 C O.D 4. Restricted Delivery?(Extra Fee) 0 Yes 2 Article Number 4 ,7 aa1 _a3 an :._a 011.5....._6-.7.1-1 s 6-2 6- (Transfer from service label) PS Form 3811,August 2001 Domestic Return Receipt 102595-01-M-2509 _r(VICE 0 11 First-Class Mail Postage&Fees Pgicl USPS — Permit No G-10 • Sender: Please print your name, address, and ZIP+4 in this box • _ ------_,„Th it WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER, P.C. 12 fi1 MAIN ROAD, P.O. BOX 1424 MATTITUCK, N.Y. 11952 I , 1- ii, 1,,1 .- k ECEWP 02-i';' ' 2-5 202 i II Ili i i 1 I III i i I 1 j• 1. 11.1 i.i. ii CIS iiiittiliiiiilnitifilwituffilililliii:iffidill:sulddi. 1/C)01 2- y4Ni . OM'L " SS el • r' THIS SECTION .1 . r IN Complete items 1,2,and 3.Also complete A. Si. - re item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. /1 / ,, ,�A��g�ent ■ Print your name and address on the reverse / Agent see so that we can return the card to you. B Received by(Printed Name) C. Date eltvery ■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, /�,, or on the front if space permits. fAg6/1 / (14-Aei/C/i//1// 3!l Oo'Z 1 Article Addressed to D. Is delivery address different from item 1? 1:1Yes Gardiners Bay Estates Club, Inc. If YES,enter delivery address to `AS o P.O. Box 44;. East Marion, New York 11939 (� 73 • 1 3. Service Type '� ' 'K Certified Mail ❑ Expr s ele }, CI .Registered Return Receipt-for erchandise 0 - ❑ Insured Mail ❑ C O D 4 Restricted Delivery (Extra Fee) ❑Yes 2. Article Number — -- ----------___- (Transfer from.•serv,ceilabel) ' : I• _–.7°PA,.0:3 a0: 0 0 0 5 6 7]13 3 7E4 5.1' _. •PS Form 3811,August 2001 • Domestic Return Receipt 102595-01-M-2509 VITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE I_I First-Class Mail I 11 Postage&Fees Paid I I USPS Permit No G-10 • Sender: Please print your name, address, and ZIP+4 in this box • WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER, P.C. ti MAIN ROAD, P.O. BOX 1424 MATTITUCK, N.Y. 11952 cc RECEIVED MAR 2 0 2007 7 '14 ,0, • ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD: NEW YORK In the Matter of the Application of ROGER WALZ and AFFIDAVIT OF - LESLIE WALZ SERVICE BY MAIL Parcel ID #1000-37-6-5 STATE OF NEW YORK) ) ss.: COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) Amy M. Beasley, being duly sworn, deposes and says: On the 18th and 19th days of March, 2002, I personally mailed at the United States Post Office in Mattituck,New York,by CERTIFIED.MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED, a true copy of the attached Legal Notice and map in prepaid envelopes addressed to current owners shown on the current assessment roll verified from the official records on file with the Southold Town Assessors Office, for every property which abuts and is across a public or private street, or vehicular right-of-way of record, surrounding the applicant's property, as follows: Edward A. &Virginia Thorp 1000-37-6-3.3 12 Norcross Street Rockville Centre,New York 11570 Donald H. &Elizabeth H. Frazier 1000-37-6-4 1821 Mooringline Drive 3F Vero Beach, Florida 32963 Ralph Martin, Jr. 1000-37-6-6.1 2555 Old Orchard Lane P.O. Box 203 East Marion,New York 11939 Gardiners Bay Estates Club, Inc. 1000-37-5-23.2 P.O. Box 4 East Marion,New York 11939 l� kveasiik(Amy M. :easl Sworn to before me this 020 d'`day of March, 202 Notary Public CHERYL CROHAN NOTARY PUBLIC,State of New York No.39-4970347 Qualified in Suffolk County Commission Expires February 4, I ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD:NEW YORK In the Matter of the Application of AFFIDAVIT OF -1e11-144112 of A licant POSTING p ) Regarding Posting of Sign upon Applicant's Land Identified as 1000- 3 - 6 - _------- COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) STATE OF NEW YORK) I, Prx47 residing at .315 2.cee,r7/— , New York, being duly sworn, depose and say that: On the /7 d ay of 2xi ,140,-;-4 personally placed the Town's official Poster, with the date of hearing and nature of my application, in a secure position upon niy property, located ten (10) feet or closer from the street or right-of- way - facing the street or facing each street or right-of-way abutting this property;* and that I hereby confirm that the Poster has remained in pla • for seven days prior to the d9.te of the subject hearing date,which hearing date a•hown to be r• / signature) Sworn to before me this 0-") day of .,19 Zo OZ • / JOYCE M. 9NSNotary Public.Stateto ofof New York )14,ajvaj,(_____4' No.4952246,Suffolk County ( otary Public) Term ExpirosJune 12, c)-_v03 *near the entrance or driveway entrance of my property, as the area most visible to passersby. MAR-22-2002 02:24P FROM: • TO:7659064 P:2'2 414116 ( ; ud ) _ • ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD:NEW YORK in the Matter of the Application of ROOFR WALZ and AFFIDAVIT OF LESLIE WALZ SERVICE DY MAIL Parcel IT)#1000-37-6-5 STATE OF NEW YORK ) ) ss.: COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) Amy M. Beasley,being duly sworn, deposes and says: On the 186 and 19th days ol'March,2002, 1 personally mailed at the United States Post Office in Mattituck, New York, by CERTIFIED MAIL,RETURN RECEIPT REQULS IED,a true copy of the attached Legal Notice and map in prepaid envelopes addressed to current owners shown on the current assessment roil verified from the official records on file with the Southold Town Assessors Office. 1.,r every property which abuts and is across a public or private street, or vehicular tight-uf-way of record,surrounding the applicant's property, as follows: Fadward A. &Vhginia Thorp 1000-37-6-3.3 12 Norcross Street Rockville Centre, New York 11570 Donald H. &Elizabeth H. Frazier 1000-37-6-4 Int Mooringline Drive 3F Vero Beach, Florida 32963 Ralph Martin, Jr. 1000-37-6-6.1 2555 Old Orchard Lane P.O. Box 203 Fast Marion,New York 11939 Gardiners Bay Estates Club, Inc. 1000-17-5-23.2 P.O, Box 4 Fast Marion,New York 11939 Jicjsz4, Amy M, :easle) Sworn to before me this /07 7A�'`day of March, 205 _ Notary Public CHERYL OROHAw f NOTARY PUBLIC,Stat®of Now Yo No 31-4970341 Ouahf od in Suffolk County C $ —, .�� c mmIsslon Gxplr�s Feoruay 4, MAR-22-2002 02:24P FROM: 70:7659064 P:1{2 • W ICKHAM, t7VICKHAM&BRESSLER, P.C. P.O. Box 1424, 10315 Main Road,Maltituek,New York 11952 Phone(631)298-8353 —Fax(631)298-8565 To: Pa..tia. Fax No.: l Lth A From: [ L.Ltc . _. . Re: 1,0a ir Includes: Gt ,.k x u I c Date:422j(Y2 - #of Pages including cover sheet 2— This transmission contains information confidential and/or legally privileged. It is intended for use only by the person to whom it is directed. If you have received this telecopy in error,please notify us by telephone immediately so that we can arrange for the return of the documents to us at no cost to you. If you do not receive all of the pages indicated,please call as soon as possible at the number referenced above. 4 „ ,,,,,,,,, iip APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS • ” 0 %UFFOL"( o ®�® ® Southold Town Hall Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman d i � � :t 53095 Main Road Lydia A.Tortora '1'; k � P.O. Box 1179 George Horning �,. ®^7 �� Southold, New York 11971-0959 � Ruth D. Oliva . �� ZBA Fax (631) 765-9064 �' � � Vincent Orlando = 1 +,0i0 Telephone (631) 765-1809 /''° http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF MAY 2, 2002 Appl. No. 4962 - ROGER J. AND LESLIE WALZ. Parcel #37 -6-5 Location of Property: 2505 Old Orchard Road, East Marion. BASIS OF APPEAL: Building Inspector's Notice of Disapproval dated May 2, 2001, denying a permit for a second-story addition stating that the proposed addition to a non- conforming structure is not permitted pursuant to Article XXIV Section 100-242A. The existing structure has a nonconforming side yard setback of 3 ft. from the easterly lot line and 6.5 ft. on the westerly line and the second-story addition represents an increase in the degree of nonconformity. 9 AREA VARIANCE REQUESTED: Applicants request side yard variances of 3 ft. and 6.5 ft. for a second-story addition instead of the code-required 10 ft. minimum for a single side yard and a total of 25 ft. for both side yards, all as shown on the maps (A-4, A-5, S-1) prepared by Fairweather-Brown Design Associates, Inc., dated March 16, 2001, May 1, 2001, May 14, 2001, and May 24, 2001. The second-story would create 1,615 ft. additional living space over an existing first floor living area of 1,087 sq. ft. and 722 sq. ft. attached garage. The expansion would create two bedrooms and a recreation room that would extend through the center of this very long, approximately 75 ft. +-, L-shaped house with widths that vary to a maximum of 38 ft. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held public hearings on this application on June 7, 2001; August 16, 2001; September 20, 2001; November 15, 2001; November 29, 2001, at which hearings written and oral evidence were presented. At the applicant's request, the hearing was re-opened March 28, 2002, at which time written and oral evidence were presented. Based upon all testimony, documentation, personal inspection of the property, and other evidence, the Zoning Board finds the following facts to be true and relevant: 1. PROPERTY FACTS: Applicants' property is located on the east side of Old Orchard Road in East Marion. The .215-acre lot (9360+- sq. ft.) was created prior to zoning as part of an old map subdivision known as Gardiner Bay Estates, Section Two. The lot is long and extremely narrow with water frontage of 54.89' on Gardiners Bay, and 257.4 ft. along the east property line and 265.0 along the west property line. Access to the property from Old Orchard Road is via a 20 ft. wide black top drive that angles sharply upward for a distance of 47 ft. in front of the adjoining property owners lot to the west. The property is improved with the applicant's one-story single-family residence, attached garage, porch, cabana and brick patios, all as shown on the site plans prepared by Fairweather-Brown Design Associates, Inc , dated May 16, 2001. a t 410 16 Page 2—May 2, 2002 Appl No 4962— R and L Walz 37 -6-5 at East Marion 2. The existing residence is an older waterfront home located on a very tiny, narrow lot, that is substantially elevated above the adjoining property owner on the west lot line. The applicants have owned the residence since 1980 and wish to expand the house in order to retire there in the future. Because the lot is so narrow, and the residence is already 75 ft. long, applicants propose a second-story addition to gain total living area of 2,202 ft. excluding an existing 722 sq. ft. attached garage. 3. The second-story would create 1,615 ft additional living space over an existing first floor living area of 1,087 sq. ft. and 722 sq. ft. attached garage. The expansion would create two bedrooms, a bath, recreation room and balcony that would extend through the center of this very long, approximately 75 ft. +-, L-shaped house and the east side, and over the full first floor on the west side The width of the house varies to a maximum of 38 feet. 4. The community consists of odd-sized substandard lots, some with residences such as the applicant's that were once summer cottages created prior to zoning. While the applicant's attorney submitted a map indicating many waterfront homes in the area have one-and one-half and two-story residences, the board finds that only three are less than 50-feet wide, and a majority are substantially larger than the applicants. 5. Nonetheless, some of the existing homes, particularly in the immediate waterfront area, are located close to the lot lines, and these neighbors offered support for the applicants' proposal. 6. Both adjacent residences, on the east and west of the applicants' property, are very close to the applicants' lot lines. On the east side, the adjoining neighbor's single-story residence is located 5 ft. to 6 ft. from the property line at the closest point. The neighbor sent a letter in support of the applicant stating that the nine ft. house-to-house distance allowed them to carry on conversations from their porches and share a flower bed. On this side, the applicant's architectural plans show a proposal to extend the existing first floor straight up with a gabled roof at the existing setback of three (3) feet. 7 The board notes that variances run with the land and that future owners may not appreciate the effects of a two-story, 75+-ft. long house set three (3) feet from the property line. The board also notes that because the applicant's existing house is only three (3)feet from the property line, fire vehicles have no access to the south water-side of the residence, and the proposed straight-up second story will only exacerbate the problem and further limit fire access to the east side of the residence. 8. Both the applicants' architect and attorney conceded that the proposed second-story with gabled roof on the east side was a "problem", and more massive and intrusive than the low, shed-type roof design on the east side of the house. They maintain that the 2 r '' a 40 Page 3— May 2, 2002 Appl No 4962— R and L Walz 37.-6-5 at East Marion straight design is necessary to achieve the applicants' desired 1615 sq. ft. of additional living space. 9. The board disagrees. The existing house is not a cottage but a substantial structure located too close to the lot lines on a very small lot. The property has constraints, and the negative impacts of a huge house on a tiny lot are not in the best interests of the health, safety and welfare of the community. The board believes the applicant can achieve additional living space by creating a smaller, less intrusive second-story addition on the east side. 10. On the west side of the applicant's existing residence, a brick path near the property line shows sign of erosion onto the adjoining property. The land slopes sharply upward from Old Orchard to the applicant's lot. The roof line of the objecting neighbor's one-half story residence is approximately level with the applicant's existing residence. The adjoining owner has expressed strong opposition to the proposed second-story addition. The neighbor's residence to the east also has a nonconforming setback (approximately 3.5 feet) to the lot line, and they maintain that the proposed addition will create a towering wall over their residence, and create problems of loss of privacy, water and septic contamination. Combined with the proposed setback of 6.5 ft. in this application, the total distance between the two residences would be nonconforming (approximately 10 feet total instead of 25-30 feet total for both dwellings). 11. To mitigate the impact to the westerly premises, applicants' architect designed a shed roof with an eave that would eliminate the gable roof and create a less severe roof line, similar to a modified pyramid. The second floor would not be incorporated over the L- shaped south side of the residence. The applicants have agreed to install french drains to contain roof run-off. REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: On the basis of testimony presented, materials submitted and personal inspections, the board makes the following findings: 1. A) Grant of the area variance on the west side of the residence will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The alternative drawing submitted by the applicants' attorney for a second- story addition with 10' and 15' side yard setbacks from the side property lines (that could be constructed without a variance) would create a straight-wall, towering effect, affecting the neighbor's property on the west side. Applicant's architect has designed a less massive, second-story addition with a lower roof line to mitigate the impact to the adjoining westerly neighbor. B) Grant of the area variance on the east side of the residence will produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby (3.5) 3 11b lir . , , Page 4— May 2, 2002 Appl No 4962— R and L Walz 37 -6-5 at East Marion properties. For reasons stated previously, the board believes that the requested variance to permit a 75 ft. long, straight-up, second-story, 3 ft. from the property line will be out-of keeping with the narrow width and small size of the property, and will be a detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the community. 2. The benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance. The applicant submitted a drawing indicating that a full-second floor could be added over the existing structure, which would not require variances and would comply with the code's 10 ft. minimum and 25 ft. total side yards. Neither the applicant nor the board believes that the example cited offers a reasonable design solution. The board does believe that the applicants can achieve the benefit of a second-floor addition on the east side with a modified pyramid roof line to provide a greater setback to the property line. 3. The variances requested are substantial. The applicants request total side yards of 9.5 ft instead of the code's 25-foot minimum. Although the magnitude of the second-story addition on the west side has been diminished by the proposed design, the design on the east side will create a 74+- ft. long, massive two-story structure, set three feet from the property line. 4. The alleged difficulty has been self-created. The code's minimum side yard setback were in effect at the time the applicant purchased the property in 1980 as a summer home. The desire to create a large house on a small lot can only be described as a self-created difficulty. 5. Because of the high elevation of the applicant's property over the adjoining westerly property, the existing erosion and roof runoff could be exacerbated by the proposed second-story addition. The board will condition its approval of a variance on the west side with the installation of French Drains. The requested variance at the east side will have an adverse impact on physical conditions in the neighborhood. The size and magnitude of the proposed second story will close off the waterfront, have an effect of wall-to-wall building, and create an unwarranted fire hazard for both firefighters and the residents. 6. Grant of the requested variance on the west side is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of second-story additions to a single- family residence, while preserving and protecting the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community. The requested east side variance is not the minimum necessary because the applicant can achieve additional living space by creating a smaller, less intrusive second-story addition 4 J 4 I I I 0 Page 5-May 2, 2002 Appl. No 4962- R and L. cNalz „fie/ 1/ 37.-6-5 at East Marion 0 \ RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD: In considering all of the above factors and applying the balancing test under New York Town Law 267-B, motion was offered by Member Tortora, seconded by Member Orlando, and duly carried, TO GRANT a Variance authorizing a second-story addition on the west side with a minimum setback of 6.5 ft. with the CONDITION that the second floor be constructed in full accordance with the site plan dated May 14, 2001 (S-1) prepared by Fairweather-Brown Design Associates, Inc., and made part of the record, and with a further CONDITION that French drains be installed to contain roof runoff on site, and reinforcement and reconstruction of the brick path; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, TO DENY a Variance authorizing a second-story addition on the east side with a minimum setback of 3 ft., and to GRANT ALTERNATIVE RELIEF authorizing a second-story addition with a minimum setback of seven (7) feet on the east side, with the CONDITION that the design and roof follow the modified pyramid design of the opposite (west) side second floor. A shed roof can be placed over the four (4) ft. distance from the existing roof line to the exterior wall of the second floor, or to the secondary roof of the second floor. This action does not authorize or condone any current or future use, setback or other feature of the subject property that violates the Zoning Code, other than such uses, setbacks and other features as are expressly addressed in this action. VOTE OF THE BOARD: Ayes: Members .= ringer Chairman , Tortora, and Orlando. (Absent were: Members Horning and YIiva.) This --solutio as ly a.2 r-d ,4-0). f, r` ..,,.--"GERARD P GOEHRINGER, CHAIRM A 1 ' - '- ' 5///0/0 L '-'f-.--r? /0;00 -- -_ (3D , -- , _,,. i P 5 ) COUN OF SUFFOLK\ f\u .. ie • � $(6%.\ _Ltd ,14.,'7 �i ROBERT J. GAFFNEY SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE THOMAS ISLES, AICP DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING DIRECTOR OF PLANNING ^ k , June 7, 2002 ' { 4/ An 14Z Town of Southold Zoning Board of Appeals Pursuant to the requirements of Sections A 14-14 to 23 of the Suffolk County Administrative Code, the following application(s)submitted to the Suffolk County Planning Commission is/are considered to be a matter for local determination as there appears to be no significant county-wide or inter-community impact(s). A decision of local determination should not be construed as either an approval or a disapproval. Applicant(s) Municipal File Number(s) Walz, Roger& Leslie 4962 Floyd King Trust 5045 Laoudis, Theodore &Angela 5077 Laoudis, Thoedore &Angela 5078 Ahlers, Paul & Patricia 5082 Carnesi, Anthony 5083 Kistner, John 5085 Wood, Joan 5087 Giacale, Louis & Sarah 5088 Bedell, John& Susan 5090 Young, Robert& Dorothy 5091 Arnold, Richard&Joan 5092 Edgewater III 5093 Buskard, Donald - 5094 Gusmer Realty 5096 Sleckman, James & Cathy 5097 Ketterer, Gwyneth 5103 Blackley, James 5107 DiBlasi, Robert 5112 Edgewater III 5120 Custom Designer Homes, Inc. 5121 Ellis, Scott& Constance 5122 CD LOCATION MAILING ADDRESS H LEE DENNISON BLDG. -4TH FLOOR ■ P 0 BOX 6 1 00 ■ (5 I 6) 853-5 190 100 VETERANS MEMORIAL HIGHWAY HAUPPAUGE, NY 1 1 788-0099 TELECOPIER(5 1 6) 853-4044 June 72002 *OLK COUNTY PLANNING DEPARIODIT Page 2 Como, Joseph& Christina 5128 Youngman, Arline 5129 Very truly yours, Thomas Isles Director of Planning S/s Gerald G. Newman Chief Planner GGN:cc G\CCHORNY\ZONING\ZONING\WORKING\LD2002 JAN\JUN\SD4962 JUN / f '''' / LOCATION MAILING ADDRESS H LEE DENNISON BLDG -4Th FLOOR ■ P 0 BOX 6 100 ■ (5 I 6) 853-5 190 100 VETERANS MEMORIAL HIGHWAY HAUPPAUGE, NY I 1788-0099 TELECOPIER(5 I 6) 853-4044 VP COUNTY OF SUFFOLK.) 1 5;t 4N. TV �=r'cayy'r 411. ;; •%-It i, 4 1 41 ROBERT J. GAFFNEY SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE THOMAS ISLES, AICP DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING DIRECTOR OF PLANNING June 7, 2002 (�s JCA! 1113 Town of Southold Zoning Board of Appeals Pursuant to the requirements of Sections A 14-14 to 23 of the Suffolk County Administrative Code, the following application(s)submitted to the Suffolk County Planning Commission is/are considered to be a matter for local determination as there appears to be no significant county-wide or inter-community impact(s). A decision of local determination should not be construed as either an approval or a disapproval. Applicant(s) Municipal File Number(s) Walz, Roger& Leslie 4962 Floyd King Trust 5045 Laoudis, Theodore &Angela 5077 Laoudis, Thoedore &Angela 5078 Ahlers, Paul &Patricia 5082 Carnesi, Anthony 5083 Kistner, John 5085 Wood, Joan 5087 Giacale, Louis & Sarah 5088 Bedell, John& Susan 5090 Young, Robert& Dorothy 5091 Arnold, Richard& Joan 5092 Edgewater III 5093 Buskard, Donald 5094 Gusmer Realty 5096 Sleckman, James & Cathy 5097 Ketterer, Gwyneth 5103 Blackley, James 5107 DiBlasi, Robert 5112 Edgewater III 5120 Custom Designer Homes, Inc. 5121 Ellis, Scott& Constance 5122 LOCATION MAILING ADDRESS H. LEE DENNISON BLDG -4TH FLOOR ■ P O. BOX 6100 ■ (5 16) 853-5 190 100 VETERANS MEMORIAL HIGHWAY HAUPPAUGE, NY 11788-0099 TELECOPIER(5 16) 853-4044 .,, -- June 7, 2002 S , , OLK COUNTY PLANNING DEPART, . r Page 2 Como, Joseph& Christina 5128 Youngman, Arline 5129 Very truly yours, Thomas Isles Director of Planning S/s Gerald G. Newman Chief Planner GGN:cc G\CCHORNY\ZONING\ZONING\WORKING\LD2002 JANUUN\SD4962 JUN LOCATION MAILING ADDRESS H LEE DENNISON BLDG. -4T1-1 FLOOR ■ P. 0 BOX 6100 • (5 I 6) 853-5 190 100 VETERANS MEMORIAL HIGHWAY HAUPPAUGE, NY I 1788-0099 TELECOPIER(5 I 6) 853-4044 die . June 4, 2002 Mr. Gerald G. Newman, Chief Planner Suffolk County Department of Planning P. 0. Box 6100 Hauppauge, NY 11788-0099 Dear Mr. Newman: Please find enclosed the following application with related documents for review pursuant to Article XIV of the Suffolk County Administrative Code: Appl. No. —4962 — Roger J. and Leslie Walz Action Requested: Front yard setbacks Within 500 feet of: ( ) State or County Road ( X) Waterway (Bay, Sound or Estuary) ( ) Boundary of Existing or Proposed County, State, Federal land. If any other information is needed, please do not hesitate to call us. Thank you. Very truly yours, Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman By: Enclosures 10 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS ' r ,//$,O�OSQf FO(,�co` Southold Town Hall Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman ���a� Gyd: 53095 Main Road Lydia A.Tortora t y Z P.O. Box 1179 George Horning " O t Southold,New York 11971-0959 Ruth D. Oliva y 0�/' ZBA Fax(631) 765-9064 Vincent Orlando = 491 jig +." Telephone(631) 765-1809 http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD May 10, 2002 Fairweather-Brown Design Associates P.O. Box 521 Greenport, NY 11944 Re: Appl. No. 4962 — Roger and Leslie Walz Variance Determination Dear Sir or Madam: Enclosed please find a copy of the variance determination with conditions regarding the above application. If you have any questions regarding the next step in this building permit/zoning review process, please feel free to call the Building Department (765-1802) for remaining documentation to complete the building permit file. We have today also furnished copies of the enclosed determination to both the Building Department and Eric J. Bressler, attorney for Mr. and Mrs. Walz. Thank you. Very truly yours, GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN Enclosure Copies of Decision to: Building Department Suffolk County Department of Planning r� � I. O. RECEIPT OF ZBA DECISION Appl. No. 4962—Roger Walz Decision Rendered May 2, 2002 1 Received 1N FE © 7WE' r 7 MAY I , )2 itipj IP lip NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS THURSDAY, MARCH 28, 2002 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Section 267 of the Town Law and Chapter 100 (Zoning), Code of the Town of Southold, the following applications will be heard during public hearings by the SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS at the Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York 11971, on THURSDAY, MARCH 28, 2002, at the time noted below (or as soon thereafter as possible). 7:05 p.m. Appl. No. 4962 — ROGER J. and LESLIE WALZ. This is a request for a Variance under Article XXIV, Section 100-242A, based on the Building Inspector's May 2, 2001 Notice of Disapproval regarding the proposed second-story addition to existing dwelling. The reason stated in the Notice of Disapproval states that the existing structure has a nonconforming setback of less than 10 feet and 15 feet on the side yards, and as a result, the addition of the second-story represents an increase in the degree of nonconformity. Location of Property: 2505 Old Orchard Road, East Marion, NY; Parcel 1000-37-6-5. (The hearing was concluded on November 29, 2001, and reopened at the request of the applicants' attorneys.) 7:45 p.m. Appl. No. 5058 - PETER & VAL LEONIAK — (Continuation from February 28, 2002). This is a request for Variances under Zoning Code Sections 100-30A.3 and 100-31, based on the Building Inspector's November 29, 2001 Amended Notice of Disapproval. The applicant proposes Parcels 1 and 2, each with less than 40,000 sq. ft. in size. Parcel #1 will also contain less than 125 ft. of lot width (frontage), and includes the existing accessory garage on a lot, presently vacant and without a principal use. Location of , Property: 2040 Pine Tree Road, Cutchogue; 1000-98-1-15, 16 and 17(approx. 1.5 acres as exists). The Board of Appeals will hear all persons, or their representative, desiring to be heard at the hearing, or desiring to submit written statements before the conclusion of each of the above hearings. The hearing(s) will not start earlier than designated. Files are available for review on regular Town Hall business days between 8 and 3 p.m. If you have questions, please do not hesitate to call (631) 765-1809. Dated: March 19, 2002. GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS Town Hall 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 N°1 J►4' FORM NO. 3 /)- TOWN OF SOUTHOLD f �� BUILDING DEPARTMENT ! �' U� �' SOUTHOLD,N.Y. 2 52001 NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL o x DATE; May 2, 2001 TO Amy Martin A/C Walz PO Box 521 Greenport NY 11944 Please take notice that your application dated March 16, 2001 For permit for 211d story addition to one family dwelling at Location of property 2505 Old Orchard Road East Marion County Tax Map No. 1000 - Section 37 Block 6 Lot 5 Subdivision Filed Map# Lot# Is returned herewith and disapproved on the following grounds proposed addition not permitted pursuant to Article XXIV Section 100-242A which states; Nothing in this Article shall be deemed to prevent the remodeling,reconstruction or enlargement of a nonconforming building containing a conforming use,provided that such action does not create any new nonconformance or increase the degree of nonconformance with regard to the regulations pertaining to such buildings. Existing structure has non-conforming setback of 3 feet from easterly side lot line and 6.5 feet on westerly side line, the addition of the second story represents an increase in the degree of non- conformity Authorized ature TOWN (:0 'i b;UTHOT D` _y-_= - ; - BUU D T,APPLICATION CHECKLIS! BUILDING DEP . • _ave or need the following,before applying plc TOWN 1:141;', �� Board of Health SOUTITOED,NY 11971 —, i 9 ' . 3 sets of Building Plans . TEL: 765-1802o sm L 0 � t D' .,. . , Survey . L''''1241'1"-- - PERMIT NO. Check - • - Septic Form • N.Y.S.D.E.C. . Trustees Examined ,20 Contact: Approved -,20 ," Mail to:. - Disapproved a/c 6 21/01 - . ` - , ' 3)/1)AAj" , Phone: Building Inspector APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT ' . ,Date , /6o , 200/ INSTRUCTIONS a. This application MUST be completely filled in by typewriter or in ink and submitted to the_Building Inspector with 3 sets of plans, accurate plot plan to scale. Fee according to schedule. b.Plot plan showing location of lot and of buildings on premises,relationship to,adjoining premises or public streets or areas, and waterways. - c.The work covered by this application may not be commenced before issuance of Building Permit. d.Upon approval of this application,the Building Inspector will issue a Building Permit to the applicant. Such a permit shall be kept on the premises available for inspection throughout the work. e.No building shall be occupied or used in whole or in part for any purpose what-so-ever until a Certificate of Occupanc- is issued by the Building Inspector. , , . APPLICATION IS HEREBY MADE to the Building Department for the issuance of a Building Permit pursuant to the , Building Zone Ordinance of,the Town of Southold, Suffolk County,New York, and other applicable Laws, Ordinances or Regulations, for the construction of buildings,,additions or alterations or for removal or demolition as herein described.The applicant agrees to comply with all applicable laws, ordinances,building code,housing code, and regulations, and to admit authorized inspectors on premises and in building for necessary inspections. u , .rte . � , / ,___..a' , (Signa%e of applicant or name,if a corporation) • ..e sa i %, , , - iiys (Mailing •i.ress .Lr..pplicant) State whether applicant is owner, lessee, agent, architect, engineer, general.contractor, electrician, plumber'or builder- • Name o er of premises ler v, ' //.5// ei /0,4-izJ ' : . - ;� (as'on the tax roll or latest deed) • If applicant is a corporation, signature of duly authorized officer - .(Name and title of corporate officer) •• . . . Builders License No. Plumbers License No. • . Electricians License No. ' Other Trade's License No. - - ' 1. Location of land on which proposed work_/� will be done: / c7/.6-0 -0 ® aee ct.N6 72-b gstp- Acle/ON ' House Number Street ' Hamlet - - County Tax Map No. 1000 Section 3 7 :Block Gp - .. , , s, Lot= ; Subdivision q />j,y S y Rs frfe.,�-, • 'Filed Map No. a7'5-�~ 'Lot' -e1 o` ' (Name) / D 2.: State existing use and occupanc , ises and intended use and occuAD roposed construction: a. Existing use and occupancy ' n `� - b. Intended use and occupancy i').1 /e.„- 4,pc.,e_.2JV - 3. Nature of work (check which applicable): New Building Addition - v - Alteration Repair- - Removal , Demolition - Other Work (Description) 4. Estimated Cost - 46'0) 000 . Fee . (to be paid on filing this application) 5. If dwelling, numbefof dwelling units / . Number of dwelling units'on each floor If garage, number of cars. ,fry 6. I'f business, commercial or mixed occupancy, specify nature and extent of each type ofuse. ,/i$' ' 7. Dimensions of existing structures, if any: Front /a - z Rear 761 t - Depth dila. 312'3-1-: Height /,:5 ' `1" 2: Number of Stories / Dimensions of same structure with alterations Or additions: Front V e - Rear 76 't - Depth 3,2.5-2-4e.E, Height �a /6 " Number of Stories vt% 8; Dimensions of entire new construction: Front - Rear Depth" Height - Number of Stories 9. Size of lot: Front 010 ' _ Rear ?51 4' Depth 94, r r- - , 10. Date of Purchase %980 ? Name of FormerOwner - 11. Zone or use district in which premises are situated )QE,fs,dP•,-r/.� . , , , 12. Does proposed construction violate any zoning law, ordinance or regulation: kiPi6.6 - ,C s,_ 'a/c-/-' 13. Will lot be re-graded ' kid �' Will excess fill be removed from premises: YES NO 0961 ye- ai.j 112e'-4 ei— ' - -40_, ; ., 14. Names of Owner of premises . ,9 4 Z Address 42!d `''/A- tiu Phone g. " 1/7"7 - 4064'/ _' Name of Architect ,Obey`5Y©um Address'4/3 "3- Ai eS-` Phone No /177-975749. Name of Contractor Address - Phone No. . 15. Is this property-within 100 feet of a tidal wetland? *YES NO V _ . ' - • IF YES, SOUTHOLD TOWN TRUSTEES PERMITS MAY BE REQUIRED 16. Provide-survey,to scale, with accurate foundation plan and distances to property lines. - ' ' 17. If elevation at any point On property i`s at 10 feet or below,must provide topographical data on survey. STATE OF NEW YORK) - " , SS: , COUNTY OF •.3.07 /k). . - ' fiir)X � / l !�'Ibeing duly sworn, deposes and says that(s)he is the applicant (Name ofdividual signing contract)above named, (S)He s the " CA e,--/- _ . . .. , . (Contractor, Agent, Corporate Officer, etc.) . . . of said owner or owners, d is duly authorized to perform or have performed the said work and to make and file this application; that all statements contained in this application are true to the best of his knowledge and belief; and that the work will'be performed in the manner set forth in the application filed therewith.` Sworn to before me this / 9 day of /�jt'/eh/ 20 0// -1 to k. -.A a_ ,(7%,,,,,. , ' ' \ iz I.At JA___A../ " ' , Notary Public : attire of-Applicant ELIZABETH A STATHIS - NOTARY PUBLIC;State of New York , " No.01 ST6008173,Suffolk Co - - - ; - Term Expires June 8,20� ; .- , s, ' . -b i s o f 3''iCf.km T signed No. °Et. For Offic/ q/ce Use Only: Fee$ * • , TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK APPEAL FROM DECISION OF BUILDING INSPECTOR ' AI /4 �O f DATE OF BUILDING INSPECTOR'S DECISION APPEALED: / TO, THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS: I,(We) (Appellant)knY /224,9-(0.-.74a-ckieeihy* ot...aiietc).MLYtee- r iwk) (Tel # /7/72-970-7'9 ) HEREBY APPEAL THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DATED � !D &2 - FOR: DENIED AN APPLICATION WHF,REBY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR ( tif Permit to Build , ( ) Permit for Occupancy ( ) Permit to Use ( ) Permit for As-Built ( ) Other. �,� .g!'411. ���/�P���l 1. -Location of Propert c:1 -0..C.c:1 -0..C. ad ®�°e�'1,' D q`� Zone District 1000 Section..4 y�.Block.h..Lot(s) 6P' Current Owner... - 2. Provision of the Zoning Ordinance Appealed. (Indicate Article, Section, Subsection _v", and pa (vrajah of Zoning Ordnance by numbers. Do not quote the law.) R E C E I D ArticleXl�l Section 100-v.� .. ...S . ub-Section 3. Type of Appeal. Appeal is made herewith for: . MAY 15 2001 ( Variance to the Zoning Ordinance or ZoningbM New York Town Law �fno�d town Clerk ( ) A Variance due to lack of access as required y Chap. 62, Cons. Laws Art. 16, Section 280-A. ( ) Interpretation of Article , Section 100 • - ( ) Reversal or Other: 4. Previous Appeal. A previous appeal (has) (has not) been made with respect to this property or with respect to this decision of the Building Inspector(Appeal # Year ) REASONS FOR APPEAL (Additional sheets may be used with applicant's signature): AREA VARIANCE REASONS: (1) An undesirable change will not be produced in the CHARACTER of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties, if granted, because: ` 4- cofd /?on- &alik (2) The benefit sought by the applicant CANNOT be achieved by some method feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance, because: Jae ...5!t 07e ` - t- (3) The amount of relief requested is not substantial because: Mr /,reie ,3i6lC' 70 E- / iov--/e/�J0-- (4) The variance will NOT have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district because: �o�- T,� /7 let)/(t- //y/,iebv� 74€ f ii��h/vG67' v/a y ,7 &,i 0<4-A14 (5) Has the alleged difficulty been self-created? ( ) Yes, or (�No. This is the MINIMUM that is necessary and adequate, and at the same time preserve and protect the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety, and welfare of the community. ( ) Check this-box if USE VARIANCE STANDARD re comple - • a d attached. i ' / / ' Sworn to before me this Signature . Appellant or Authorized Agent) 75-'—,day of ?t , 2019 . (Agent m submit Authorization from Owner) L� ,F77 A - Notary Public_____ g , . _ ZBA App /00 LINO,P.KOWALSKI SL'OS'AoN soJcdx3 uosssiururea Notary Public,State of New y , 900 3110unS ail paisilerio 1 • No.52-4524771 LLLPZ9t'- 9'°N Qualified in Suffolk:oL A Mehl}o ems•ancrod kWh Commission Expires Nov.3O S1VMON J VflNI1 Nil 411410 - Appeal Application, Continued BOARD OF APPEALS : TOWN OF SOUTHOLD COUNTY OF SUFFOLK:STATE OF NEW YORK x Application of Appeal Application (Continued) Property ID# REASONS FOR USE VARIANCE • x Continuation of Appeal Application for a Use Variance (when applicable): For Each and Every Permitted Use under the Zoning Regulations for the Particular District • Where the Protect is Located (please consult your attorney before completing): (1) The applicant CANNOT realize a REASONABLE RETURN because: (2) The HARDSHIP relates to the property and does not apply to a substantial portion of the district or neighborhood because: (3) The relief requested will not alter the essential CHARACTER of the neighborhood because: (4) Has the alleged difficulty been self-created? ( ) Yes, or ( ) No. (5)This is the MINIMUM that is necessary and adequate, and at the same time will preserve and protect the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety, and welfare of the community because: (6) The spirit of the zoning ordinance will be observed. (7) The public safety and welfare will be secured and substantial justice done. (Signature of Appellant or Authorized Agent) Sworn to before me this day of , 20 . (Notary Public) ZBA App 08/00 - M ---,. V) /jid J7 _ c _4,-- TO1i.. .IF SOUTHOLD PIS. :PERTY RECORD CARD DWNER STREET r VILLAGE DIST. SUB. LOTS, ' ..� –hQ/ �-D Ca Et_ �W L7- '1• 4 . OLl oReimi W " . � mil f ' fir G J-i 14-1 /1.� _7L,.'u-^ , / aZ� FORMER OV)/NE� N E ACR. t :U\c?L VA d IC 1 Pe va..4 c\U)(c dr2,2,#5 I - S W TYPE OF BUILDING ES. j p SEAS. VL. FARM COMM. CB. MISC. Mkt. Value L. ID IMP. TOTAL DATE REMARKS A� /� 7 �J /1 y l roc') ..6-6 eo o otO /�``t'- 1.-.1 bey 2 741 to,59S 0 ke-H -6 `H e I Vat-£ 1.pre.r- /l v o t, '°' ''e+ 6 66-0 0 -V9 j// 1 W2,/42., �i ae .v 7 I .p4 9 . Oc� c5tcs —4-d Dave))4o0 j. Y. ,4.,Eofwavd 2ktis aL 120 ,®�kniu4k) iPEr?.i a R1 P Lz Au)F ' :6a�.1. r - AGE BUILDING CONDITION \IEW NORMAL BELOW ABOVE FARM Acre Value Per Value ( ®\' ' Acre ilia 1 illab 2 iliable 3 'oodland vampland FRONTAGE ON WATER b-U ` , ' °0 y / 4 0 0 •ushtand FRONTAGE ON ROAD ) t:-t .` • ' ouse Plot DEPTH f Js`ei r BULKHEAD ',+' n DtaI DOCK • S r' V t'`, - .. leiii, :.1. y ' ' ': , ' :' ' ' ''':,. ,'. '' ' ' , 1P17, , ' • , "o ' r' I ,T I, 1„tAt.LAa.C6,�1��F1 ''! i} i• 'm r ; -,j i „' !'•:'„ r; i'` 1 l r 1`•'i t ,. • ' N;._5,4 t"G'30"In... G J Mia �._._._ .•_ ''_..._` -;__ .�' ._._.. :'` 1 j { _' �� _ Fete` -\l' ! I r.) 11 i 311' r ~r - �� ! .-",.67,.. , . , , ' , I r > n 1Cr' war. .datratt Ni ,,, , e •/ ' 'iI , . Z,, , ; , rt" 01 T F.a „ t3.akn or the New Yeade �, �•; .I d � { �) _ _ �� mar. �}�' i• { f ;Il+ t i,; ,.�:sQ �F �!/�c; cO�X�� s mail Trot 1' "a .C." �p�1CK Vq�� thytgnd au,veyori Wcedd seal or ' j i , I f •: 1\1!11�, '. , I ,, tliZICK. ! r COqN vPJi,' ; i' MndhalmlBWonlistedlwnwnand - t :,,,, / _ , to the assignees of the lending heti. • -- - �I ._ ...r 4 ! ;�, ,/ , Wm.Guarantee.am no trandstabta I yC I.; / t4 additional tnstgrgiery oraebtequer,t .. .� :I' �;.. TITLE NO. JZ1T.SOQ- 1 f .,,r.c'.�'' I' - ' -- . ' 1 '' ' 1 : - l h 1 ' 42' ,. 1 J� ,` ,t.r::, I. I,f- k, '•k tet,'[J1 ''''.—....-'2....:.:—....,.........--:.' L74L ' 1. 1 ;', �:� T. .-,7"147 --::' ' .' , ' :!7' t:'- 'Al «a ,SEC 7 iiI i_;'ri' ., '� ) . . ' )+,.;i. . , j.f= .•OifJCE.�.Af-MAP,-.7.s,• . 1 ' - �� ,' , ' .., • ',. . r 1, - { ! , .r00 �� , ' :siIAl:-kKI i:* •F., '' '1: riTi 1''t=t),,A.A,P4I"t:k:,..wt:', , i I , h4 ' M WWW!� �, :.i.-1I. r. ,Yjl t l/IC ,h' Iir'.j1�14, {. l•'v clt% .•^ ' i' `` i' Lr,•n .. i.,. .... l , . Sr . , :.. .r. .� , t '� Page 15,June 7,2001 s \Qf ZBA Public Hearing Transcript PXTown of Southold \, MARIE BENNENATI: Yes you did. Thank you. CHAIRMAN: You're welcome. Hearing no further comment I'll make a motion to closing the hearing reserving decision until later. SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION * * * 7:20 P.M. Appl. No. 4962—ROGER J. and LESLIE WALZ. This is a request for a Variance under Article XXIV, Slection 100-242A,based on the Building Inspector's May 2, 2001 Notice of Disapproval regarding application's proposed second story addition to existing dwelling. The Notice of Disapproval states that the existing structure has a nonconforming setback of three,feet from the easterly side lot line and 9.9 feet from the west side line, and as a result, the addition of the second-story represents an increase in the degree of nonconformity. Location: 2505 Old Orchard Road, East Marion,NY; Parcel 37-6-5, Fairweather-Brown Architects. CHAIRMAN: How are you tonight? What would you like to tell us? AMY MARTIN: I'm Amy Martin, part of Fairweather-Brown,representing Roger and Leslie Walz. Unfortunately, they are not here tonight they had to be out-of-state. They have owned this property since approximately September 1980. They wish to add a second-story to this home, as they hope to retire in the near future. As the Board knows that the area of Gardner Bay Estates in the waterfront area is a jungle of very strange and • N unusual lots. A lot of cottages are on small non-conforming properties. This one in particular is quite irregular in shape; it's a line#1238 lot with only 20 feet . On the right side where the kitchen is proposed, there is there now and it's sufficient to the propertylline. The addition that is proposed is a second story, yet there is no change to the footprint, at all (inaudible) line#1278 . The 6.2 property line and flat area around where proposed will remain a one single story structure. The U shape will change a shed was making it 10 %2 feet from grade. Where it's presently 14.6 feet to the ridge edge at the sound. So it comes out from the house, instead of going across. This whole section of area that they wish to remodel is in the center of the home on the one side lot, in neither of the side yards. On the east side there are a few feet from the'property line and the neighbor told me that it angled and that it ranged from 5 %2 feet from his property line to about 12 feet on the water end. Change in elevation on the part were irregular. We are adding approximately 7 feet to the garage end. lines from the two other sections. Basically the west end of the Martin house will be, I'm sorry. The Martin house to the west is a 1-1/2 structure as it exists and in the area there are other two-story structures. Up until recently to add on to, a second floor to a home on the same footprint, it would have been allowed but the law has been reinterpreted in a different direction. CHAIRMAN: Mrs. Martin, you Low me as not the person that would ever say derogatory things, but this a phenomenally large structure. I think that in that realm, it's hard to understand how large this structure is going to be without looking at it in some way manner or form. I don't know what to suggest to you at this point, other than the fact e , } n f Page 16,June 7,2001 ZBA Public Hearing Tianscnpt Town of Southold --,) that we understand that the house is a ranch now, a one-story structure. I stood at both the base of the garage, the foot of the garage, and I stood at the area which is most closely related to the beach; and I had trouble understanding the height and the magnificence of what this house is going to be, as you are proposing it or your client is. I just don't know how to deal with it at this point, and that's not a derogatory statement. MR. BROWN: (inaudible) CHAIRMAN: Somehow, Mr. Brown, we never miss you at one of these hearings. You've been very busy, haven't you? MR. BROWN: Very busy. The footprint, in terms of the second-story addition, is that when we started the design and well into the work going into the design, we had every reason to believe that the Building Department was continuing to interpret this portion of the Code involved here, in that, as there were no changes to the footprint, there was no significant difference in terms of the NAH pre-existing non-conforming conditions of the structure. It wasn't until we were almost finished with the 0 that we were informed by the Building Department that they had decided to reinterpret that portion of the code. In terms of the size, it is a very long house; there is no question about that. It's a very narrow house. It's literally, in some respects a railroad car design. The addition that we are proposing is purely two bedrooms and a recreation room on the second floor. We've kept the roof as low as possible and still conform to State Codes in terms of habitable space. In fact on the east side we are forced to provide a dormer situation in order to maintain appropriate headroom for the egress window. We have kept; we changed to a to a minimum, in order to allow, in order to provide second floor habitable space. The addition, basically, runs straight through the center of the long portion of the house. There is a small L at the south end, where we are actually moving a reversed . gable and providing a one-story shed roof, one story shed roof. Which actually reduces the immediate impact on the neighborhood. CHAIRMAN: Well the neighbor is the one that has the greatest setback is that correct? MR. BROWN: Yes. We have been informing our clients that the neighbor to the East has had no objection. And they are the ones who to my knowledge, will greatly impact CHAIRMAN: The problem I have is he issue of the East side, and the height of the roof, where the drainage calculations from water, torrential rain, could in effect over shoot the gutter and end up on the neighbors property,just because the height of the roof. I realize that this is a fairly, it's not a low pitched roof, but it's a pitched roof now, and I assume that's what's happening now. I just, in even looking at it, I don't want to further exacerbate that situation. MR. BROWN: I think it's necessary to exacerbate the situation. Certainly, while I haven't, at this point, calculated the size of the gutter,based on rainfall, certainly there is room for, in terms of the size of the gutter. Beyond that we have in the past employed i / ,______ n - ,m111 Page 17,June 7,2001 ZBA Public Hearing Tianscript Town of Southold what's called a French Drain, which is a trough built below the foundation of the building, dug to a depth of usually 18", filled with gravel and a perforated pipe which would run the drainage that was missed by the gutter off into a drywell. We have done that in the past. We've done it in place of gutters in the past. This procedure is fully approved by the D.E.C.and any other agency. Quite honestly, in terms of the footprint, once again, there would be no increase in the amount of runoff; because we're not changing the footprint one square inch. CHAIRMAN: I understand that, but still, the pitch could be changed on the roof line which could cause that aggravated situation. MR. BROWN: Which could be regulated by type of CHAIRMAN: Right, let's further see what happens. Mr. Dinizio any questions? MEMBER DINIZIO: No questions. CHAIRMAN: Miss Collins? MEMBER COLLINS: I don't have questions. I'm just concerned that the Building Department, having decided to take this position on interpreting the Code Section increasing the degree of non-conformity puts us into a situation of almost judging design. Under their old interpretation, if you had the setback, you could keep the setback and people did humungous things with their existing setbacks. MR. BROWN: You could even increase a footprint as long as you didn't MEMBER COLLINS: As long as you didn't go any further than where you already were. Some of the results of that were fairly awful. Now in your case they've taken a different view, and I haven't really figured out how I'm going to sort it out. I'm not sure where we are headed on this. I do share the Chairman's view, that I found standing there with the blueprints and looking at the building, I was finding it very, very hard to see how the new building, the new roof line and details fit with what was there already. I couldn't picture the new building inside the old building. MR. BROWN: It is difficult because of the position of the house on the property. The only thing that I can suggest is that we could prepare a rendering of the proposed structure based on a point of view of someone standing in front of the garage. CHAIRMAN: It maybe helpful, because we may have to reduce some of the roof lines. MR BROWN: As I've said, we have worked very hard on keeping,understanding the situation. We realize the house is tight enough. We did everything we could do to minimize any change in the profile. t Page 18,June 7,2001 Iry ZBA Public Hearing Tianscnpt Town of Southold -) CHAIRMAN: While you're doing the rendering, could you do two other things too? Could you use either a one by two or one by four and in both situations affix that to the ridge end of both sides of the house, so we know what the total maximum height is, when we go back and look at the property? MR. BROWN: Okay. CHAIRMAN: Just tell us when that is. I mean nothing to deface the present house, a couple of nails, possibly spruce so it won't waiver in the breeze. Mrs. Tortora? MEMBER TORTORA: One of the things I guess that we've been seeing as a Board increasingly over the last couple of years is just this kind of a proposal where someone has non-conforming setbacks and they have a ranch house, in your case, you're three feet from the property line, and they want to go up or they want to expand or whatever. It's very difficult to tell what it's going to look like, although, I'm getting educated pretty quick on this. The reason why is very simply, the results of some of the structures, and I would have to red flag this one as one that could have that potential. It can be humungous when you are putting two stories, huge structure on a very, very narrow lot, three feet from your neighbor's property line. Your neighbor may not object now, but when he sees it he may feel differently. But, Ican tell you one thing, we have been very surprised at the results of some of houses;particularly these two-story houses, when they are enlarged to such magnitude, particularly when you're looking at three feet from the property line. Big house, small lot or long lot, one way or another it can be over- ) powering. MR. BROWN: I would only say, I understand your concerns. Of the four houses from the beach, the four houses starting from the road, starting from the neighbor to the west; one is already one and a half stories, and one is already two stories. This would be another two story out of the four houses, as you can see fairly clustered together. MEMBER HORNING: I would say the Building Department is throwing it on our laps to deal with a new way of interpreting. MR. BROWN: I'm sure you can understand our sense of frustration about having figured the plans and discovering when I went back a new interpretation changing the whole field that you're planning on. MEMBER HORNING: So do your plans have any alternative design plans? MR. BROWN: At this point, I can't imagine that they did, because as I said, we had, it was very hard from the very beginning understanding the circumstances that we were in. To minimize the impact of this addition,by, as I said, keeping the roof line as low as possible to be able to provide habitable space on the second floor; and, in fact, not incorporating the second floor onto the L-shaped portion of the south side. } 1' t 1 Page 19,June 7,2001 ZBA Public Hearing Transcript Town of Southold MEMBER HORNING: So what you are saying is that the overall proposed building J height is the minimum? MR. BROWN: The minimum we felt we could provide and still provide habitable space upstairs. CHAIRMAN: So, in reality, what you're going to give us is a rendering of, you're going to affix those boards so that we can see what the height situation is. My question is, what is the timeliness of this application? Can we deal with this application in August? MR. BROWN: Obviously, the only concern that I would have regarding that is that, under normal circumstances I would say, if we were able to get a variance from you in August, successfully, and have the Building Permit by September so that the work could be done through the winter with no impact on the community, I would say great. But as I understand it right now, the Building Department has a backlog of approximately four months. CHAIRMAN: But, you're still in line, even though you don't have MR. BROWN: That may be, but I'm sure, you understand my concern and frustration. CHAIRMAN: The problem I have is that the July calendar is oh-la-la. MR. BROWN: Certainly, I don't want to make your lives any more difficult. If August is better for you, then August it is. CHAIRMAN: All right, we'll take some testimony tonight, if you would bring us the rendering or we can have it that night. But if we could study it at the same time. MR. BROWN: You'll have it before the August hearing. CHAIRMAN: Give us a call when you have the boards up, and we'll go back and take a look. We always love to go to Gardners Bay Estates in the summertime. It makes you feel like summer. Okay, we thank you. I have to tell you sir, that you and Miss Martin are wonderful ladies and gentleman, wonderful to deal with and, as always, in the past. You are a true gentleman, it really is a pleasure. MR. BROWN: Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN: Is there anybody else that would like to speak in favor of this application? Anybody like to speak against the application? Yes, ma'am? Good evening. NORMA MARTIN: Good evening, I'm Norma Martin. We live directly to the west of the Walz's home, and I have some comments and concerns I'd like to voice regarding this pending decision. Because of slope in the way of the land, with their house being on the highest portion of this slope, the height of their single-story house is approximately the - - e Page 20,June 7,2001 YP ZBA Public Healing Transcript Town of Southold same height as our house, which is a story and a half. I feel that adding a second story to this existing single level structure will result in something that far exceeds the height and detracts from the look of the surrounding dwellings. Granted as you look at the first four homes on the beach, ours being a story and a half, theirs being a story and then the other two-story house belongs to the fourth and it is on a considerably larger piece of property than is the Walz house. Also to be considered, I should think, would be the impact from the cesspool that would result in two bedrooms and one bath, that I understand are included in the plans. This addition would mean that there would be five bedrooms and two baths in this house. With our house situated directly next door on the downward side of the slope from their existing cesspools, I wonder what affect it will have on us. I am sure that when the Walz purchased this house, one of the things that impressed them was the look of Gardners Bay Estates. This traditional and understated private community, which has been in existence for approximately 72 years, has been achieved and maintained through the years by the diligence and cooperation of the homeowners and the Association. Although we have a Real Estate Committee, it is my understanding that the Walzs have yet to submit these for review and consideration. I am concerned as to why they bypassed this most important step. It insinuates to me that they are not concerned with what effect they have on their neighbors. When you become a resident of Gardners Bay Estates and a member of the Homeowners Association, it is assumed that you will abide by the guidelines that have been agreed upon by all; not develop your own agenda and expect to be allowed to be exception to the rule. We already have a very, very visual example just down the street on Old Orchard Lane; designed by the same architects, I might add, of what can happen when a homeowners vision and architects view of what is appropriate collide with what the neighbors feel looks best and is in the best interest of the appearance of a community as a whole. It is for the above reasons that I am opposed to these plans. Thank you for listening. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Good evening Mr. Martin, how are you? RALPH MARTIN: By having this house with a second story on, will affect the cut-off of any and all air circulation of our bedroom which are secured to the east of my home. My bedroom,my grandchildren's bedroom, and the guest bedroom. By going up, you limit the air; you lose some of the sunlight you might get. If I wanted to live next to a wall, I would have lived in New York City perhaps. I came out here, my wife and I did, for just the way this Town of Southold is and was; and I hope that this Committee will realize the fact that, that's the way I think our houses should be done, try and keep our rural atmosphere. I remember we had two traffic lights in town, now we have four or five. It seems to me that people like to move out here to the East End because of the rural atmosphere and the way people are. Many times, often times, I won't say many times, when people do move out here for what we have after they get settled, they want to start to change and bring the West end into our community. It doesn't really fit, and it happens it seems to me more so than not. We were never even addressed by the Walzs when they thought they might wish to put a second story on the house, but that's their business. But I still am a neighbor of theirs directly to the west, and my property line to my chimney, the property line, is about three feet. So that gives us nine feet between houses. It's 6.6 from their house and my property line; and I believe from my chimney, which is next to 1144 Page 21,June 7,2001 ZBA Public Hearing Tianscnpt Town of Southold two bedrooms, is about three feet, three and one half feet. Then to go up two stories with a bit more, I think it's just a little bit too much in my opinion. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Martin, I would like to see this, your house and what you're saying upstairs if you don't mind me making an appointment with you. Could I just have your telephone number? RALPH MARTIN: 477-0428 CHAIRMAN: They're going to put these ridge markers up, and once they're up, I'll give you a call and I'll come over some Saturday or whatever at your convenience. Okay. RALPH MARTIN: Fine, Mr. Chairman. I thank you very much for your time. CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone else that would like to speak against? Yes ma'am. JOAN A. BRIDGET EGAN: I have been a homeowner in Gardner Bay Estates since 1964. I couldn't agree more with Mr. and Mrs. Martin, and I think one of the most important highlights of what he said, is the fact that what happened with real estate changing and the fact that a lot of people bought these summer homes, now they're getting a little bit older, they sell the house west and they move here. Which is understandable, I did the same myself. We couldn't go wide, we couldn't go deep, and we went up a story, a half a story. These changes and overpopulation and the progression of these things. Hopefully the Walzs will live a long, long life and we don't have too many children in Gardner Bay Estates that we have to educate. But if these things go on, and they become year round homes, which is what I think is what Mr. Walz wants, you're going to have more, more, more. I think that the changes that have happened in Gardner Bay Estates, some of them, I don't know how they passed Zoning, that would be Mr. Frenzel's property that is on Old Orchard Lane. It is a horror, an absolute horror. There is nothing we can do about it,but I think somewhere along the line here you have to say stop. I think here, Mr. Martin and the other people tonight, including myself. I have served in every capacity in Gardners Bay Estates before it was homeowners,before, before. Mr. and Mrs. Walz have never even participated in any way, in any community activities that I know of and I think I would know of it. So all of these things can give me a very sour grapes. I think it's important that we maintain what we have and I'm sure there's some solution to this. I've been in the Walz house several times, when the Vanripers had it, and I don't know,maybe they could do better with a basement, putting things in a basement rather than going up. I think it would also effect the air corridor as far as ventilation for the homes going north, that might be Mrs. Frazier and it could go on to the Collins home. I think they're a lot of things other than just where the rain falls. I think the weight, also, of putting this structure up there on a slope like that, it can have a mud slide and it certainly could affect the Martins and I don't know the name of the people who live in the small home which could eventually effect our roads. It's a progression of things and I say stop. Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN: Anybody else, we are going to recess? Go ahead sir. Page 22,June 7,2001 ZBA Public Hearing Tianscnpt Town of Southold FRANK THORP: I am Frank Thorp; I live at 180 South Lane, two houses to the east of the Walzs. I also represent my brother Edward and his wife Virginia at 80 South Lane who is the immediate house next to the Walzs. A couple of things, my house, which is the two-story house referred to, is only five feet from the property line. The Walzs deed does not require them to submit an approval of plans. That was in the original deed. Some of the original deeds to the Gardners Bay Estates Company did not require certain things, including 8-foot setbacks from the side yard. Obviously, in this particular deed did not require the approval of the company for building plans which were then passed on to the Association. My brother and I strongly approve of the plans that have been proposed, we feel it will greatly enhance the community and will maintain and, perhaps, even add to our property value. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Hearing no further comment, yes, you have one thing you want to say? AMY MARTIN: Just wanted to give you one thing. We had our draftsman acquire the properties of the surveys of the two adjoining properties just to show you. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Hearing no further comment at this hearing, I make a motion recessing until August 16th, 2001. SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION 8:00 P.M. Appl. No. 4953 —HENRY L. FERGUSON MUSEUM, INC. This is a request for Variances,based on the Building Inspector's April 11, 2001 Notice of Disapproval which states that a permit for an addition to the existing museum building is denied for the following reasons: (a) Article III, Section 100-32 requires a minimum front yard setback of 60 feet; and (b) Article XXIV, Section 100-243A.1 a for the reason that the proposed addition will increase the size of this nonconforming nonresidential building, resulting in an increase in the overall building footprint of more than 15 percent. Location: Equestrian Avenue, Fishers Island,NY; Parce19-4-11.1 Stephen L. Hamm III, Esq. BARBARA HAMM: Good evening, I'm Barbara Hamm and I represent the Ferguson Museum. I have an Affidavit of Sign Posting for you and five (5) sets of papers. CHAIRMAN: I knew you looked familiar; from the Lynch application. BARBARA HAMM: I'm on that tonight too, and Steve still isn't coming back after the Southampton Lumber fiasco. MEMBER COLLINS: Tell him we miss him. k IJ \, PiIge 15,June 7,2001 ® 6� ZBA Public Hearing Transcript6Itr Town of Southold MARIE BENNENATI: Yes you did. Thank you. CHAIRMAN: You're welcome. :I-Tearing no further comment I'll make a motion to closing the hearing reserving decision until later. SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION * * * 7:20 P.M. Appl. No. 4962—ROGER J. and LESLIE WALZ. This is a request for a Variance under Article XXIV, Section 100-242A,based on the Building Inspector's May 2, 2001 Notice of Disapproval regarding application's proposed second story addition to existing dwelling. The Notice of Disapproval states that the existing structure has a nonconforming setback of three feet from the easterly side lot line and 9.9 feet from the west side line, and as a result, the addition of the second-story represents an increase in the degree of nonconformity. Location: 2505 Old Orchard Road, East Marion,NY; Parcel 37-6-5, Fairweather-Brown Architects. CHAIRMAN: How are you tonight? What would you like to tell us? AMY MARTIN: I'm Amy Martin, part of Fairweather-Brown,representing Roger and Leslie Walz. Unfortunately, they are not here tonight they had to be out-of-state. They have owned this property since approximately September 1980. They wish to add a second-story to this home, as they hope to retire in the near future. As the Board knows that the area of Gardner Bay Estates in the waterfront area is a jungle of very strange and unusual lots. A lot of cottages are on small non-conforming properties. This one in particular is quite irregular in shape; it's a line#1238 lot with only 20 feet . On the right side where the kitchen is proposed, there is there now and it's sufficient to the property line. The addition that is proposed is a second story, yet there is no change to the footprint, at all (inaudible) line#1278 The 6.2 property line and flat area around where proposed will remain a one single story structure. The U shape will change a shed was making it 10 1/2 feet from grade. Where it's presently 14.6 feet to the ridge edge at the sound. So it comes out from the house, instead of going across. This whole section of area that they wish to remodel is in the center of the home on the one side lot, in neither of the side yards. On the east side there are a few feet from the property line and the neighbor told me that it angled and that it ranged from 5 1/2 feet from his property line to about 12 feet on the water end. Change in elevation on the part were irregular. We are adding approximately 7 feet to the garage end. lines from the two other sections. Basically the west end of the Martin house will be, I'm sorry. The Martin house to the west is a 1-1/2 structure as it exists and in the area there are other two-story structures. Up until recently to add on to, a second floor to a home on the same footprint, it would have been allowed but the law has been reinterpreted in a different direction. CHAIRMAN: Mrs. Martin, you know me as not the person that would ever say derogatory things,but this a phenomenally large structure. I think that in that realm, it's hard to understand how large this structure is going to be without looking at it in some way manner or form. I don't know what to suggest to you at this point, other than the fact I • Page 16,June 7,2001 ZBA Public Hearing Transcript Town of Southold that we understand that the house is a ranch now, a one-story structure. I stood at both the base of the garage, the foot of the garage, and I stood at the area which is most closely related to the beach; and I had trouble understanding the height and the magnificence of what this house is going to be, as you are proposing it or your client is. I just don't know how to deal with it at this point, and that's not a derogatory statement. MR. BROWN: (inaudible) CHAIRMAN: Somehow, Mr. Brown, we never miss you at one of these hearings. You've been very busy,haven't you? MR. BROWN: Very busy. The footprint, in terms of the second-story addition, is that when we started the design and well into the work going into the design,we had every reason to believe that the Building Department was continuing to interpret this portion of the Code involved here,in that, as there were no changes to the footprint, there was no significant difference in terms of the NAH pre-existing non-conforming conditions of the structure. -It wasn't until we were almost finished with the 0 that we were informed by the Building Department that they had decided to reinterpret that portion of the code. In terms of the size, it is a very long house; there is no question about that. It's a very narrow house. It's literally, in some respects a railroad car design. The addition that we are proposing is purely two bedrooms and a recreation room on the second floor. We've kept the roof as low as possible and still conform to State Codes in terms of habitable space. In fact on the east side we are forced to provide a dormer situation in order to maintain appropriate headroom for the egress window. We have kept; we changed to a to a minimum, in order to allow, in order to provide second floor habitable space. The addition,basically, runs straight through the center of the long portion of the house. There is a small L at the south end, where we are actually moving a reversed gable and providing a one-story shed roof, one story shed roof. Which actually reduces the immediate impact on the neighborhood. CHAIRMAN: Well the neighbor is the one that has the greatest setback is that correct? MR. BROWN: Yes. We have been informing our clients that the neighbor to the East has had no objection. And they are the ones who to my knowledge, will greatly impact CHAIRMAN: 'The problem I have is he issue of the East side, and the height of the roof, where the drainage calculations from water, torrential rain, could in effect over shoot the gutter and end up on the neighbors property,just because the height of the roof. I realize that this is a fairly, it's not a low pitched roof,but it's a pitched roof now, and I assume that's what's happening now. I just, in even looking at it, I don't want to further exacerbate that situation. MR. BROWN: I think it's necessary to exacerbate the situation. Certainly,while I haven't, at this point, calculated the size of the gutter,based on rainfall, certainly there is room for, in terms of the size of the gutter. Beyond that we have in the past employed • h • Page 17,June 7,2001 • ZBA Public Hearing Transcnpt Town of Southold what's called a French Drain, which is a trough built below the foundation of the building, dug to a depth of usually 18", filled with gravel and a perforated pipe which would run the drainage that was missed by the gutter off into a drywell. We have done that in the past. We've done it in place of gutters in the past. This procedure is fully approved by the D.E.C.and any other agency. Quite honestly, in terms of the footprint, once again, there would be no increase in the amount of runoff;because we're not changing the footprint one square inch. CHAIRMAN: I understand that,but still, the pitch could be changed on the roof line which could cause that aggravated situation. MR. BROWN: Which could be regulated by type of CHAIRMAN: Right, let's further see what happens. Mr. Dinizio any questions? MEMBER DINIZIO: No questions. CHAIRMAN: Miss Collins? MEMBER COLLINS: I don't have questions. I'm just concerned that the Building Department,having decided to take this position on interpreting the Code Section increasing the degree of non-conformity puts us into a situation of almost judging design. Under their old interpretation, if you had the setback, you could keep the setback and people did humungous things with their existing setbacks. MR. BROWN: You could even increase a footprint as long as you didn't MEMBER COLLINS: As long as you didn't go any further than where you already were. Some of the results of that were fairly awful. Now in your case they've taken a different view, and I haven't really figured out how I'm going to sort it out. I'm not sure where we are headed on this. I do share the Chairman's view, that I found standing there with the blueprints and looking at the building, I was finding it very, very hard to see how the new building, the new roof line and details fit with what was there already. I couldn't picture the new building inside the old building. MR. BROWN: It is difficult because of the position of the house on the property. The only thing that I can suggest is that we could prepare a rendering of the proposed structure based on a point of view of someone standing in front of the garage. CHAIRMAN: It may be helpful,because we may have to reduce some of the roof lines. • MR BROWN: As I've said,we have worked very hard on keeping,understanding the situation. We realize the house is tight enough. We did everything we could do to minimize any change in the profile. S 1 Page 18,June 7,2001 ZBA Public Hearing Transcript Town of Southold CHAIRMAN: While you're doing the rendering, could you do two other things too? Could you use either a one by two or one by four and in both situations affix that to the ridge end of both sides of the house, so we know what the total maximum height is, when we go back and look.at the property? MR. BROWN: Okay. CHAIRMAN: Just tell us when that is. I mean nothing to deface the present house, a couple of nails,possibly spruce so it won't waiver in the breeze. Mrs. Tortora? MEMBER TORTORA: One of the things I guess that we've been seeing as a Board increasingly over the last couple of years is just this kind of a proposal where someone has non-conforming setbacks and they have a ranch house, in your case, you're three feet from the property line, and they want to go up or they want to expand or whatever. It's very difficult to tell what it's going to look like, although, I'm getting educated pretty quick on this. The reason why is very simply, the results of some of the structures, and I would have to red flag this one as one that could have that potential. It can be humungous when you are putting two stories,huge structure on a very, very narrow lot, three feet from your neighbor's property line. Your neighbor may not object now,but when he sees it he may feel differently. But, I,can tell you one thing,we have been very surprised at the results of some of houses;particularly these two-story houses, when they are enlarged to such magnitude, particularly when you're looking at three feet from the property line. Big house, small lot or long lot, one way or another it can be over- t powering. l MR. BROWN: I would only say, I understand your concerns. Of the four houses from the beach, the four houses starting from the road, starting from the neighbor to the west; one is already one and a half stories, and one is already two stories. This would be another two story out of the four houses, as you can see fairly clustered together. MEMBER HORNING: I would say the Building Department is throwing it on our laps to deal with a new way of interpreting. MR. BROWN: I'm sure you can understand our sense of frustration about having figured the plans and discovering when I went back a new interpretation changing the whole field that you're planning on. MEMBER HORNING: So do your plans have any alternative design plans? MR. BROWN: At this point, I can't imagine that they did,because as I said, we had, it was very hard from the very beginning understanding the circumstances that we were in. To minimize the impact of this addition,by, as I said,keeping the roof line as low as possible to be able to provide habitable space on the second floor; and, in fact,not incorporating the second floor onto the L-shaped portion of the south side. 0 AI ,, , Page 19,June 7,2001 ZBA Public Hearing Transcnpt Town of Southold MEMBER HORNING: So what you are saying is that the overall proposed building ,----) height is the minimum? MR. BROWN: The minimum we felt we could provide and still provide habitable space • upstairs. CHAIRMAN: So, in reality, what you're going to give us is a rendering of, you're going to affix those boards so that we can see what the height situation is. My question is, what is the timeliness of this application? Can we deal with this application in August? MR. BROWN: Obviously, the only concern that I would have regarding that is that, under normal circumstances I would say,if we were able to get a variance from you in August, successfully, and have the Building Permit by September so that the work could be done through the winter with no impact on the community, I would say great. But as I understand it right now, the Building Department has a backlog of approximately four months. CHAIRMAN: But, you're still in line, even though you don't have MR. BROWN: That may be,but I'm sure, you understand my concern and frustration. ` CHAIRMAN: The problem I have is that the July calendar is oh-la-la. ®) MR. BROWN: Certainly, I don't want to make your lives any more difficult. If August is better for you, then August it is. CHAIRMAN: All right,we'll take some testimony tonight, if you would bring us the rendering or we can have it that night. But if we could study it at the same time. MR. BROWN: You'll have it before the August hearing. CHAIRMAN: Give us a call when you have the boards up, and we'll go back and take a look. We always love to go to Gardners Bay Estates in the summertime. It makes you feel like summer. Okay, we thank you. I have to tell you sir, that you and Miss Martin are wonderful ladies and gentleman, wonderful to deal with and, as always, in the past. You are a true gentleman, it really is a pleasure. MR. BROWN: Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN: Is there anybody else that would like to speak in favor of this application? Anybody like to speak against the application? Yes,ma'am? Good evening. NORMA MARTIN: Good evening, I'm Norma Martin. We live directly to the west of the Walz's home, and I have some comments and concerns I'd like to voice regarding this pending decision. Because of slope in the way of the land, with their house being on the highest portion of this slope, the height of their single-story house is approximately the a Page 20,June 7,2001 ZBA Public Hearing Transcript Town of Southold same height as our house, which is a story and a half. I feel that adding a second story to this existing single level structure will result in something that far exceeds the height and detracts from the look of the surrounding dwellings. Granted as you look at the first four homes on the beach, ours being a story and a half, theirs being a story and then the other two-story house belongs to the fourth and it is on a considerably larger piece of property than is the Walz house. Also to be considered, I should think, would be the impact from the cesspool that would result in two bedrooms and one bath, that I understand are included in the plans. This addition would mean that there would be five bedrooms and two baths in this house. With our house situated directly next door on the downward side of the slope from their existing cesspools, I wonder what affect it will have on us. I am sure that when the Walz purchased this house, one of the things that impressed them was the look of Gardners Bay Estates. This traditional and understated private community, which has been in existence for approximately 72 years,has been achieved and maintained through the years by the diligence and cooperation of the homeowners and the Association. Although we have a Real Estate Committee, it is my understanding that the Walzs have yet to submit these for review and consideration. I am concerned as to why they bypassed this most important step. It insinuates to me that they are not concerned with what effect they have on their neighbors. When you become a resident of Gardners Bay Estates and a member of the Homeowners Association, it is assumed that you will abide by the guidelines that have been agreed upon by all; not develop your own agenda and expect to be allowed to be exception to the rule. We already have a very, very visual example just down the street on Old Orchard Lane; designed by the same architects, I might add, of what can happen when a homeowners vision and architects view of what is appropriate collide with what the neighbors feel looks best and is in the best interest of the appearance of a community as a whole. It is for the above reasons that I am opposed to these plans. Thank you for listening. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Good evening Mr. Martin,how are you? RALPH MARTIN: By having this house with a second story on, will affect the cut-off of any and all air circulation of our bedroom which are secured to the east of my home. My bedroom, my grandchildren's bedroom, and the guest bedroom. By going up,you limit the air; you lose some of the sunlight you might get. If I wanted to live next to a wall,I would have lived in New York City perhaps. I came out here,my wife and I did, for just the way this Town of Southold is and was; and I hope that this Committee will realize the fact that, that's the way I think our houses should be done, try and keep our rural atmosphere. I remember we had two traffic lights in town, now we have four or five. It seems to me that people like to move out here to the East End because of the rural atmosphere and the way people are. Many times, often times, I won't say many times, when people do move out here for what we have after they get settled, they want to start to change and bring the West end into our community. It doesn't really fit, and it happens it seems to me more so than not. We were never even addressed by the Walzs when they thought they might wish to put a second story on the house,but that's their business. But I still am a neighbor of theirs directly to the west, and my property line to my chimney, the property line, is about three feet. So that gives us nine feet between houses. It's 6.6 from their house and my property line; and I believe from my chimney,which is next to 111 0 • Page 21,June 7,2001 ZBA Public Hearing Transcript Town of Southold two bedrooms, is about three feet, three and one half feet. Then to go up two stories with a bit more, I think it's just a little bit too much in my opinion. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Martin, I would like to see this, your house and what you're saying upstairs if you don't mind me making an appointment with you. Could I just have your telephone number? RALPH MARTIN: 477-0428 CHAIRMAN: They're going to put these ridge markers up, and once they're up, I'll give you a call and I'll come over some Saturday or whatever at your convenience. Okay. RALPH MARTIN: Fine, Mr. Chairman. I thank you very much for your time. CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone else that would like to speak against? Yes ma'am. JOAN A. BRIDGET EGAN: I have been a homeowner in Gardner Bay Estates since 1964. I couldn't agree more with Mr. and Mrs. Martin, and I think one of the most important highlights of what he said, is the fact that what happened with real estate changing and the fact that a lot of people bought these summer homes, now they're getting a little bit older, they sell the house west and they move here. Which is understandable, I did the same myself. We couldn't go wide,we couldn't go deep, and we went up a story, a half a story. These changes and overpopulation and the progression of these things. Hopefully the Walzs will live a long, long life and we don't have too many children in Gardner Bay Estates that we have to educate. But if these things go on, and they become year round homes,which is what I think is what Mr. Walz wants,you're going to have more, more, more. I think that the changes that have happened in Gardner Bay Estates, some of them, I don't know how they passed Zoning, that would be Mr. Frenzel's property that is on Old Orchard Lane. It is a horror, an absolute horror. There is nothing we can do about it,but I think somewhere along the line here you have to say stop. I think here, Mr. Martin and the other people tonight,including myself. I have served in every capacity in Gardners Bay Estates before it was homeowners,before, before. Mr. and Mrs. Walz have never even participated in any way, in any community activities that I know of and I think I would know of it. So all of these things can give me a very sour grapes. I think it's important that we maintain what we have and I'm sure there's some solution to this. I've been in the Walz house several times, when the Vanripers had it, and I don't know, maybe they could do better with a basement, putting things in a basement rather than going up. I think it would also effect the air corridor as far as ventilation for the homes going north, that might be Mrs. Frazier and it could go on to the Collins home. I think they're a lot of things other than just where the rain falls. I think the weight, also,-of putting this structure up there on a slope like that, it can have a mud slide and it certainly could affect the Martins and I don't know the name of the people who live in the small home which could eventually effect our roads. It's a progression of things and I say stop. Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN: Anybody else,we are going to recess? Go ahead sir. • 7 111 Page 22,June 7,2001 ZBA Public Hearing Transcript Town of Southold FRANK THORP: I am Frank Thorp; I live at 180 South Lane, two houses to the east of the Walzs. I also represent my brother Edward and his wife Virginia at 80 South Lane who is the immediate house next to the Walzs. A couple of things, my house, which is the two-story house referred to, is only five feet from the property line. The Walzs deed does not require them to submit an approval of plans. That was in the original deed. Some of the original deeds to the Gardners Bay Estates Company did not require certain things, including 8-foot setbacks from the side yard. Obviously, in this particular deed did not require the approval of the company for building plans which were then passed on to the Association. My brother and I strongly approve of the plans that have been proposed,we feel it will greatly enhance the community and will maintain and, perhaps, even add to our property value. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Hearing no further comment, yes, you have one thing you want to say? AMY MARTIN: Just wanted to give you one thing. We had our draftsman acquire the properties of the surveys of the two adjoining properties just to show you. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Hearing no further comment at this hearing, I make a motion recessing until August 16th, 2001. SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION 8:00 P.M. Appl. No. 4953 —HENRY L. FERGUSON MUSEUM, INC. This is a request for Variances,based on the Building Inspector's April 11, 2001 Notice of Disapproval which states that a permit for an addition to the existing museum building is denied for the following reasons: (a)Article III, Section 100-32 requires a minimum front yard setback of 60 feet; and(b)Article XXIV, Section 100-243A.1 a for the reason that the proposed addition will increase the size of this nonconforming nonresidential building, resulting in an increase in the overall building footprint of more than 15 percent. Location: Equestrian Avenue, Fishers Island,NY; Parce19-4-11.1 Stephen L. Hamm III, Esq. BARBARA HAMM: Good evening, I'm Barbara Hamm and I represent the Ferguson Museum. I have an Affidavit of Sign Posting for you and five(5) sets of papers. CHAIRMAN: I knew you looked familiar; from the Lynch application. BARBARA HAMM: I'm on that tonight too, and Steve still isn't coming back after the Southampton Lumber fiasco. MEMBER COLLINS: Tell him we miss him. • 6 PAGE 52-SEPTEMBER 20,2001 - - ZBA PUBLIC HEARING TRANSCRIPT TOWN OF SOUTHOLD still one parcel. That's Lydia's point and that's very interesting that it didn't occur to us when were looking at the next-door property. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: Jim that email message is not part of the file. You've got to decide on whether that should be put in the file. CHAIRMAN: Put it in the file. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: You want to put it in. CHAIRMAN: It was comment regarding this piece of property, this application that's before us and therefore we should make it part of the file because that's caused some inquisitiveness on our part. There's nothing wrong with your application. We understand the situation; there are just some issues that are raised there regarding this. So what I would like you to do is take this to the Planning Board, we'll just recess it without a date and we'll re-advertise it. MEMBER COLLINS: We'll talk to the Town Attorney to find out if we're doing the chicken before the egg or the egg before the chicken and so on and so forth. I'm not sure because this is only the second one we've actually had. CHAIRMAN: So, we'll just go from there. If you would do that we would appreciate that. JAMES FITZGERALD: Okay, sure. CHAIRMAN: Is there anybody else that would like to either for or against this application? Seeing no hands, I'll make a motion recessing it without a date. SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION * * * 10:09 P.M. Appl. No. 4962 — ROGER AND LESSLIE WALZ. (Carryover from prior - • hearing calendars). This is an Appeal requesting a Variance under Article XXIV, Section 100-242A; based on the Building Inspector's May 2, 2001 corrected Notice of Disapproval. The Notice of Disapproval states that the existing structure has a nonconforming setback of three feet from the easterly side lot line and 6.5 feet from the west side line, and as a result, the second-story addition represents an increase in the degree of nonconformity. Location of Property: 2505 Old Orchard Road, East Marion; Parcel 1000-37-6-5. CHAIRMAN: Who is representing whom here? Mr. Bressler, twice in the same night? ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: There's a rarity isn't it. I'm here on behalf of the applicants. I understand that we have a carried over hearing. C „ PAGE 53-SEPTEMBER 20,2001 - ZBA PUBLIC HEARING TRANSCRIPT TOWN OF SOUTHOLD CHAIRMAN: Is there a great possibility that we could carry this over again? I mean you're certainly welcome to bring in your witnesses and so on and so forth, but anything you could do to expedite this we would appreciate. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: You know that's in my nature. Yes, we shall I understand Mr. Chairman and it may be necessary to take special steps but I understand the objectors are here. You adjourned this specifically to give them an opportunity to be here. So I think they ought to have the opportunity to hear what we say. Here we go. Mr. Chairman and Members of the Board, this is an interesting application I think. I think it's a significant application. I think the application consists basically of two parts. Notwithstanding the way this thing was initially styled and brought on. I think it brings up two issues and I would urge you to consider it on this basis and if you need any amendatory papers. This is a highbred application in fact. What we are dealing with is an Appeal from a Determination of the Building Inspector. That determination resulted in a denial of an.... application to increase the size of a nonconforming building by going up. So the issue' before the Building Department and before you tonight in the first instance is whether or not under the relevant Section 100-242A whether going up is something that results in an increased nonconformity. It's my understanding that up until extremely recently the answer to that question was no. Because as long as you stayed within the footprint or indeed as long as you stayed within an area that was defined by a line that ran through a point which closest to the lot line, as long as you stayed within that envelope there was no greater nonconformity or degree of nonconformity. Indeed very recently that was just what this Board held. I'm sure the Board is familiar with, what I'm familiar with and for the record I would like the Determination of the Findings and Facts. In that particular case there was a building situation upon a lot that was nonconforming and the building was situated at an angle such that the greatest nonconformity occurred and they heard which was real nonconformity and was more determined when as long as a structure stayed within an envelope which was measured by a line parallel to the boundary that went through that point everything was okay, and that to my understanding in the twenty-. five years or so that I've been doing it is the way everything looked. The Building Department did it that way and this Board did it that way and I've been given to understand that before my time and since the inception of Zoning it is done that way too. - Ekerybody understood just what that meant. It's been brought.to my attention as a result ' j.• •lirthedenial we got here and in conversaion•ith members .of the'Building Department where very recently there has been what is to me an Inexplicable change after roughly fifty years that the Building Department's Determination as to how they're going to deal with these things and now, if you stay within the envelope and go up you will be disapproved. I'm not sure why, I'm not sure how; but we find ourselves before this Board seeking relief. I don't know of any reason why that should necessarily be so at this particular time. There has been no change in the Ordinance and a model of any change anywhere that would lead to this result. The first wrong of this application is reversal. Do what this Board has been doing consistently and indeed what the Building Department has been doing consistently for all these years. There's been no change in the Ordinance and I think it would not be rational to adopt some sort of change in the absence of some sort legislative action. I've not been able to determine any valid reason why there should be that kind of a change. I don't believe that the Building Department s PAGE 54—SEPTEMBER 20,2001 - ZBA PUBLIC HEARING TRANSCRIPT TOWN OF SOUTHOLD was in error all those years, and while I may disagree with the Board from time to time, certainly my position tonight is that the Board was correct in adopting those determinations. And we urge the Board to adhere to its precedents and apply a uniform rule to my client that's been applied in the past. CHAIRMAN: Let's just leave that issue right there. What you really need to do is to file an Interpretation with us if you want us to over claim that issue. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: I've sent in a reversal actually. CHAIRMAN: I mean you need to file an Interpretation to actually have us file us a reversal, in order words, at the eleventh hour you can't bring that issue in. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: No, that was my application to amend, Mr. Chairman to bring that since you indicated at the outset that there was no debt before the proceedings my application is to file with you the necessary papers to bring that within the purvey of this Determination so as not to duplicate the efforts of the Board. And have everything under one umbrella. CHAIRMAN: So you will do that now? ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: I will do that. I make the oral application and I represent to you that I will follow up with the necessary papers to bring that to you so we don't waste time and effort here. And that's all I've got to say about that application at this time. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: I have a question, would that have to be advertised? CHAIRMAN: The Interpretation has to be advertised. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: That's going to take time. • EIiiIC•-BRESSLER, ESQ.: I'm asking for a Reversal, which would necessarily require you.to interpret, right.. That's all I think what I want to say, or can say about at this, s` particular' time. Assuming atrgued 'that they get the house back I would like to briefly address the second prong of the application. Should you chose to agree with that the Building Department's Interpretation, which obviously I urge you now to; but should you chose to do that there's a second prong to the application and that is if that's going to be the rule down there, then we're in front of you for a variance. That has been properly advertised and we are here seeking relief. I read the initial presentation so I won't go over that material again. What I would like to do is to address in the first instance, I would like in that regard to put before the Board I've actually go two of these. CHAIRMAN: What are we looking at here? PAGE 55-SEPTEMBER 20,2001 0 ZBA PUBLIC HEARING TRANSCRIPT TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: You are looking at a map of a community called Old Orchard, Gardiners Bay. CHAIRMAN: We knew it was Gardiner's Bay. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: That's what it says, this is Gardiner's Bay but it says there so you can identify it for the record. It says in the upper right hand corner Community called Old Orchard. And you are looking a blow-up of the tax map and you are looking at a number of homes that are marked in blue and each of those lots including the ones not marked in blue that are on the waterfront are enabled with the names of the owners. What I'd like to do is match up, if I could, each of those parcels with a photograph which are labeled on the back. What is the purpose of all that? The purpose of all that is to demonstrate to the Board what the nature of the waterfront lots, the thirty-seven waterfront lots in Gardiner's Bay are. And if you look at these blue ones and you count them you will see two-level homes. That's what this is designed to demonstrate. This means that by far the large majority of these homes are two-level. Why is that important? It's important because that's what we're asking for, and it will not change the character of the neighborhood. It is similar to most of what's there. Now there was an issue where at the last meeting, concerning the impact of this particular project on one of the neighbors. The Board has in its file based upon my review a series of letters from people in the area. One of which from an immediate neighbor, he is alleging that there is going to be an impact on light and air. This project was designed to have minimal impact on that neighbor to the west. I'm going to ask Mr. Brown to come up and just address you briefly with a couple of exhibits and what he's going to be doing is truthful. He is going to be showing you photographs of the south and north elevations of the house with the new constructions superimposed. And what this is going to show you is that roof line on the west side of the house, has been designed in such a manner as to soften the impact of the neighbor from what currently exists. Specifically on that side of the house there is an extension that comes out in a triangular fashion and it is of a height that goes out to the entire edge of the house. We're proposing to eliminate that and gradually go up from the first floor, up a little•bit higher with a gradual roofline. It would actually result in less impact to the neighbor than gburrently exists. So this house has been designed in a manner , to minimize impact while at the-same time giving to these people it is essentially no . - different from what most of their neighbors already have. You're also going to set.from Mr. Brown two studies that he has prepared. One on light and one on air.' 'Fascinating things, really I saw them outside. The light is going to show you that there is no impact on light on the neighbor except for the briefest period of time on calendar basis at a time prior to 5:00 a.m. in the morning. There is a tiny, tiny sliver when there is a tiny bit of impact and you will see how that works. So in essence there is no limitation on sunlight reaching this house. Why is that? Well that house is in front of ours. And can't move the sun means that they get better sun that we do at least in terms of when the rays arrive first. So there's no blockage. You're also going to see in terms of breeze, air; you're going to see a chart that has been prepared by Brookhaven National Lab, which indicates where the wind comes from on a daily basis. He's charted that out in terms of the compass. And again, because their house is in front of ours they get the benefit of the prevailing southwesterly and there's no adverse impact. In fact the only adverse impact PAGE 56-SEPTEMBER 20,2001 ZBA PUBLIC HEARING TRANSCRIPT TOWN OF SOUTHOLD on the air and the wind, if you want to call it adverse, is that they're sheltered from the nor'easters' because our property is more to the east of theirs. If you want to call that a detriment I guess we'll live with that. I would think of it as, a benefit, I don't want the nor'easters' coming down on my house. So in terms of light and air, there is no negative impact, in fact, there is a positive impact on the neighbor in terms of shelter from the nor'easters'. That having been said I ask Mr. Brown to come up, show you the demonstrative evidence and put it in your record. ROBERT BROWN: May I approach? CHAIRMAN: Sure. ROBERT BROWN: I realize some of these may be difficult for you all to see at once. CHAIRMAN: For anybody in the audience we, of course, are not going to close this hearing. Everybody has the right to look at it and so when we're done with the presentation we may reserve any discussion that we have with it after we study them. ROBERT BROWN: I just want to start with a photograph taken in front of the Waltzes house towards the west. So I think this clearly. CHAIRMAN: Where is Mr. Martin, he might want to come up and see this. Is Mr. Martin in the audience? Anybody else that has an interest? Mr. Martin why don't you stand over there and watch the whole thing. Mrs. Martin how are you? Anybody else have an interest in this issue on the opposition side? Or on the for side, you're welcome to stand over there. Okay, let's go. ROBERT BROWN: In view of the question that the Walzes house is facing me west, it is my opinion that this photo clearly shows that when you consider that the second floor addition only starts at this point off the Walzes house and goes up here that the impact on the vast majority of the neighbor's house is, in my opinion, insignificant. We go then to, yqu asked at our,last meeting for some presentation of the actual impact and I realize that thPse.:aft. fairly faint, but .av*rplayed on these photographs is what the proposed • construction.would look like. The roof peaks are taken, you can see in the photograph, are the poles that rest on the structure to show the peak of the roves. CHAIRMAN: Could you mark that one up a little bit more? MEMBER TORTORA: That's the top of the roofline there? It's very hard to see. CHAIRMAN: Could you mark that one up takes that one back tonight and mark it up a little bit more? ROBERT BROWN: I'm not quite sure what you want. CHAIRMAN: We'll take C.,3/D PAGE 57-SEPTEMBER 20,2001 ZBA PUBLIC HEARING TRANSCRIPT TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ROBERT BROWN: You want the roofline marked up? CHAIRMAN: Yes. ROBERT BROWN: I'll do it right now if somebody has a pen. This is where there is a gable end roof that we are replacing with a shed roof that you can see that much of roof is being removed from the west. CHAIRMAN: The cutout still stands there right? ROBERT BROWN: This portion of the cutout? • CHAIRMAN: No the cutout down below where the tree is, in back of that tree. Is that in front of that house? ROBERT BROWN: This is the'part of the house that will remain, and the roof, instead of going up to here, will now come across here. CHAIRMAN: Again, you have plenty of time to comment on, this is not a quiz situation. ROBERT BROWN: Let me explain this briefly, this is centered on the center of the house to the west to show where the impact is. These arched lines represent the sun in the sky on the 21st of any specific month. The months denoted by the roman numerals on the. So the highest the sun is in the sky in the morning because the Walzs house is to the east, you can see that on June 21st from 4:45 to approximately to 5:00 a.m. this portion of the Walzs house in fact does shade the center of the neighboring property. After that point and on any other time in the year, there is absolutely no sunlight impact from the house to the northeast. And finally, in the upper left hand corner is a sample from Brookhaven National Labs, this was just a few days ago, the top to bottom indicates degrees of the compass. You can see from the outline of this house that it blocks air from approximately 355 degrees to 60 degrees. That is indicated by the red on the chart. I think its fairly clear from this being recordings of wind direction according to the angle from which its coming that the vast majority on this day and on other days that I sampled, even more so in some cases, the vast majority of the wind is coming from directions other than the northeast. But I don't think it takes Brookhaven National Labs for us to know that the wind comes off the water in the summer, it comes from the northeast, northwest rather on a winter day, and if its coming from the northeast, I'd just assume be blocked. I hope that helps you. CHAIRMAN: We will certainly study it Mr. Brown. We'll certainly study these there's no question about it. And if we have any question on it ROBERT BROWN: If you have any questions please feel free to call me. If you need any calculations. PAGE 58-SEPTEMBER 20,2001 ZBA PUBLIC HEARING TRANSCRIPT TOWN OF SOUTHOLD CHAIRMAN: We'll do it at the next hearing, Eric is going to modify this and we're going to open them together. Thank you. What else do you have to say Mr. Bressler? ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: At this particular time, and keeping in mind, we will be back once more, given the lateness of the hour. CHAIRMAN: Okay, Mr. Martin and Mrs. Martin you will study these, you'll have questions and we'll quiz the applicant's counsel and architect at the next hearing. We just have to determine when the next hearing is going to be. Our problem Mr. Bressler is that we are absolutely loaded for the October meeting. So we are loaded as we are tonight. You can't get more saturated than this. I have a feeling this is going to be part of the November calendar. That's the only way I can suggest here. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: If that's your first available date, we'll take it Mr. Chairman. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: It's the fifteenth. You're going to get it in next week I guess right? CHAIRMAN: Yes. So hearing no further comment from anyone, I'll recess the hearing and we will then take both issues and if we have any questions on those issues at that point, we may also request a member of the Building Department to come in and discuss that. Since we have a unique situation, we have Mr. Forrester who actually did the Notice of Disapproval but now holds another position in the Town, we may ask him to come and now Mr. Verity holds that position and we may ask them both to come, we don't know, we'll see what happens. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: I had previously contacted Mr. Verity, but due to the lateness of the hour, he was able to stick around and I'm not sure if he did you would want to hear from him now. CHAIRMAN: So, I offer that as a resolution, ladies and gentlemen. • SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION • * * * Recess for five minutes . 10:48 p.m. Appl. No. 5003 —KACE LI, INC. This is an Appeal requesting a Reversal of the Building Inspector's Notice of Disapproval dated August 13, 2001, denying an application for a building permit for two-family dwellings under Article IV, Section 1000-42A.2. The reason stated in the Notice of Disapproval is that the proposed project indicates several two-family dwellings on a single parcel, and that the Code allows only one such structure per lot as a permitted use. Zone District: Hamlet-Density (HD). Location of Property: South Side of North Road (a/k/a/ C.R. 48) (now or formerly referred to as "Northwind Village" site), 500+- feet east of Chapel Lane, Greenport; Parcel#1000-40-3-1. SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS TRANSCRIPT OF PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD MARCH 28, 2002 (Prepared by Paula Quintieri) Present were: Chairman Goehringer Member Tortora Member Oliva' Member Orlando Board Secretary Kowalski Absent was: Member Horning(as agreed) PUBLIC HEARINGS: 7:05 p.m. Appl. No. 4962 — ROGER J. AND LESLIE WALZ. This is request for a Variance under Article XXIV, Section 100-242A, based on the Building Inspector's May 2, 2001 Notice of Disapproval regarding the proposed second-story addition to existing dwelling. The reason stated in the Notice of Disapproval states that the existing structure has a nonconforming setback of less than 10 feet and 15 feet o the side yards, and as a result, the addition of the second-story represents an increase in the degree of nonconformity. 2505 Old Orchard Road, East Marion; 37-6-5. (The hearing was concluded on November 29, 2001, and reopened at the request of applicants.) CHAIRMAN: Mr. Bressler we received your letter. We, of course, spoke to you prior to the letter and we're waiting to hear what you have to say regarding this application. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: Well, Mr. Chairman, I think we're at the end of the road here. You have ruled the way you have ruled on the first half of the application; and, at least for the time being, that is the rule that applies to these particular projects. That being the case, my comments tonight will be addressed toward the application of that rule to this specific project. Hard cases make bad law, am I adding to the law. And I think if we were to examine this particular application we'd all be constrained to agree. I think the important thing to focus on at this particular juncture is measured against that particular rule, what is the relief that is sought by the applicant in this particular case. It is beyond argument that the applicant is entitled to something, even under the rule that this Board has announced. In fact, the applicant is entitled to build with 15 feet on one side and 10 feet on another side. That is so. So the question before you is, is that the best possible result of this situation. We have said from the beginning, even before the pronouncement of that rule, that that is not so. That is not the best possible result for the applicant; it's not the best possible result for the neighbors. It's not the best possible result for anybody. Now why is this so. This is so because the neighbor to the east has no objection to moving the bulk of the second story next to him. The neighbor to the west has an 1110 U Page 2,Mai ch 28,2002 ZBA Public HeaiingTiansciipt Town of Southold objection to what I can see to virtually anything, and doesn't want anything near him. So, as a result of this, the proposed plan calls for the bulk of this second story to be next to the neighbor who doesn't object, and as far away as possible from the neighbor who does. That's what the plan proposes. As of right, all the applicant can do is build in a position that is further away from the neighbor who doesn't care and is closer to the neighbor who does object. This is an irrational result. All we have done, in order to aid the Board in looking at what the application and this new rule would require and why it doesn't really work in this situation, I've asked Mr. Brown to draw up the building as it exists, the building that could be built, absence relief from the Board, and the building that is proposed to be built far away from the object ant and close to the neighbor who doesn't care. I've also asked him to calculate what the effect of the proposed project would be on the objecting neighbor and he has calculated that there would be a reduction in bulk or volume within the nonconforming zone close to the objecting neighbor. And he has calculated that in cubic feet. So the net result of all that is, there is a reduction in bulk close to the objecting neighbor, it is further away from the objecting neighbor and it's near to a place where nobody cares. You will also hear from Mr. Brown, that architecturally this is the best possible design, given the lay of the land. You will hear from him architecturally it's the best possible design, given the interior design of the house. In short, this maximizes the benefit for everybody and it minimizes the detriment for everybody. There is no reason not to grant this. Mr. Brown do you have these drawings? CHAIRMAN: Good evening Mr. Brown, how are you? ROB BROWN: Good evening. Fine thank you, how are you? If I may? CHAIRMAN: Surely. ROB BROWN: I would just like to add a bit of history for the newer Members of the Board. In fact, when this design was conceived and actually well until the working drawing phase, this design was based on an Interpretation of the Code by the Building Department which made this design perfectly legitimate and acceptable. It was not until the working drawings were almost completed, that the Building Department changed their Interpretation of the Code. That's just a little background. What I have here is a simple diagram, which shows, if I may explain it on the top, is the existing condition. This shows the three properties contiguous. This is viewing from the north, looking the last house from the center. The fourth house to the west is to the left, and the Martin residence to the right is to the West, the fourth house is to the east. The top shows the existing conditions and directly below that is the proposed plan. As you can see the reduction of the gable roof on the west side of the Walz residence, as proposed, would reduce the volume of structure in the nonconforming area by 120 cubic feet. There are three reasons, three basic design concepts behind this original proposal. The first is when you're dealing with slope terrain you want to move the mass, the large proportion of mass upslope for the simple matter of visual stability. In this case, the second factor behind this design was the fact that its structurally logical and, therefore, economical to build a second floor directly over a first floor rather than having to suspend over air, which . Page 3,March 28,2002 ZBA Public Hearing Tiansciipt Town of Southold would be the case below. The third, and I think you might see some irony in this, is that the design, if we were to conform to the setback regulations, actually has a far more significant impact on the house to the west than the proposed design. You could, of course, put the 15 feet on the east side, I'm sorry the 10 feet on the east side, and the 15 feet on the west side. ROB BROWN: Certainly, and you will understand that this diagram is showing a worst case. MEMBER TORTORA: It's not to scale. ROB BROWN: The fact of the matter is the preponderance of the mass would be closer to the house to the west than to the east. MEMBER TORTORA: The dwelling is not to scale. ROB BROWN: It's roughly to scale. MEMBER TORTORA: The three feet that you're showing from the property line on the east. CHAIRMAN: He just showed you there's a 15 on that side. MEMBER TORTORA: No, I mean on what's existing. MEMBER OLIVA: The proposed, Mr. Brown, I mean Mr. Martin's complaint it seems to me with your roof line the way it is, all that run off, unless you do some gutters and leaders and putting some drywells in there, all that soil and everything else is running right down into his property and the property that is today on the west side of the Walz property is eroding. ROB BROWN: Well, if I may, first of all. MEMBER OLIVA: Because of just runoff, not property. ROB BROWN: But if I may, we've never stated any objection to gutters, drywells, French drains or any other matter. We felt that that was not a matter for this Board, but for the Building Department. Secondly, the proposed design does not have a single square inch more of roof area than the existing house does. And certainly we would do anything to mitigate runoff, but we didn't feel that was an issue to this Board. That's between us and the Building Department in my opinion. MEMBER TORTORA: About a year, not even a year, about at one of the earliest hearings, I was going through the files today and I noted that you said that you were applying to the Town Trustees because the project is within their jurisdiction. That's in Page 4,Maich 28,2002 ZBA Public Healing Tiansciipt Town of Southold the minutes of one of the meetings and yet I don't see any Trustee permit or Letter of Non-Jurisdiction. ROB BROWN: That I'm sure is a clerical situation if we applied, I'm sure its been approved. I mean we're going back a very long time now. We've been at this ten months, just with this Board. MEMBER TORTORA: You're quite right ROB BROWN: To my knowledge you have whatever documentation was needed. If that's not the case, then obviously anything you do would be subject to. MEMBER TORTORA: The only reason I ask this, Mr. Brown, is because genuinely the Trustees do, are very concerned about matters of runoff, particularly when it involves wetland areas and waterfront area, as they are very concerned. ROB BROWN: And we take it very seriously too. MEMBER TORTORA: Yes, it can have a tremendous impact and that's why generally, these applications are reviewed by the Trustees first and we take very seriously their comments. ROB BROWN: Well, again there is zero difference in the roof area between the proposed plan and the existing structure and if there were any concern, I mean aside from any concern that any Board might have, this is something that as any responsible architect, designer or engineer would consider, runoff is an issue under any conditions in any situation and its something to be dealt with. Certainly, if this Board wanted to make that a condition of their approval we would welcome that, but it certainly wouldn't make us any less or more interested in doing that, that's something that we have to do. MEMBER TORTORA: I'm sure if you could just show us either the Trustee permit or Letter of Non jurisdiction, and put it into the record we would appreciate it. ROB BROWN: I am certain we can get that for you. MEMBER TORTORA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Brown it would be very interesting to see this from the opposite side, from the waterside. Is there any possibility of you assembling that from the waterside? ROB BROWN: Mr. Goehringer the plans that I presented many months ago, that showed a photographic rendition of the existing with an overlay of drawing, of the proposed was from the other side, I really, with all due respect that's kind of beating a dead horse. CHAIRMAN: Okay. Any other questions of Mr. Brown? IIP 411P Page 5,Match 28,2002 ZBA Public Heating Ttanscttpt Town of Southold MEMBER ORLANDO: No questions. CHAIRMAN: Okay, thank you. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: In closing, I would just like to say; it has been an extremely long for my client. He's retired. Despite all this, he still wants to retire out here and build and he needs to have a decision. With all due respect, I don't feel that another rendition form the waterside is going to change the facts. The facts are what they are. The proposal has minimized the effect on the west side, we all know that; the bulk was moved over to the east. If that's something that the Board thinks is a good thing, then we urge you to approve. If you don't think that that is a good thing, under the circumstances, then don't approve it. And we either build as of right, take an appeal or both, I don't know. But give us a decision. The Martins have been here objecting for months. You can now see there is nothing else we can do. And everything else that we might consider, whether its 10 or 15 on one side and the other, it doesn't really matter, its going to be worse. CHAIRMAN: But, you asked for this re-hearing, we didn't ask for it. But, we're here ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: Let me just clarify that. You asked whether I would waive something, and the answer is no, I'm not going to waive it. The fact that I'm here, I think is a good thing, I think especially the new Members of the Board needed the opportunity to hear what this was about. I think because the Board announced a new rule, it would be not a good thing to rule on the variance without taking into account what the new rule's impact was on this particular project. In particular, Mr. Brown's computation of the reduction in volume on the Martin side I think is something that the Board can rightfully take into account in terms of evaluating the project. I think that's important and I think before the rule is announced nobody even knew that that was even marginally relevant. Well, now it is and we've introduced evidence to the Board to show that there is a reduction and that is the amount of reduction. We've also shown you that we've moved it as far away as we possibly can and anything else is going to be closer to them. Whether it's a foot, two feet, three feet, whatever it is, its going to be closer to them and its going to end up in something less desirable for them. That's where I think the bottom line is, given the fact that the neighbor to the east doesn't object, we urge you to look at this plan and see whether or not you agree with us that this is the best possible resolution for everybody in the neighborhood. Or would I send Mr. Brown back to the drawing board and think about doing something else. • CHAIRMAN: Mr. Bressler, the neighbor to the east told us that when they laid out the sub-division, and that neighbor is here tonight, that he agreed with a 6-foot by 8-foot side yard, this Board has never agreed with a 6 foot or an 8 foot side yard. You are telling me that he is, this house is 3 feet from the property line on that side and he is 6 feet from the property line, or how close is his house from the property line? MEMBER OLIVA: 6 feet. CHAIRMAN: 6 feet, okay. So 6 and 3 is 9, we're talking 9 feet between the two houses S Page 6,Match 28,2002 ZBA Public Healing Transcupt Town of Southold ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: He has no objection. CHAIRMAN: I don't care if he has any objection. I have an objection. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: Wait a minute Mr. Chairman, you said two things; the first, I take issue with and I find it totally unacceptable that you have stated on the record that you don't care what the neighbor thinks. I think that's wrong. I think you have to care to a degree. Now you might. CHAIRMAN: Let me rephrase my question. Just a minute (raising his voice) I have ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: May I finish my sentence? CHAIRMAN: No I'll finish. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: No, I can't finish my sentence? CHAIRMAN: No you can't finish your sentence. No. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: What kind of a ruling is that, that I can't finish my sentence? CHAIRMAN: Because, pardon me Mr. Bressler. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: Mr. Chairman, I have never been treated where I have not been able to finish a sentence. Please. Now you say that you care, yes I agree. That what you think matters a lot. You are on the Board, what all of you think matters. But to say that you don't care that the neighbor doesn't object I think is unfair. That's my point. I'm not saying its determinative, I'm saying that you ought to take it into account when one neighbor says I object a lot over here, and the other one says I don't. That's my only point. No one says you're bound by it, but I think you have to, as reasonable people, listen to what they say in the neighborhood, that's all. CHAIRMAN: I never said I would not listen sir, all I said was that I still contend that 9 feet between these two houses, at the height that is going to be constructed, is too close and that's my opinion. I'm not thrusting that opinion on anybody else, that is my opinion as a fireman for thirty-four years in the Town of Southold. That's all I'm telling you. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: My only ploy is, I don't think its fair for any Member of the Board to say that they don't care what a neighbor says. You may not be bound by it. CHAIRMAN: I will change my statement. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: But, I object to that. Page 7,Match 28,2002 ZBA Public Healing Tianscnpt Town of Southold CHAIRMAN: Well, you can object to whatever you want, I said I will change my statement. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: Okay, fair enough. My point is we've done everything in accordance with what we think the neighbors will live with and what they want. And if this Board doesn't want to do that, then we will be guided accordingly. And if we need to move this over, closer to the Martins, then that's what's going to happen. We're here at the end of the line, as I said at the beginning, its up to you people to decide what you're going to penult here and what you're not going to permit. My job is only to tell you the way I see it and that's the way I see it. The man to the east doesn't care. The man to the west has a vital objection and wants it as far away as he can, and we've tried to meet that. MEMBER TORTORA: Mr. Bressler,just a quick question? I went back to the transcript to get, to try, one of the transcripts it was INAUDIBLE, some of the parts were inaudible and that happens sometimes when people move away from the microphone. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: And talk over one another, and I do apologize for that. MEMBER TORTORA: Yes, gentlemen. CHAIRMAN: Did I stop him, he continued. MEMBER TORTORA: Okay. Just to get some stuff on the record here that we kind of lost in the transcript. What is the square footage of the ground floor of the house now? ROB BROWN: We can certainly get that for you, I didn't bring that information with me. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: Keep going, if we can't answer it. MEMBER TORTORA: I know there's a two-car garage and there's, on the bottom now of the house? ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: Yes. MEMBER TORTORA: And that would remain correct? ROB BROWN: Yes. MEMBER TORTORA: I was trying to figure it out, it's about 1800 — 2000 square feet now, I don't know? I'm sure you have that information. ROB BROWN: Not with me I'm afraid. I thought that that was old news. Al) Page 8,Maich 28,2002 ZBA Public Hearing Transcript Town of Southold MEMBER TORTORA: It would be old news if we had a perfect world where nobody jiggled papers and everybody spoke into the microphone and everything could get transcribed, but it was not picked up in the transcription. ROB BROWN: I'll see if I have it with me, if not I will certainly get that to you as quickly as possible. MEMBER TORTORA: Just one thing I want to note, Town Law has not changed. Our Interpretation will still consider and be focused on the criteria set forth in New York State Town Law. That the criteria are, will it be a detriment, benefit to the applicant versus the detriment to the community, correct? ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: Absolutely, the only thing that's changed is your Interpretation of what can be done with the nonconforming uses. MEMBER TORTORA: That does not change New York State Town Law and the criteria under which we're supposed to look at a variance. It changes nothing. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: Oh no, that doesn't change. What changes is what you're looking at, not what standards you apply. You are now looking at something which you've called a nonconforming area, but yes, you must apply the same factors absolutely. MEMBER TORTORA: And as to the degree of the variance, I don't care what method you're using, the Code requires 25 foot total side yards ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: That's correct. MEMBER TORTORA: and by any measure, a request for 9 feet is substantial. There is no disputing that. What I see here is you're trying to mitigate that. I see that you are trying to mitigate that. This is a very old sub-division. The lots, in my opinion, its my opinion, its not a statement from the Board or anything else, its my observation. The lots are substandard, they're small, and they're tiny little lots. Mr. Martin, the neighbor who is the objector, his property is 6 feet from yours. Unfortunately, his property is underneath your property, so your property is here, and Mr. Martin is here. So when you want to put a two-story house on, there is a towering effect. And that is a fact. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: It's a fact. MEMBER TORTORA: When we walked around the property I was struck by one thing, I was struck the fact that the brick patio on the, I'm trying to think, the Martin side is the west? Okay, the patio on the Walz property is next to the Martin property is actually sloping like this. It's looks like it's falling. And we see things like this. This isn't something that you can put in a report or any type of textbook, this is something that you visually see, you see that the property is eroding and it's eroding onto the Martin property So, I would hope, that you would be able to devise a plan that would prevent your soil from ending up on the Martin's property. Just as I'm sure, if the situation were . fid ` Page 9,Maich 28,2002 IP4110 ZBA Public HeanngTiansciipt Town of Southold reversed, and Mr. Walz house was where Mr. Martin's is, he would want the same and you, as his attorney, would ask for the same. So that's a consideration. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: I don't think that there's any doubt that Mr. Brown will design this in such a manner that erosion, at least from the water, will not be a factor here. MEMBER TORTORA: Could we throw in soil too? ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: I don't know what you're suggesting? MEMBER TORTORA: In other words, when a ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: The only thing that we're doing is going up and we're not changing the roof area, so what is it that you're proposing. MEMBER TORTORA: I know, you have one piece of property that's like this, and another that's like this. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: Are you proposing some sort of bulk heading, along that line to prevent MEMBER TORTORA: I'm no expert and I don't intend to be. I think you have, at your expertise, people who could suggest ways to mitigate that. I'm not an expert. I am only telling you what I saw in personal inspection. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: We certainly don't have any objections to that, it's just without any guidance, it raises a whole of issues, but I don't have any real objections to. MEMBER TORTORA: Just think about. As I mentioned to Mr. Brown, the other thing is, we do rely on the Trustees to review the projects and, in reviewing them, to issue a determination based on their criteria of wetlands, decking and everything else. So I would like to see their permit and/or their Letter of non-jurisdiction. That's all. ROB BROWN: We can certainly get that to you. To be very honest with you, in clerical terms, I don't deal wit (inaudible). MEMBER TORTORA: See you're going to be lost in one of these transcripts. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: We're not picking you up. ROB BROWN: I personally did not handle all of the paperwork involved with all the permits that we deal on a regular basis. I have every reason to believe that we did make that application and we have the documentation, if that's not the case, I will certainly get it for you. But one way or another, I will make that available to you. And certainly in answer to your other question, and your comment, the Walzs asked me from the very 11111 Page 10,Maich 28,2002 ZBA Public Heating Ttanscnpt Town of Southold beginning of the design of this to take into consideration the fact that the Martins house is lower than theirs and to design it in such a way as to minimize the impact. I must say, from the bottom of my heart, that is exactly what we tried to do. I don't know if there is any other way that we could've designed this that lessened the impact the Martins have on anything at all and that's from the bottom of my heart. MEMBER TORTORA: The height of this is 21 feet? The one that, not the new one, is very tall. ROB BROWN: The final height to the ridge or to the. CHAIRMAN: Main roof. ROB BROWN: The main roof I believe is about 21 feet yes, to the best of my recollection. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Bressler I would like to afford Martins a copy of what Mr. Brown has given, if you would please and let them concentrate on that for a couple of minutes. And we'll see what develops throughout the hearing here. We'll now ask if there's anybody else that would like to speak in favor of this application? Mr. Thorpe how are you tonight? FRANK THORPE: My name is Frank Thorpe, I represent my brother Edward and his wife Virginia who are the people are immediately to the east. I would just like to clarify something; I never said that there was an 8-foot setback with this particular lot. These original deeds did not have the 8-foot setback the subsequent deeds in Gardner's Bay Estates did. My deed, my brothers deed, the deed to this particular house, the deed to the Martins particular house and the deed to the east of the Martins house did not contain those restrictions at all. Subsequent deeds sometime in the later 30's did. The map of Gardners Bay Estates was filed in 1927 with the County of Suffolk. That map of Section II and I. That's what set up all these particular lots as such. Section III is half acred zoned. CHAIRMAN: So where did the 8 feet come in then? FRANK THORPE: The 8 feet came in CHAIRMAN: I mean in your discussion? In your opinion? FRANK THORPE: I believe later, mid to later 30's. CHAIRMAN: Now that was a covenant in the deed saying that that's what you had to have as a minimum side yard? FRANK THORPE: Correct. 1101 Page 11,Match 28,2002 ZBA Public Heating Tianscript Town of Southold CHAIRMAN: Okay, and your side yard presently on the house that you're representing for your brother is 6 feet, is that correct? FRANK THORPE: No, 5 feet. CHAIRMAN: 5 feet. FRANK THORPE: At one point. And when it was added on to, in 1976, did not require any subsequent thing, because it was no closer than the original 5 feet. CHAIRMAN: Okay, thank you. Is there anybody else that would like to speak in favor? Mr. Martin? RALPH MARTIN: Good evening ladies and gentlemen of the Board. I feel like a soldier in a foxhole, all these big guns shooting at me. Nonetheless, I shall carry on. On Saturday, March 2nd at 7:30 in the morning my wife and I were served with a request for judicial intervention by Mr. Eric Bressler on behalf of the petitioners Roger and Leslie Walz on which we were named as respondents, along with the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Southold. Our involvement with the Walzs application has been the result of our being advised and invited by registered letter of the Zoning Board of Appeals to attend the application hearing and to express our objections if any. We had voiced our objections in a businesslike way and have not slandered or nor have made ourselves, and have made ourselves available to the Walzs, their attorney and their architect to discuss amicably why we are not in favor of their proposed second story addition. Apparently they were not desirous of any such discussion since a meeting was never arranged. We have a right to our opinion and have expressed it before this Board in the proper manner. Therefore, we are puzzled as to why we have been named in this lawsuit. However, since there are new Board Members, and this application hearing has been re-opened, we wish to request that our previously submitted comments and photographs, which are all part of the file, be considered during your deliberation. To reiterate briefly, their lot is less than 47 %2 wide on which has been built an approximately 38 foot wide, single-story house. The addition they propose will loom overwhelmingly large on a small, narrow piece of property with the exception of one, we know of no other two-story home in the community that is built on such a narrow lot. Also, since there are house is at the highest elevation of the slope of the land between the two houses we are very concerned about the additional drain on and possible overflow of their septic system. llasmuch, as there will be an increase in the number of bedrooms and bathrooms, should the existing septic systems fail and all overflow, the affluent could not our property but possibly leach into the nearby shallow waterway as well. The Suffolk County Department of Health has very specific regulations regarding sewage disposal systems and minimum septic tank areas and capacities. And you would hope that the Building Department would seek the County's approval of the septic system. It would appear that in order to be in compliance with the current County of Department of Health Regulations a new and/or enlarged system would be required. However, we can't imagine where it would be constructed on a small lot. We would also like to know if the Town Trustees have made a determination of jurisdiction regarding this construction due r ill S . ., Page 12,Maich 28,2002 ZBA Public Healing Tiansciipt Town of Southold to its closeness of tidal water. The size of the house they are proposing is more in keeping with the south shore than Gardners Bay Estates. One has only have to ride around in some of the smaller more established waterfront communities in Southold to see what happens when residents whether full or part-time decide that they should be able to do whatever they wish and the Building Codes are made for everyone else but them. Ladies and gentlemen I thank you for your time and I will give you a copy of what I have just said. CHAIRMAN: Yes, Mr. Brown? ROB BROWN: I would just like to clarify one point. I've had several conversations on the phone with Mr. Martin requesting a meeting with him to discuss plans and how they came about and they how they affect him. And he declined to meet with me if the Walzs were not present. Thank you. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Martin, let's just wrap this up please. RALPH MARTIN: I wish to rebut that. We did call the gentleman and ask for a meeting with the Walzs. The Walzs apparently could not attend, for whatever reason it was, and I wanted them to be there as our neighbors to see if this could be worked out amicably. It never happened. LESLIE WALZ: Mr. Chairman, you should know that we were asked to meet with Mr. Martin. I'm very sorry we didn't meet. My husband was in the hospital, I wonder why! CHAIRMAN: Mr. Bressler is there anything you would like to wrap up with? ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: Yes, thank you. Thank you Mr. Chairman, I think it is evident from what you've heard by way of objection tonight, that the principle issues before you are not really addressed by those objections. What the Trustees do, the Trustees will do. What the Health Department does, it will do. And they are charged by law of doing certain things, as are you. So those objections don't really go to the heart of this particular application. What I heard is that there is an objection to having a second-story. We all know that the Walzs are entitled to something. Something that's going to be less desirable for the Martins, than what is proposed, and I think that's the issue here. I think when you consider what you're going to do about this you ought to take into account the fact that from the very beginning this project has been designed to provide the maximum relief given the lay of the land, the location of the dwellings on the land, and now we're before you asking for that type of relief. I'm fond of saying from time to time, that no good deed goes undone and no good deed goes unpunished. Now I feel that this is where we are, we designed this thing the way we designed it. I know, Mr. Chairman, you asked, is there anything that we could do? I think, for the Martins, I think that the drawings make it clear that we have moved as far away as we can. We have reduced by 120 cubic feet, the volume of structure that is on their side. There is not greater roof area. The runoff will not be any greater since the roof area is not increased. There will be gutters, leaders and drywells and anything else that we can do to mitigate whatever 4 \. , , , Is.a,,,,,I ~ + 400 SIP Page 13,Match 28,2002 ZBA Public Healing Tianscupt Town of Southold effects there may be. What we propose, we think is a reasonable plan given the nature of the opposition and given the nature of the agreement and we would urge you to afford us that relief measured against the standards that this Board has announced, the program that we have designed for this building meets the spirit of that particular ruling in beauty and the light of the neighbors concerns and I think that's what we're looking at here and that we would urge you to grant relief and we urge you to do it in an expeditious manner so that the Walzs now know what they're going to do since Spring is upon us. They would like to retire here and we would like to know what we're going to do if anything. Thank you. CHAIRMAN: Seeing no hands and hearing no further comment, I'll make a motion closing the hearing reserving decision until later. SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION * * * • ' 03/29/2002 11: 21 6314770973 FAIRWEATHER BROWN PAGE 01 tk- 3)2 . -61 794 )t,je,cu DESIGN ASSOCIATES,INC. P.O.Box 521 413 Main Street Greenport,N.Y. 11944 631-477-9752 (fax)631-477-0973 March 29, 2002 Zoning Board of Appeals Southold Town Re' Walz SCI'M# 1000-037-6-5 Following are the Measurements requested: First floor(existing) livingspace 1087 square feet Second floor(proposed) livingspace 1615 square feet Proposed total living space 2702 square feet Existing Garage 722 square feet Re ir,. ctfutly submitted, 0!r1 own awl awl aull auli -cloJcl loecpaG ../ loecips -cloiel I I I ,11-1DRI AO SV, ODUOpIGVN ZIOAA POUgplGgej OCLIOLli 07UgPIGgN LliveN I-1121 0 N 1; ff ii , . CEO ODZI W : if—. 3 3 f 5 i ' .....-- , ------1 --7-Z-, --f7 _, ..-:::--; --..N. A., i "'Z''''' -,,.:_,,,_ .A-7...„----..:=, -----:".--, ...-7,-_,1‘, ."--." --,../. 21111 01.11I 2U11 OR -cioJcl loeci4as pecnas -cloJcl I I I I CES0c1011d .111,•11 gIVOC 00U g P IG72,1 1.114.1e1A1 3.311°I91" Z I eM I-1.IA 0 N aougpiGaN ackloqi •1 "r-1.11_,,„,.. _4 r,. !t . i 02021 CI:JD COD , I 11 ---.'••---.7:-=-=-E-4 ------ -,q1z,.44 -"-4---Zi-,, MOM MOM MIMI MEM 2111M MOM , • , .v. ' 11:1---'-'"-2'7 f 4g2}olcinn oz I -xcucicie I - --NI-", sum mos sin• Ael/9/1.11J011J02-1.10LI 4c,0 11.11110A GO GlIpJ _ gull gull owl gull •cioJci recpas =Pec140G •do.icl I I I I -DNILSDCH augpisoN zieArk `""'"'" aouapisaN aciJou gouapiGasd u14...JetAl 1-1 121 0 N 7,....___ ,-; r., _ ,• :- ;; .;,.. •—ltultu -`,-,-, g-L1=4 1 i---7-----`_----1• L :. '.3 i '5---'4:, if z 3 •1 ,- =.F. 1'' € • _L,.,,,„ 1 tfi .d 1 1, 4111, f. • GJ '/9C 2 Ref: Roger&Leslie Walz--Appl. #4962 Presented to ZBA 3/28/02 On Saturday, March 2, 2002, at 7:40 in the morning,my wife and I were served with a "Request for Judicial Intervention" by Mr. Eric Bressler, on behalf of Petitioners Roger and Leslie Walz, on which we were named as respondents, along with the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Southold. Our involvement with the Walz' application has been as a result of our being advised and invited, by registered letter, from the Zoning Board of Appeals,to attend the application hearing and to express our objections, if any. We have voiced our objections in a business-like way, have not slandered or libeled and have made ourselves available to the Walzes,their attorney and their architect to discuss, amicably, why we are not in favor of their proposed second-story addition. Apparently,they were not desirous of any such discussion, since a meeting was never arranged. We have a right to our opinion and have expressed it before this Board in the proper manner. Therefore, we are puzzled as to why we have been named in this lawsuit. However, since there are new Board members and this application hearing has been re-opened, we wish to request that our previously submitted comments and photographs, which are all part of the file,be considered during your deliberation. To reiterate briefly: Their lot is less that 47.5 ft. wide, on which has been built an approximately 38-foot wide, single-story house. The addition they•propose will loom overwhelmingly large on this small,narrow piece of property. With the exception of one, we know of no other two-story home in the community that is built on such a narrow lot. Also, since their house is at the highest elevation of the slope of land between our two houses,we are very concerned about the additional drain on, and possible overflow of, the septic system, inasmuch as there will be an increase in the number of bedrooms and bathrooms. Should the existing septic system fail and overflow,the effluent could not only spill over onto our property,but possibly leach into the nearby shallow waterway as well. The Suffolk County Department of Health has very specific regulations regarding sewage disposal systems and minimum septic tank area and capacities, and we would hope that the Building Department would seek the County's approval of the septic system. It would appear that, in order to be in compliance with current County Dept.of Health regulations, a new and/or enlarged system would be required. However, we can't imagine where it could be constructed on this small lot: We would also like to know if the Town Trustees have made a determination of jurisdiction regarding this construction, due to its closeness to tidal water. The size house they are propgsing is more in keeping with the South Shore than Gardiners Bay Estates. One has only to,ride around some of the small,more established waterfront communities in Southold Town to see what happens when residents,whether part- or full-time, decide that they should be able to do whatever they wish and the building codes are meant for everyone else but them. Thank you. Ralph Martin, Jr. __J �U� —•mac_.. �� of Reference: Reference: Roger&LesLog of telephone convemations with Mr. Brown Li Appl. #4962 for ZBA 11/29/01 << �(1 On Wed., 11/21/01 (the day before Thanksgiving) at 1:44 in the afternoon, Walz' (c�'tk, architect,Robert Brown, called and left a message indicating that he had been advised by the vx,(tj• chairman of the ZBA to contact us in..4.a..4.aeffort to set up an appointment to discuss the "Walz project" and answer any*estions we may have. He concluded his message with"perhaps I will call back on Monday". On Friday, 11/23/01 at 9:40 a.m, we returned his call (477-9752) and indicated that we would be more than happy to meet with him and the Walzs (and Mr. Bressler, should they so desire) at their earliest convenience. We asked that he let us know when would be a good time for them and we would make every effort to be available. At 1:45 p.m. Mr. Brown called us back and advised that the Walzs were unable to come `out since they had "closed up the house for the winter" and "have other plans". If they have, in fact, "closed up for the winter", it will be the first time we can remember that they have left furniture outside,have not put up the storm shutters and have left the kitchen window ajar. Mr. Brown said he was their representative in this matter and Ralph replied that he would discuss it with his wife and also seek advice from another party. Tuesday, 11/27, is OK with Mr. Brown. We are to call him and let him know what we decide. On Monday, 11/26/01 at 1:15 p.m.,we contacted Mr. Brown and advised him that we saw no point in meeting with him without the Walzs being present. We explained that, inasmuch as they are the applicants for the variance and we are their next door neighbors with whom it was suggested they open a line of communication and respond to whatever questions we may have, it seems reasonable-to expect that they would want to participate in whatever discussion took place. Also, it's possible that we may have some questions that Mr. Brown may not have the answers to. We have indicated our willingness to sit down and discuss this in an effort to resolve the problems that exist,but it seems pointless to take up everyone else's time at a meeting that the Walzs have declined to attend. Ralph Martin, Jr. 2555 Old Orchard Lane East Marion,NY 11939 631-477-0428 ,1 •APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS • ct„fiFfO( ' to itkovSouthold Town Hall Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman ���/1 0A: 53095 Main Road Lydia A.Tortora t y P.O. Box 1179 \)a i George Horning Southold,New York 11971-0959 c\ 0,, Ruth D. Oliva �� ®�•11 ZBA Fax(631)765-9064 Vincent Orlando : RI •,.•i Telephone(631) 765-1809 .....�'� http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD February 27, 2002 Fax 298-8565 \Eric J. Bressler, Esq. Wickham Wickham&Bressler, P.C. Main Road Box 1424 Mattituck, NY 11952 Re: Appl. No. 4962—Roger Walz Variance Request • Dear Mr. Bressler: As a follow-up to our telephone conversation today, this will confirm that the Board of Appeals adopted the following Resolution at its meeting held Thursday, February 21, 2002: RESOLVED, that the hearing be reopened and scheduled for March 28, 2002, with all notices as required under Chapter 58 to be provided by the applicant; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the applicant furnish a letter in detail explaining the grounds for a reopening of the hearing. This Resolution was duly adopted (5-0). Very t .. Gerard P. Goehringer r Chairman • NSMISSION VERIFICATION REPORT TIME : 02/28/2002 09:57 DATE,TIME 02/28 09:56 FAX NO./NAME 2988565 DURATION 00:00:30 PAGE(S) 01 RESULT OK MODE STANDARD ECM LAW OFFICES WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER, P.C. 10315 MAIN ROAD, P.O. BOX 1424 MATTITUCK, LONG ISLAND WILLIAM WICKHAM NEW YORK 11952 MELVILLE OFFICE ERIC J. BRESSLER 275 BROAD HOLLOW ROAD ABIGAIL A.WICKHAM - SUITE III LYNNE M.GORDON 631-298-8353 MELVILLE, NEW YORK 11747 JANET GEASA TELEFAX NO. 631-298-8565 631-249-9480 TELEFAX NO.631-249-9484 February 19, 2002 VIA FACSIMILE Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold,New York 11971 Re: Walz application for reversal/variance Dear Mr. Goehringer: Thank you for your letter of February 11,2002 regarding this matter. After careful consideration we believe that it would not be appropriate or beneficial for the newly reconstituted board to determine this matter without the new members having the opportunity for the give and take which inevitably accompanies the hearing process. The recently adopted interpretation invites input and analysis of the application as measured against this standard. We understand that the matter can be accomodated on the March 28, 2002 calendar and ask that you do so in the interests of resolving this matter. Please do not construe this letter as a waiver of any right or remedy of the applicant. Thank you for your consideration. Very truly yours, Eric . Bressler EJB/al cc: Mr. &Mrs. Walz EJB/zbaltr FEB-19-2802 10:37A FROM: TO:7659054 P:2%2 /71' -I LAW OFFICES u WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER, r.c. 10315 MAIN ROAb P 0. BOX 1424 wll IaFI w1cKlIAM MATTITUCK. LONG ICI AND CRIT,1 ijREssL:R NLAN YORK I I9�,i2 MELVILLE OF�IGE ADIGAII A WICKMAAq s'J`v BROAD HOLLOW ROAD aUITE III LYNNE M GORDON 631 29 -13.353 MELVILLE, NEW YORK 11747 JANCT QCASA TrLEFMX NO, 53I-2S18-13565 631 ,'4.y-:3480 TELCFAX NO 41::1 E47-2$484 February 19, 2002 VIA FACSIMILE Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Southold Town Zoning hoard of Appeals 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold,New York 11971 Re; Walt application for reversal/variance Dear Mr, Goehringer: Thank you for your letter of February 11, 2002 regarding this matter. After careful consideration we believe that it would not he appropriate or beneficial for the newly reconstituted board to determine this matter without the new members having the opportunity for the give and take which inevitably accompanies the hearing process. The recently adopted interpretation invites input and analysis of the application as measured against this standard, We understand that the matter can be accomodated on the March 2g, 2002 calendar and ask that you do so in the interests of resolving this matter, Please do not construe this letter as a waiver of any right or remedy of the applicant. Thank you for your consideration. Very truly yours, Eric, . Bressler LJtl/nl cc; Mr it Mrs Walz h;117/�hcrllr FEB;1,9-2002 10:37A FROM: T-c't`',659064 P: 1/2 WY-m1AM, WICKHAM & l3RESSLER, Y.C. P.O. Box 1424, 10315 Main Road,Mattituck, New York 11952 Phone(631) 298-8353—Fax(631)298-8565 To:-14 , eA1fl1í, Fax No.: 705 Ciocpq From: Includes: .tak.. -_ Date: 2. j q/ ("1i #of Pages including cover sheet: 1 This transmission contains information confidential and/or legally privileged. It is intended for use only by the person to whom it is directed. If you have received this iciccopy in error,please _ notify us by telephone immediately so that we can arrange for the return of the documents to us at no cost to you. If you do not receive all of the pages indicated,please call as soon as possible at the number referenced above, J . iNSMISSION VERIFICATION REPORT S • TIME : 02/11/2002 16:36 DATE,TIME 02/11 16:36 FAX NO./NAME 2988565 DURATION 00:00:40 PACE(S) 01 RESULT OK MODE STANDARD ECM AFPEMS BOARD MEMBERS �i��''"���� SVFF®`� = Southold Town Hall 1sI • Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman ���h�®� ®may 53095 Main Road • P.O. Box 1179 Lydia A.Tortorat Southold,New York 11971-0959 ® ZBA Fax(631)765-9064 George Horning ® ii�� Telephone(631) 765-1809 Ruth S. Oliva •- Vincent Orlando BOARD OF APPEALS i'll° � 0 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD February 11, 2002 Fax 298-8565 Eric J. Bressler, Esq. Wickham,Wickham & Bressler, P.C. Main Road P.O. Box 1424 Mattituck, NY 11952 Re: Appl. #4962—Walz Setback Variance Request Dear Mr. Bressler: This letter is a request regarding the above pending application,which, as you know, has been pending reviews under the procedures required by New York Town Law. Recently, two Zoning Board positions were filled by new individuals, Members Ruth Oliva and Vincent Orlando (filling the positions held by Lora S. Collins and James Dinizio, Jr.). Before a vote of the Board may take place and a determination rendered on this application, the two new members will be conducting full reviews of the record and familiarizing themselves with the property and areas under consideration. Would you please confirm whether or not the applicant will approve of a determination procedure, with a vote of the Zoning Board to include the two new Zoning Board Members, after familiarization of the entire record, without opening the hearing, re- noticing a new hearing, etc. In either event, would you please sign below, noting the applicant's answer, and returning the original to us? Your approval is an authorization for the above procedure, which would authorize a waiver of re-opening, re-noticing and holding a new (additional) hearing, but which will not affect the actual decision resulting from the votes in the near future. Your disapproval also will not affect the actual decision resulting from voting in the near future. If you have any questions, please feel free to call our office. Thank you. Sincere y yours, r y Gerard P. Goehringer Chairman ( ) Yes, I approve of the procedure to waive a new hearing procedure as noted above, or ( ) No, I disapprove of the procedure and request a new hearing procedure. Signed: kei '0 (0 Joseph T. Trencheny 120 South Lane East_M, ri n, NY 11939 j q [Moir: 1 '7.0179 \:,\ I JUL 9 2006 July 6, 2001 ` 1\ Mr. Gerard Goehringer, Chairman Southold Town Board of Appeals 53095 Main Road Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971-0959 Dear Mr. Goehringer: I write with interest regarding the proposed home renovation by Roger and Leslie Walz of Old Orchard La. East Marion,NY. After speaking with them this past weekend,they informed me that their plans are on hold due to necessary approval by the Town of Southold. Upon reviewing the plan with them,I see that the renovation calls for the addition of a second story with added bedrooms,bathroom and recreational area with no expansion past the existing footprint of the house. Please keep in mind that the vast majority of the homes in this area are two-story situated on non-conforming lots used for both seasonal and year round occupancy. My concern in this postponement lies in that many homes in this area,including mine, are in need of renovation and updating. To have this plan stalled or possibly disallowed and have precedent set due to an individuals' desire not to allow change is certainly not in the interest of this community. I have been acquainted with the Walz family for the better part of twenty years. I am confident that the plan as well as the finishing work proposed will not only enhance their property, but those surrounding it as well. Truly,they are neighbors that have continued to improve their home over the years and this plan for renovation should be granted for their enjoyment. Additionally, please notify me of any additional public hearings as I will be interested in attending and m, -hanks for your attention to this matter. 4-- ` : ren••eny 1 .1ti 09/1012001 09:56 6314770973 FAIRWEATHER BROWN PAGE 01 4 AMWEAlliE"WIWN -ft DESIGN ASSOCIATES,INC. C r _s F-O.13ox 571 SEP 10 2001 l i i 11 413 Maio Street 1 1! Greeopert,N.Y. 11944 _ I f 631-477-9752 (Poi)631-477-0973 j September 10,2001 Chairman Goehringer Zoning Board of Appeals Southold Town Re: Walz Appl, No, 4962 SCTM# 1000-037-6-5 in response to your"reminder" of August 31st: The "ridge poles" have been attached to the above named residence to indicate the proposed heights of the renovation. This is in response to your request at the hearing of June 7th. (To have been reheard August 16th but was post-poned by your letter of June 20th until this hearing of September 20th). • Respectfully submitted, Amy M n permit Agent 6 , 1 10) ii b C7 ,..-r- g1 VAgYp edy.- ---- :,------ - 25 01 \( a--/--/ ) e ,, )(. //937 ( \ S ? 6____:__j ,Zrig-,,ae ?.°.e/ %,..)210- C, 4,A46e ,..0, , 4.f.e.z.,-/4ia_z.,.‘ //79 \v-:zit- -e--/---L-z-, )-(,7, //57 /- zgie-i --- 2 1,i.---(-4-,, z,/: .. _.....4,,z_e_. ....../....e_v_6".Le_eL tie,- "e**4.."151A.e.40Z _ --/--6,.'--- , ( ',;,o...4•1.--,e_ .... -,/ a, , ,.1--2), -- ,,,-.,/ za4-,--1:4-e.-e" (7ea--xz ,;214--,a ea-e-,--04-x-ee....- ..e-.4- --7A-e---e--4-1-1 - /.....4...,<_ ef--a-e- oee- 1 (_,(.,,,.._ _,„,......6_,,,„e ,zez-e) ,...„.... . ,.__ , 4,-- e-40,-- ,..-.'- ..„.• ......4.-„,...,,,_ ' _e-d .-- , *4 mi';4,-,iNI."'.4..; 4:,•,:,'; -...."' ., , Ilk ,. .' :' .- , ' .''''':•11; ";-+ *. - ," .- I. ;... • rilq . --.)., i , .. - v., i- -. (/ - iiilto- • (, ' /- '`*-- -I 1 . .--- ":01:f.:e L , • . .,. .- _ .,.0 ... Hi ' ' . _ i , _3,, . Alb 111111) 5 - 4 (2-kut/o C rt:July 31, 2001 Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Board of Appeals ! 2°1_,,,,,°19.....2.L1,11 WO to Town of Southold _1Southold Town Hall c\\4 pO 53095 Main Road [11.0_1J/U2.13 '�°r� P.O. Box 1179 Southold,New York 11971 Re: Walz Residence 2520 Old Orchard Lane Gardiner Bay Estates East Marion Dear Chairman Goehringer, I am writing to you in reference to the application before the Board of Appeals concerning the renovation/expansion of the residence immediately adjacent to me on the south. I have reviewed the plans prepared by Fairweather-Brown Design Associates,Inc., on behalf of Roger and Leslie Walz;I also attended the Board of Appeals meeting in Southold Town Hall on Thursday,June 7, 2001. The plans do not enlarge the footprint of the existing house and appear sensitive to neighbors on all sides. The second floor addition has been added in such a way as to minimize its impact on the neighbors and any limitation on our views. I find it attractive and a plus for the neighborhood. As one of the neighbors most affected, I want you to be aware that I am supportive of their application. If you have questions regarding my thoughts,please feel free to contact me directly. Sincerely, eeLi,aixz49 N, 7-1,5 ,e-e--z.- Elizateth H. Frazier 2415 Old Orchard Lane East Marion,NY Cc Gardiner Bay Estates Architectural Committee Roger and Leslie Walz -TRANSMITTAL MEM iw TO: ZBA Chairman and Members FROM: ZBAOffice Staff DATE: �'o210( SUBJECT: ile Update With reference to the above application, please find attached the following new information added to the official ZBA office file: • Comments: Number of Pages)ttached: c_ TrMemo.doc --,TRANSMITTAL TO: ZBA Chairman•and Members FROM: ZBA Office Staff DATE: ;00l / SUBJECT:- rile Update With reference to the above application, please find attached the following new information added to the official ZBA office file: • • Comments: Number of Pages Attached: L TrMemo.doc ` � - - ) di ���� `~� --( }�`- . OrlfirtJ6-1-30) , . / / « q � ,`kIttlo � ~ 180 SOUTH LANE ^m�7r � P .O . BOX 5 *' U . EAST MARION , [� �� h� oug W 11939-0C, !:- JULY 26,2001 JUL 27/UU .. �� ~ ii . GERARD P . GOEHRINGER , CHAIRMAN [/ SOUTHOLD TOWNBOARD OF APPEALS "•BOARD �� ° ' SOUTHOLD TOWN HALL ' - J -�l " P.O . BOX 1179 SOUTHOLD , NY 11971 � . RE : APPEAL OF ROGER AND LESLIE WALZ DEAR MR . GOEHRINGER , . . � I AM WRITING IN SUPPORT OF THE BUILDING APPLICATION APPEAL OF ROGER AND LESLIE WALZ FOR THEIR RESIDENCE AT 2505 OLD . ORCHARD LANE , EAST MARION. , ' . , MY HOUSE TO THE EAST IS LOCATED FIVE FEET FROM MY PROPERTY LINE , WITH MY GARAGE ONLY TWO FEET FROM THE LINE . THE HOUSE NEXT TO ME IS ONLY THREE FEET FROM MY PROPERTY . THE HOUSE JUST EAST OF THE WALZ HOUSE IS FIVE FEET FROM THEIR LINE , AS IS THE HOUSE TO THE WEST . IT IS THEREFORE NOT UNUSUAL IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA TO HAVE HOUSES CLOSE TOGETHER . . THE HOUSE TO THE WEST OF THE . WALZ HOUSE IS A TWO STORY ' STRUCTURE AS WELL AS ALMOST ALL THE HOUSES TO THE EAST . THE WALZ PLAN WOULD CONFORM WITH THE OTHER STRUCTURES IN THE AREA . MANY OTHER HOUSES IN THE AREA HAVE BEEN ALLOWED ADDITIONS ' AND ALTERATIONS AS LONG AS THEY STAID WITHIN THEIR FOOTPRINT . I BELIEVE THAT ROGER AND LESLIE WALZ SHOULD BE ALLOWED THE SAME PRIVILEGE . , SINCERELY � °' �� ' � . FRANK o . THORP , JR . , , , ^ . . , (4,;_j � . , , BUN Fh' PF 401 '1) • /0 - r-•eleaC" k/ • • APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS •i �1 Southold Tbwn Hall " ' ` 53095 Main Road Gerard P. GoahriRger, Chairman � ,„ 4� �• 4./. /� �� t �� L. V I P.O. fox 1179 James Dinizio, Jt , .Z• Lydia A.Tortola \.11' x"{s �� �' :" II$'ID Southold, New York 11971 Lora S Collins _ �� 1° ZHA Fax (631)765-9064 George Homing l `a�.•' �1 v }Telephone(63 1) 765-1609 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN Or SOUTTIOLD FINDINGS. DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF JUNE 8, 2000 • Appi No 4804 -q$TRID GAQDiS 1000-126.11-8 STREET& LOCALITY: 7020 Pe0Ork Bay Boulevard, Laurel DATE OF PUBLIC HEARiNr3• April 8, 2000, May 4, 2000 EINDfNGS Offer PROPER Y FACTS/DESCRIPTLQN; The applicant's property consists of a total lot area of 19,227 sq R , lot depth of approx. 340 feet, width of 82 feat on Peconlc Bay Boulevard and 68 56 feet on Peconrc Bay. Applicant demolished a 1-1/2 story house under B P 128308-Z, in order to rebuild on Its foundation with en expansion. According to the survey of John Fetrantello dated 0/28/93 and updated 8/31199, the foundation of the former house was sM at a 45 degree angle to the east and west lot lines Because of its orientation, the closest points to the lot lines were at comers, 14 9 feet on the west end 4 feet on the east The foundation setback from the bulkhead as 70 2 feet_ An open patio extended about 18 feet from the house toward the Bay, to a setback of 52.5 feet from the bulkhead At the time the property was first viewed by Board members, the former house had been demolished and the existing foundation had been expanded by new foundation work. @ASISQF AF_TIJCATlON. This is a request for a Variance under Article XXIV, Section 100-242A based on the Building inspector's February 14, 2000 Notice of Disapproval wtilch states that: (1) the proposed covered deck 10 Meet deep, to replace the open patio on the Bay side, would have a setback of 81 feet from the bulkhead, and its construction would violate the 76-foot setback requirement of Code Section 100- 239.48. (2) the corner of an addition at the northwest corner of the house would be 10 feet from the westerly property line, less than the existing 1449" nonconforming setback of 14 9 feet and thus in violation of Code Section 100-242A. AREA VARIANCE RELIEF REQUESTED' Applicant requests a Variance authorizing covered porches on the Bay side and northwest corner of the house. The revised site plan submitted Apnl 27, 2000, date stamped by the Board on May 1, shows the waterside porch to be 31.2 feet from the outer edge of the bulkhead, and the northwest corner porch to be 13.1 feet from the property line at the closest point. The latter porch has been reduced from the original proposal, vottich entailed a 10-foot setback .s . e : lb. : . e L e, . 1 : s :, e,. • Based on the testimony and record before the Board, and personal inspection. the Board makes the following findings. (1) The house is less flan 75 feet from the bulkhead Therefore, any construction above grade on the Bay side requires a vanence The former patio was at grade level at ■ setback of'52 5 feet from the bulkhead Th® proposed porch would be on plies up to 1a Mees above grad., and covered (2) The proposed covered porch facing the Bay, although less deep then the former open patio. would be a much more massive structure and would add significantly to the bulk of the house The 60 'd (i)-27) dLV : ai 00-Et - Lnr -. -- 0J10l1 /187 .IFFF BUT' FR PE glibPA(?[ 63 Pacje 2- )une 8, 2000 28A App! No 4804 -Astrid Caddis Partici 1000-126-11-6 at Laurel Code requirement for a setback from a bulkhead serves not only to protect the shoreline physically but also to prevent the intrusion of building mass into open shore areas. The size and bulk of the proposed covered porch facing the Bay would produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood and detriment to nearby properties (3) The pre-existing northwest comer setback of 14.9 feet is nonconforming and thus sets the limit for westerly setbacks under Code section 100-242A, anything less requires a variance Applicant's original plan called for an addition to the house footprint with a corner only 10 feet from the westerly line. The revised site plan received on May 1, 2000, shows a covered porch at this corner with a setback of 13.1 feet This is nota substantial reduction from the pre-existing setback, and will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or detriment to nearby properties. (4) Applicant purchased an older house, demolished it, and is budding a much larger, more massive structure Applicant was able to plan the new structure starting from the pre-existing foundation, and the difficulties applicant has encountered In complying with the Zoning Code are essentially self created (5) There is no evidence that the action set forth below will have an adverse effect or impact on physical or environmental conditions (8) The action set forth below is the minimum necessary and adequate to enable applicant to enjoy the benefits of a new house of the sort he has planned while preserving and protecting the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community. RE$OLUTION/AcTIgN: On motion by Dinizio, seconded by Chairman Goehringer, It was RESOLVED, to DENY the requested variance for a covered porch set back 61 2 feet from the bulkhead, and further RESOLVED, to GRANT the requested variance for a covered porch at the northwesterly corner with a setback of 13 1 feet as set forth in the revised site plan received by the Board on May 1, 2000 VOTE OF THE BOARD. AYES: Goehringer, Dinizio, Co • . . YS. Tortora and Horning (suggesting denial as alternative). GERARD P GOEHRI ER, CH RMAN For filing about 6/15/00 111?-'sp,) Ot ' d d817 : at 00-£I - 1 - - TRANSMITT L MEMjj al TO: ZBA Chairman and Members FROM: ZBA Office Staff DATE: 7tsl4I SUBJECT:• File Update With reference to the above application, please find attached the following new information added to the official ZBA office file: id-; 4419&02 _ yov. f r41-6,-.5/1124, Comments: Number of Pages Attached: L I TrMemo.doc to/ 4 1111 , e GARDINER'S BAY ESTATES HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION INC. P.O. BOX 4, EAST MARION, NY 11 3;•M ©1 -vi7 July 2 2001 I ;\ JUL 7 eao, Boa-rdYof-%Appeal s Town of Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Re:--- Apel ica-tion--No: -4962-Roge-r- J. -and Leslie Walz Honorable Board: Gardiner ' s Bay Estates Homeowners Association Inc. does not have a Building Code and refers homeowners to conform to the Town of Southold Zoning Code and the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building COde . However the GBEHOA Inc . has a real estate committee which requires a person to submit plans for any new construction, alterations , additions as a courtesy for suggestions . There is no convenant in deeds or excerpts of the deed that a two story residence cannot be built in the Estates , so long as it conforms to the Zoning Code of the Town of Southold. The GBEHOA Club which proceeded the GBEHOAInc. allowed two story residences to be constructed in the ' 30s to ' 60s . Statements have been made with reference to the above application that a second story to the existing residence will interfer with air, light, view. The applicants residence is located on ahiah_er ' elevation than the adjoining residence and will not interfer with air, light and view as it will not be added horizontally. Back in the ' 20s a sub-division of various odd shape lots was approved and no thought was given to side yard set backs, front and rear yard set backs and percent of occupancy of property. Small summer cottages were builton odd lot shapes and sizes and now home owners are retiring to their ideal location and would like to have larger homes for family and friends . The Real Estate Committee neither approves or objects to the application for expansion. SIncer�e1y, 6 6 ) Harold challer "/' Warren A. Sambach Sr. APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Iii,��'���®� ®� ��- Southold Town Hall rard P. Goehringer, Chairman ��0 A4. ` r . ®� 53095 Main Road James Dinizio,Jr. 0 1 t�; , P.O. Box 1179 Lydia A.Tortora � ,fit,,,„ ? Southold,New York 11971-0959 )i) ,,ILora S. Collins , 4.� , ��� ZBA Fax(631)765-9064 George Horning Telephone(631) 765-1809 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD August 31, 2001 By Fax Transmission 477-0973 Fairweather Brown Design Associates, Inc. Attn: Rob Brown/Amy Martin P.O. Box 521 Greenport, NY 11944 Re: Appl. No. 4962 — Roger Walz Application Dear Mr. Brown/Mrs. Martin: This letter replaces yesterday's August 30, 2001 sent in error to your office. Board Member(s) are requesting the status regarding possible placement of ridge markers (by your office other individuals). It is possible that if this is not available for viewing starting about September 10, 2001, the hearing may be re- calendared for the following hearing calendar (tentatively October 16th) Thank you. Sincerely yours, #410„. „., ,: , P, :., , ., Gerard P. Goehringer Chairman (771,-- -1 , -. Ilk 10 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS �i,'',,,� /�,•11(k VFF®`j'`, 1.°01.4•Y , Southold Town Hall Gerard P Goehringer, Chairman ��• ®G�; 53095 Main Road James Dinizio,Jr. % o • . % P.O. Box 1179 %Lydia A.Tortora ,? Southold,New York 11971-0959 Lora S. Collins :0 •' IO ZBA Fax(631)765-9064 p\\3eore Horning *f4 Nig `0®.0i' Telephone(631)765-1809 ))\''9 � BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD K ' / ,,,1v ) August 30 2001 st or,\ o, P 1 By Fax Transmission 477-0973 l' 6/ "" Fairweather Brown Design Associates, Inc. kli h" Attn: Amy Martin P.O. Box 521 Greenport' NY 11944 Re: I. No. 4962 — RogerWalz A plication PP 9 Dear Mrs. Marti ,: The Board Me beg T-9_ re u ti g the status in placement of proposed ridge markers by a 1.an w ,0 er or not they have been placed on a map r er referenc� Boa d Members have indicated that if this is not as mak available on or aboutt"�September 0, 2001, the hearing will be re-calendareTor a later date (October 16 ©ossibly) Thank you. ` Sincerely yours, #4-sufze-t.ZP - - - /, Gerard P. Goehringer Chairman SMISSION VERIFICATION REPORT TIME : 08/31/2001 11:22 DATE,TIME 08/31 11:21 FAX NO./NAME 4770973 DURATION 00:00:30 PAGE(S) 01 RESULT OK MODE STANDARD ECM ANSMISSION VERIFICATION REPORT! TIME : 08/30/2001 11: 02 DATE,TIME 08/30 11:02 FAX NO,/NAME 4770973 DURATION 00:00:29 PAGE(S) 01 RESULT OK MODE STANDARD ECM TRANSMITTAL MEW) 1 r` TO: ZBA Chairman and Members FROM: ZBA Office Staff DATE: 01.2//o SUBJECT: File Update With reference to the above application, please find attached the following new information added to the official ZBA office file: •i4.(6.,6 • Comments: • Number of Pages Attached: TrMemo.doc • APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS1'SUFFO(,(co - 1110 ,0 Gy ; Southold Town Hall Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman �� c ; 53095 Main Road James Dinizio,Jr. t y Z P.O. Box 1179 Lydia A.Tortora V36' 0 Southold,New York 11971 Lora S. Collins ;= 1�ljo 40*/ ZBA Fax(516)765-9064 George Horning * �; �'� Telephone(516)765-1809 ..... .iii BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD June 20, 2001 • • Fairweather-Brown Design Associates, Inc. P. 0. Box 521 Greenport, NY 11944 Attn: Mrs. Amy Martin RE: Appl. No. 4962—Roger and Leslie Walz Dear Mrs. Martin: Enclosed please find copy of a letter from Ralph Martin, neighbor to the Walz property. Mr. Martin has requested a postponement to this hearing of September 20, 2001. Please be advised the hearing will be continued to the September 20th meeting date. Thank you. Very truly Gerard P. Goehringer Chairman GPG:pq Enc. } -- z45 P 4110 ilE © RUED tikti-EIV 200:j (dt' J POB 203 I East Marion,NY 11939-0203 June 18, 2001 Mr. Gerard Goehringer, Chairman Southold Town Board of Appeals Town Hall 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Re: Roger J. and Leslie Walz Southold,NY 11971-0959 Appl. No. 4962 Dear Mr. Goehringer: May I respectfully request the August 16, 2001 re-hearing on the above application be postponed to September 20, 2001? Since I am a most interested and affected party,I wish to be in attendace,however the original date is in direct conflict with my being out of town. Thank you in advance for whatever consideration you can give to this request. '671-1P," - RMJR:ntm Ralph Martin,J1C-.7.-- _ (2D / ADDITIONAL INFO F( 3OARD MEMBERS 4/S97 /�'fO/ ‘\Q) � Re: Appl. of-- L�`„c� , Hearing Date: 6/VD/ From: UU 12. E '3 ,p aciv. 0,6r, 0�� (3j -/ FAIRWEATHER-BROWN DESIGN ASSOCIATES,INC. P.O.Box 521 413 Main Street Greenport,N.Y. 11944 631-477-9752 (fax)631-477-0973 May 14, 2001 Zoning Board of Appeals Southold Town Re: Walz SCTM# 1000-037-6-5 Attached please find our application for an appeal to the disapproval received from the Building Department. The Walz's would like to expand it "up" not "out". The existing footprint is 3' from their east property line and 6'6" from their westerly line and these current foot print set backs does not meet the zoning code. A second story is their only option for increasing the living space. Respectful) submitted, • y M. Permit Arent A off 644, a ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE / ®#� Town Hall, 53095 Main Road TOWN CLERK ; P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRIAGE OFFICER "- � `� �1 Fax (631) 765-6145 RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER �_ Tj� rr�� •s11°. °1� Telephone (631) 765-1800 FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER ��� OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD TO: Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals FROM: Elizabeth A. Neville, Southold Town Clerk DATED: May 16, 2001 RE: Zoning Appeal No. 4962 00_ Transmitted herewith is Zoning Appeal No. 4962 by' Amy Martin of Fairweather-Brown for Walz for a variance. Also included is: Notice of Disapproval dated May 2, 2001; copy of Application for Building Permit; letter from Amy Martin to ZBA dated May 14, 2001; ZBA Questionnaire; survey; and plans. \ - r \ ,. oe° t. PROPOSED 2ND FLOOR (')?) \ D� ADDITION TO EXISTING 0, �`� �.G� I STORY FRAME HOUSE. N o \ GP O \ \ .\ 7,44 -.57/L A CI \ 1 -V,<\ \ 0 \ o \ \ <` \ , \ 3✓ \ 2 \ , \ \ \ . \ ' \ , S \ "7 -57 \ , / -- c` / \ BASED ON 4. // \ MAP SURVEYED FOR \ ROGER J. - LESLIE WALZ AT EAST MARION \ / TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, N.Y. SUFFOLK COUNTY TAX MAP INFO: , / 1000-037G-5 LOT NO.'S REFER TO MAP OF GARDINERS \ BAY ESTATES SECT. 2, FILED IN THE SUFF.CO.CLERKS OPFFICE AS MAP 275. \ \ \ S O, � c SITE PLAN SCALE: I"=20'0" r 1 Y ft FORM NO. 3 P-4 11 W7 Olrei TOWN OF SOUTHOLD II BUILDING DEPARTMENT MAY I O 2001 ,, ccs P;a,-4,10 5 SOUTHOLD,N.Y. \,I iL)1 „'-r 64 5 ,uoLu� `�°��• ��a � 1NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL DATE; May 2, 2001 TO Amy Martin A/C Walz PO Box 521 Greenport NY 11944 Please take notice that your application dated March 16, 2001 For permit for 2nd story addition to one family dwelling at Location of property 2505 Old Orchard Road East Marion County Tax Map No. 1000 - Section 37 Block 6 Lot 5 Subdivision Filed Map # Lot# Is returned herewith and disapproved on the following grounds proposed addition not permitted pursuant to Article XXIV Section 100-242A which states; Nothing in this Article shall be deemed to prevent the remodeling,reconstruction or enlargement of a nonconforming building containing a conforming use,provided that such action does not create any new nonconformance or increase the degree of nonconformance with regard to the regulations pertaining to such buildings. Existing structure has non-conforming setback of 3 feet from easterly side lot line and . feet on westerly side line, the addition of the second story represents an increase in the degree of non- conformity Authori:-• Signature i NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS THURSDAY, JUNE 7, 2001 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Section 267 of the Town Law and Chapter 100 (Zoning), Code of the Town of Southold, the following application will be heard at a public hearing by the SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS at the Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York 11971, on THURSDAY, JUNE 7, 2001, at the time noted below (or as soon thereafter as possible): 7:05 p.m. Appl. No. 4962 — ROGER J. and LESLIE WALZ. This is a request for a Variance under Article XXIV, Section 100-242A, based on the Building Inspector's May 2, 2001 Notice of Disapproval (as corrected) regarding applicant's proposed second-story addition to existing dwelling. The Notice of Disapproval states that the existing structure has a nonconforming setback of three feet from the easterly side lot line and 6.5 feet from the west side line, and as a result, the addition of the second-story represents an increase in the degree of nonconformity. Location of Property: 2505 Old Orchard Road, East Marion, NY; Parcel 1000-37-6-5. The Board of Appeals will hear all persons, or their representative, desiring to be heard at the hearing, or desiring to submit written statements before the conclusion of the above hearing. This hearing will not start earlier than designated. Files are available for review during regular Town Hall business hours (8-4 p.m.). If you have questions, please do not hesitate to call (631) 765-1809. Dated: May 25, 2001. GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS Town Hall 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 `,jam . QUESTIONNAIRE FOR FILING WITH YOUR Z.B.A. APPLICATION A. Please disclose the names of the owner(s) and any other individuals . (and entities) having a financial interest in the subject premises and a description of their interests: (S parate sheet may be attached. ) . B. Is the subject premises listed on the real estate market for -. salr being shown to prospective buyers? ( ) Yes ' • ( ) No. (If Yes, please attach copy of "conditions" of sale. ) C. Are there proposals to change or alter land contours? ( } Yes ( No - D. 1. Are there any areas which contain wetland grasses? /141 2. Are the wetland areas shown on the map submitted with this application? /Y2 3 . Is the property bulkheaded between the wetlands area and the upland building area? / 4. If your property contains wetlands or pond areas, have you contacted the Office of the Town Trustees for its determination of jurisdiction? /11/ 96L-4-'4 E. Is there a depression or sloping elevation near the area of proposed co truction at or below five feet above mean sea level? 1l0 (If not applicable, state "N.A. ") F. Are there any patios, concrete barriers, bulkheads or fences which exist and are not shown on the survey map that you are submitting? JY® If none exist, please state "none." G. Do you have any constru ;fin taking place at this time concerning your premises? /V,, If yes, please submit a copy of your building permit and map as approved by the Building Department. If none, please state. H. Do you or any co-owner also own other land close to this parcel? /Y) If yes, please explain where or submit copies of deeds. I. Please list prese• use or o era 'ons conducted at this parcel �- -i and proposed use r r . / & _, 257/0/ Au . . zzed ,, -.. -ture and Date 3/87, I0/90Ik /oz)4410 Illr APPLICANT TRANSACTIONAL DISCLOSURE At • The Town of Southold ' s Code of Ethics' prohibits conflicts of interest on the part of town officers and employees. The purpose of this form is to provide information which can alert the town of possible conflicts of interest and allow it to take whatever action is necessary to avoid same. YOUR NAME: 1 ® " ���/ e-- (Last 'nan(e, fir t name,„ m dle initial, unless you •are applying in the name of someone else or other entity, such as a company. If so, indicate the other person 's or company ' s name. ) NATURE OF APPLICATION: (Check all that apply. ) Tax grievance Variance Change of zone , Approval of plat Exemption from .plat or official map Other (If "Other, " name the activity. ) • Do you personally (or through your company, spouse, sibling, parent, or child) have a relationship with any officer or employee of the Town of Southold? "Relationship" includes by blood, marriage, or business interest. "Business interest" means a business,, including a partnership, in which the town officer or employee has even a partial ownership of (or employment by) a corporation in which the town officer or employee owns more than 5% of the shares.. YES . NO - If you answered "YES, ". complete the balance of this form and date and sign where indicated. Name of person employed by the Town of Southold Title or position of that person Describe the relationship between yourself (the applicant) and the town officer or employee. Either check the appropriate line A) through D) and/or describe in the space provided. The town officer or employee or his or her spouse, sibling, parent, or child is (check all that apply) : A) the owner of greater than 5% of the shares of the corporate stock- of the applicant (when the applicant is a corporation); $) the legal or beneficial owner of any interest in a noncorporate entity (when the applicant is not a corporation) ; . C) an officer, director, partner, or employee of the applicant; or D) the actual applicant . DESCRIPTION OF RELATIONSHIP • K ' T2) / Submitted th -. / 0 day of ./I. ...(900 // • Signature ; L 1 i 411" Print name 0 6 e - -' Town Of Southold P.O Box 1179 f -.- Southold, NY 11971 * * * RECEIPT * * * Date: 05/15/01 Receipt#: 7454 Transaction(s): Subtotal 1 Application Fees $400.00 Check#: 7454 Total Paid: $400.00 Name: Walz, Roger& Leslie 2505 Old Orchard Rd East Marion, NY 11939 Clerk ID: LINDAC Internal ID:32112 i , *. SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS TRANSCRIPT OF HEARINGS HELD DECEMBER 13, 2001 (Prepared by Paula Quintieri) Present were: Chairman Goehringer Member Dinizio—arrived at 6:43 p.m. ii")°11( Member Tortora Member Horning Board Secretary Kowalski Secretary Quintieri1-71-rilve/aP DRAFT COPY dated 1/23/02 (to be inserted) 8:38 p.m. —Appl. No. 4998 —ELIZABETH SENT. L (continued at applicant's request). This is a request for a Variance under Article X ' V, Section 100-242A, and Section 100- 244, based on the Building In, ector's Jul- 27, 2001 Notice of Disapproval. The applicant is proposing additions t. existdwelling with side yard setbacks at less than 10 feet on one side and less th. 15/feet on the other. Location of Property: 220 Lakeview Terrace, East Marion; Par c 1000-31-9-16. G. Strang, Architect CHAIRMAN: We're ready for/ou sir. Are you going to give us your presentation tonight? GARRETT STRANG: Yes, think I'd like to :. that for several reasons. One, obviously the last time we were together on this applicatio ' back in October it was assumed at that time the Board would ,ave time to deliberate and make a decision on a similar application which woul impact this one which due .• the complexity in Town it has not been able to happen. R ther than wait for that to go through and if a decision is such that it requires us to col-M.1 e this action, we would need additional time. So I would rather make this presentation onight and if your decision on the other application is such that it makes this moot then it can just go to the wayside. CHAIRMAN: Could I just hold you up at that point one second, Mr. Strang? I just want to mention to the Martins in back of you that we have not made a decision, nor are we making a decision on either one of those two applications that are adjacent to your house tonight. We only started deliberating last time about two words, and now we're moving forward with them at that point. i iy ;Y'1 T , { :1,,=:_11,,,1:, _ 1',T : ,,I-4:f ;!yis E? z- u=-- is] c . t. u ember 13,2001 FJt 'i 9' - of ZBA Public Hearings ;,: :,:-.:' f Southoldi `- BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: Are you removing it from the agenda Jerry on - ::7 Walz? r CHAIRMAN: Yes, tonight we're removing it. ' BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: No, right now are you? CHAIRMAN: I am removing it from the Agenda as a deliberation item tonight. Pardon me sir, go ahead. GARRETT STRANG: That's quite all right. As I was saying, after I make my presentation, I'm sure y u won't be deliberating or making a decision on this until sometime in the future, so when your other decision comes down it may impact , but at least I'll ave a copy of the information in front of you so that if you need to make a decision on this application you will have what you need. Specifically, the application is presented which is for an addition to an existing small cottage on a small parcel. The existing pr mise is a one-story single-family dwelling; it consists of a bedroom, a bathroom, a kitchen, a living room and a porch, which is approximately 560 square feet. It is about sixty years old. My client purchased it earlier this year with the intention of making it a vacation\home for themselves and their family. They live out of the area, so when they come theX come with their children, their grandchildren. Their needs, they understand that the lo is small, the house is small and they are limited to what they can do. Their needs speci ically include having a three bedroom, one and a half bath house to accommodate their n-eds for their family. We are proposing a five-foot addition on the waterside porch and that's pretty much the limitation on the waterside. But in addition, obviously, we're prop•sing to add a one and a half story addition to the roadside of the house, which would en ompass the additional bedrooms and baths. The existing structure that's there presently ill remain in its existing size and configuration, it will only receive cosmetic improv: ents, specifically the roof, the siding and windows, and things of that nature and whatever the Code requires to improve this structure. There will be a new sep is system installed on the roadside and there will also be connected to the Suffolk Count Water Authority duly installed water main. The setbacks to the proposed construction, hich is slightly greater than those, that are consisting presently, which we know are non- •nforming. The total size of this dwelling, completed with the proposed addition is to b- approximately 1350 square feet, total. Which is from my research pretty much in ke:sing with the neighbor's parcels in the immediate area. We have presently in hand an approval from Southold Town Trustees, which I will submit to the Board. In meeting with he Trustees and meeting with them at the site, and making a presentation and listening to their concerns at a public hearing, they were in favor of the proposed one and a half stvry addition to the rear of the house and maintaining the existing one story structure on the waterside of the house. They felt that that was the right way to go. They felt that that wo,.ld be preferable in putting a two- story structure there, or a second-story on the existing o .e story house. Which is also my and my client's feelings as well. They felt that the small .,•dition on the waterside of the house is really a non-issue and made no impact on the n-'ghbors or on the site. The c.) . . • 4 ,. o I I --t-4-1---- ..rit - ? ,p. t.....,;1,,, i . 0.. . - , • •,.. . • .,.• e, Nor!. „Ai ,,,,, ,..3 k . .•;r 4., :c- ... Oir!,.'‹, -.k i dor" iir---:,< ,,,,..;...“ , -..--•0 , , i..!, .,, .1 .. , . ..:: 0„,,,,!,,difk,,, v,, '.- • .; . i , , i . ? ,..,A- ' r,..... PA • Yoli -...,.. k t -4 A .11.,:41 .fi,i..... Iv r%item, '„,i,t.‘, ., ...-•::. .4! • ! 1 .. ..:. • st., , , , 1 I... .. ._,.„ ,,„,,,,... , . .,...,. ...„ . ._7\pA, ...„., .....,„..,4,, • -,,, ,,, • „,..„,. . .. ,,,. f4 ilf , .- le i'.91- ----- 'Tv i• ers-,-.:::.f.11-,=:11,5•.: , =7- ,:. - ' • "...' *. I air 1 -.„' t , _._:___-------- ..• .. , . .,- . ,# , —,'-..-4-.'• ,.i,..i.,;1.0f,..,..,l..-,..4...1- i' -..'.''- ,• A_-,i:"•• ....,,,.v,...... 4. . ',f i,,..Iv i.l;v•k.P.t•.i.r..-..s. ..., .‘,"'... . iiA. ,.:., 17. 1 % ._ .',.;4I,f,,..i:Z...:4;-:,4 41.-' ‘, .al-l•'i.4- ,-,'. i • • .--- — . — -_ . ti Ilk‘r, ,4 . , .-1, • • 1 1 ' • t 14 t . I .e y ,Itivek , ' IF , - ii. --.1 ! ,• •-•f _ " =-nb.. • do; 1 — iii r ' ... -... s /„...„.. If - - t A... Ilk, . .hes.„. /1,1 .1. - , , ,, " III • . \ - -- ''• • . . •T.-111A; , •-•.. .--- - ilk . ... ...714 ha N! .s... , *EA • _.:___ _ ii.... --wiermik‘al •••,........- 41: . . . .0, i V 1111111-3 ---- - .....=_-_ ...: i. Ty iti slij . _ 9\'' Y''.: yve _-...----.. ...... • '' 'y •''' ... ---111114'... ... iiiilik d t - ''.... 11,115Lto-41-§OH'. • ri . - - '. -----\ - _'-;.": -:_--0:ip 11-, ''''1. .741t, it_ -4r.-.:.10. ..1 .i .-• ----"A ii. -4 ,.. i' 1,,,Illit. ) • • ii•44^-,dmir 6%. '----:.7........',7-l'..• _ : . .-, .44... .•' .,, , ' t, Isil .,—,. -A •••-•'.- - . . 4 jirg‘,f111111-- '''&.--Ir ,, ,.7 IllitilirIllt,, ? • , , 1 . . i . . _ • .... , . ...„„....:. Akill.k.„.; 1..,..... .. .. . _ * .. . ...._ • • 4 'IM."..' `' v. -- ., .. ,I., ' ,1 '' . ---4 1 I I . .,... .... ,. •J. At.s..:,.. ..., 1 "....-,..,_,,,,,,,,, ' ir-•-• - . ' . 4 Ist.--' a , ......._ •- 1... "........ . .. 1 •••• ....• , , . . .• ot •1 •-• . - ... ...-... .... , ' • '• . ...„ • ..... • ,.. ..a.'. 11,1fts.... ,.. • ,. ,--- 'r \_"--s....,,, , P^ ..--, --' , / 4-. , - s - , , . 'i ' "-- =.--•,' ' P,;- __, ,. .,,- Mint;,_ iA4. .•-/ . - . . . . , • I . . ...N.- • --A ' '1 -,- _ . -,...---- _ ... \ - -- - -•-i•N,. ) i !.. I tilt - , A 411--i---:- T\. .111111 . 11447. .ht* .. ...„, ..., It, __ ,/_—•..,,,..7-----".;*Y;-.,---,-.,-,i2'--`.,i;-it:t(1''-1:-.,'-';—---,-,..•.... „.... .,-.N./:.-_,i,p.--;i,f-4 t.•,,(..,, '..•,.--,..'...•,. , , I R .,,,,-,..1,i.!-.1,-*•5'I,." . V :' .-t 2-.-4-• .•• . •, ,1 A i . E ..,i,i,.I-j•v,,.*w-:i.,f _t..z•,-a,--.,..).1..,t4,1,..-in..,i.._.t.,.,t'i...,.i.t,.s-.,,.:xi.t,.k.,.'1-_.-,4.:--4P"41:iiI.O.-i.4..7.6i°.-4 .,.,2-ir,i7..,..f7•14.;4..--;1.$v`„.,,•.6 : -- . ,- .d',...''•.,,,,,-,,„-,,,-1,,,.:w',fAY1'.0v ,.,:•...-7-'--'-_-,--'..:.r.ri-t,---'I:-:t',_-_',r..'__:,__-___41_:":.",.'".•-4._-= ..- f-•,,,•..•••.:•,. •-•',..-•._'.4.,,--_.-..,-----'-- ,7 . 14-•-• ....*.effl”"",4. , , : i a 4111 Ei T., -.. •:, ,.., ,,,, - , . . ..:44,2=Wt.ilk.2'....-:- 1 , . '''r' ' .' ! q ." i' . -tam . . ... , ,_ --, ,,,,,s-„A.,•,:-•2--7. ,A=. ! • -.•• - 1.,. . :•: ‘ :... .,,. - - .. . ...- - : ,..„.,.--'4'•.• • . \ ....4* , 4 - _ _ , .....„. , ' 4 _...7iei .fc-*A.,-.. .,,,,10:4,ts th ,,.i.i;•:, . ,„ . _ - .-. ..,.• 1",i..15," '':M,I:0'. , k'. •A„:;* / i ,' •.... ,, , .. - ' '' . . .4.1sg4 '-1:41.,"`"?;.- - .„,,,..-re•10,-,:t.).Y.:,st,.:,;,.... . .. .... .: ..,, .--, -.'.?;!,4-,,,,L,:,..,....*; ...._. 1 ...._ _ ,..„..;,, ., A. f..i,....!';:4 )..4, . _ . . " • ' • - • • . n.!':.1-",,,t VIr-,;‘,i-- _ .--- •,, =.---- - - i ,,,..A. ,,i:,;4 .; , T. 1 f • 301 . ---. ..------------ ...-. i-- '" - '• ' . •'..,4,',!*'..;47.- . , • .. • -•,. . , ---• . ... ,. , ... . . ' . -, .....,-• • - - . . ,-..,........--,.. . , _ ..• .___ - ............ --- - -- -- - , •if' , -4.,. .............— ...,. . 4- -- Art ......., . ..... __ .. -v.-„ .- . - -„,„....„.......... .r... , .. — , -;--4: .igi, - - ---' ..,- _ iroo. '%..x, •,), e. 1 �� j ,P1► J � 116. ad 1. T : . 410'-‘14t %A gia, � iA ..401eft i \ + 44 ' /1' .` Ir Itik- is '` y6; r �R ii ".`,"a v . y ltA 4 fir. `M` mar "r+. > _ .i 4 . . r' *- N • it t ` a ; 1 ,T� . ,.. _. _7_.,-- ... , ._.1 _ _ ,_...._ .......4 1 -. _ • • .2-. rr--...,,_''•-ii_t_ff--- •- -- - IP} -I)( ' (g) ' '1..1 ‘,..,4. .. c. ' -' ' N 4. , f.V1 I ,7;`,',*\ -* 'if k ire tet` etc ` l �1. alt r. 4`� /. 1 - !r 11. t� ii -; - ♦ ,. I �} ___4{{{* � .' • 199 • f ', - Z / -.' �{"',�,t, { ,',�a% '� , .rx Sad` � � 0,, ..,...-„,...4.: ,£ " yr ,' ,-- 44-.i.- `'; t,. L • ' ' I sok ! .7 r1i �1_r •x�r, il!! 1. ill W ' . - :.r. .•-- '' - . . ICI 1 I II ' ii 7nv Ilk-. - 11 t, tit ...• _ ,..0,_ i...,__ _ 6......--...-- • ,.. -i4 .., as_ .-.7":-7,i- 0H- if-- li t } e 'v � II -i _ J ti ti • [ 1 , .......",tiii,.........‘" ,, • . APP-114 , - trilip ,,_... ss% . ., ‘ ' ", , „te ,.. / . .,,/k , ,1 ...,it., iar .,•••• S P . " 41i a ."' ii j '� • V\. .//,- _ 1T•'' ,r'i- . .w ms`s. . ,'.;'-. j /� / 4. = : cis� . •;?". . , NCI:- -_ tea+f "--- f p ' l " . �'� �1 l l r +6� ��r.r.2 ,' a+ .4# !r -.1. + �r—_ a '• '' a `'{ • i. .: . M �..',,,f-,-.-4.,' 'i f - ' - . •,,1„,,,1„....4.-i.,,,,, ,,..._.. _1 • !moi$ y, { i1 T7 i Ili 1.1 i ;' 44 mow_ a3M F; = - ' _ !NM 1 _ a totadibi '.':li: .,,,J-idiell.41110 --- — ---- _ i�416. i -I , - .,111,11: .fl . ..„. .,itt.....7.4‘i ,...... .... , H Jyyy''' l a\ , • ''"�! `' -- ate. . * a $ r ( , r ► •1 _ :HP L k iy / ` 410641, _ ,y4.',� ',gr -t.a �` 9 { .�' a - ./� - 4k r !.:: ter- :, e` ' 3 ' 1 .r 9 n � ;1 ° -� _ * 1. • �4A� ./ y .: ' E ! III '••f. -, . , _,....-N--,I t" N t iF i? i1 { j � a ) ' ea 4'7 z f R e J 1. ,�_1•.-- --- a ' • ' — '", 1 1 ,1 k r�11 V a' Imo' : I -s -a Y^e. .- i • ..7 -,• "F I'I Y.S ♦ '.'�'7 'Is.... 'a +{.. r:fa �.1/� *.;-:,�t r '�. S ��. '‘‘...4w,,,•::.,,-,•-.1.,, ,,,e,,,,,,- ' ti • . • ' yam; i 7 t • '' tp 111 t. r :, 4 , ;. 'Z" - } • -'~� (- �1Ve r '� tiyr�jt + ,q£ � �l• «'t' '1�V�'73. -1:';:•3/4-1144.1•1‘",,,I, v�� �'k dr`ya\}i fi v.. �•" ! `+� \ • 1�7'•� I. , _ --- ,:-. Si .-:: h .. 34, . •, _. .,,•,,h,., ; o.:, ,i,...,, , ,.,.„,;1..., ,..[.. 1. , • „,„ ,.i, . . • : __,....... . . ,„_._ , ,..... , , 41 dif jFil " ;, i : _ 1 ' 11,"r . X11 l (--,.._..P41 -„::' l r" .• .. 11.-\''''''''' '''' __ . _ . • . , •• _ _ • ilir — _ _ filikiliar-4r*- '.. Jr . di 4 -i i :,,i i A - i -- _--. ..e - ..,__„.._ --AlPii4;;ii10004111,.. - ''''''' 1 ..! • . , 1.0111 11 iii- i _ -pec At--: _: - -t.. lir . • P 14'.*: , r . ...„..r:;10:rr.,. ± 46: �� I '►t Vii. ..��� , ra" �.'.��4 1 �i. t"....".%)••• t / 311' ....kr• I ,.4., . ilipA . . :.. . ., L ., _ j / .. • . . , .. .2 , ..._ , ...., • , . . .. ..,, „„L, .... • • , i„.. •• • , „...., ............:......, , ,., . ii,.. ‘• , .,.... A . $• l!Fad«:...T.-fi • '• 'w+i r r - wit . Iliteito 4„,,. 1. 4 }' , • '; 41E1,7. `~yam•,o ,0It'd r� }* -o • ',.... ...*. , . If, ow, ..-,...4.4y v,/if.opf .. , : _4:004, ,.., • 7 , . .... , .,,,,,Tr: ... ,/. 44$44...i ''441/ or'4”. ' ,..• ,,„," ',` .. Z !, 4*,::„.4110. 4. , 14 . . ., Aig 4t +mll .� ; 1� ¶lk I f4iii ft _ ,....... .. a ._ ,,/,.. . . a s ... . , 4,... 1 olik 1 , : — _ ,. - ,..... 1„„,_ , , E1, :--,..---.....- , , .„, ,1„.... ,__,,.. .�i liA"‘irri ma .•- +n . . '�4-11,_ � t _ i ' i • • 7 ' viienwo.....„:vate .. s . . . , , , .*. V . „,a.. .. 10, „ ,;, ,,,,,.4,' d * .'•.-: 't "l' •, 44•444 4 • T .• .*".00•Ve_ .°' ' ,„„„ •• . ••s- . . • '. • y- ... - . , .. ,,,, , . \r-1) • r i 111 ,y � . ill �+ �I. , • -r` `* ►. L .1..,,...., `,.1- •. X11. a _ _ i ate ,: , Yl ` ,,„, - iiii-'' `.- ' -".�."... - �- ill .. �..1;ice` . - - - -_, '' k -r _ � � 0wr• • . -v d•-•-,. flit.. )4' f. '„.4it 4fri .•. - '/• - • /P-.- ."411.., • r i • t '� •a i', •. a 'R'',�. r • Y , • • r- - t1. Ittil _ . 4" Mit • ._• ' Iiii ,‘ , r . 4._ , .A', ' - . 11K , . ......(0 meimonsoi , :: ;AO:: il.,:,...„.. ,,.. -. - Y !?:1'....4 .`ale?1%7- t +J� ,� ' i lit ...0005:0101400..„... _-. , '—i• • - 4•4•4 ' • • •., �+ 1- f , ^. - " toy`l f .`4?� • • • • .440:: • . \ cTi. - . wig . w _ � 3 -. � . • :' ' ..T • S....." y _ , .... . - .... -,.,. )4,- ,,. 1 .. , . . . • . $ . . , .. , ip. i 4.... _. .. .. . ., ...,... . •:'• • Al a _ , r •. , ... •• • , ... ‘ : . `1• SIM- r ''. , M .-n/` 1 ^I4, 411 it: A. ' t .`, a i '. ► 4, „ ' w� • ` / . it , ..�W1,,t • r 4, ', 'M'. • •par• � ' + +- ,,,, ,,'‘' ...r .tk .,n.,,,.a n .141.4 . ' . , ,./ ' • vel I 1 •� as '„ tr, "4 , e Nr• I lit, {y ' J ,.� , �e 4, I , A.*. 44, 40: , ' , .01 i �' Gni s i '7 ' .d bl aM ,1 JY _ 1 % •1113th ' II - •', '. .�� rt ..amb., Q , s . 1 r• N i, nom► `•m911 , • • r • • ' III --x -. �� # it 0 ,. +4111,"V 11k6aigar t 11611111.10 ' It -.... r:.,.‘ ,..„) u 4 A * . 'sr - . • € . . . I r i'l I I I I 4.1 -4 ‘ lik$ . .... • e .t. ..... 4.. .4 . . . . , . _ . , „. . ., , 214 rillt lii,...• , f • lb' iq _• I., 1 •I .M 11111 ``. X191 j r \...,00 Y ' • 6 k o- ,..11111: ,,,07,, . .rrA -i;' ' �m 911 � ' . SII°'4t, - iLir,, \ All +rte • • 'r ` II 4.i r, , _'how r ` p1 '� , S I• 'VIII' , .10 illibeie •,;01,.,41111‘.. • 4't• . .------ ---- , ---- l i - / . + / h,,,. I,11 Yl '.Y'II II11 ,y.N - - ij .._ - ____ _________ ,400 , .... LEGAL NOTICE - STATE=OF NEW YORK) NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF )SS: APPEALS MARC CO OF y�UFFO�LK) THURSDAY,MARCH 28,2002 �" i, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pur- s,3.tJ ,e1,1� a4 -of Matfityck, in said f,• suant to Section 267 of the Town Law } . and Chapter 100(Zoning),Code of the county, being duly sworn, says that he/she is Principal Town of Southold,the following appli- clerk of THE SUFFOLK TIMES,a weekly newspaper,pub- by y the SOUTHOLD be heard duringHOLD TOWN public hear- ingslished at Mattituck, in the Town of Southold, County of BOARD OF APPEALS at the Town Suffolk and State of New York,and that the Notice of which Hall,53095 Main Road,Southold,New York 11971,on THURSDAY.MARCIi the annexed is a printed copy, has been regularly pub- . 28.2002,at the time noted below(or as fished • in said Newspaper once each week soon thereafter as possible). j , 7:05 p.m. Appl. No. 4962-- 1 ,for / weeks successively, ®commencing ROGER J.and LESLIE WALZ This + on the �D day is a request for a Variance under Article , XXIV Section_100 242A,based on the of sioe6.i7 20002 Building_Inspector's May- 2, 2001 -Notice 1,of Disapproval regarding the ' proposed second-story addition to exist- ing dwelling. The reason stated in the / 'rinClpal Clerk I Notice of Disapproval states that the 1-existing structure has a nonconforming I • setback of less than 10 fee[and 15 feet -'(,� on the side yards, and as a result, the Sworn to before me this ? addition of the second-story represents day of 114-41/1-CA 20 0 of , an increase in the degree of nonconfor- mity. Location of Property: 2505 Old .a ' /)- nAckuk : Orchard Road,East Marion,NY;Parcel ` , 1000-39-6-5.(The hearing was conclud- LAU RA'E. BON DARCH U K ed on November29,2001,and reopened Notary Public, State of New York at the request of the applicants' attor- , No 01806067958 ' neys.) Qualified in Suffolk County OS- 7:45 p.m. Appl. No. 5058 — I My Commission Expires Dec.24,20.- PETER 0.,PETER & VAL LEONIAK -'-"-__ •' ' ' (Continuation from February 28,2002). This is a request for Variances under 'Zoning Code Sections 100-30A.3 and 100-31 based on the Building Inspector's November 29, 2001 Amended-Notice-of-Disapproval-The I applicant proposes Parcels 1 and 2,each} with less than 40,000 sq. ft. in size. Parcel#1-will also contain less than 125 ft.of lot width(frontage),and includes the existing accessory garage on a lot, presently vacant and without a principal use. Location of Property: 2040 Pine Tree Road, Cutchogue; 1000-98-1-15, 16 and 17(approx. 1.5 acres as-exists). The Board of Appeals will hear all persons,or their representative,desiring to be heard at the hearing,or desiring to submit written statements before the conclusion of each of the above hear- ings.The hearing(s)will not start earlier than designated.Files are available for review o :gular-T_own?-fall business .ys between 8 and 3 p.m.If you have questions,please do not hesitate to call (631)765-1809. Dated:March 19,2002 GERARD P.GOEHRINGER,CHAIR- MAN SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF -APPEALS Town Hall 53095 Main Road,P.O.Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971-0959 2266-ITM28 l:S. Po tat Y •l= -a, C R. ED MAIL RE E0.1"\ (Domestic MaillOnly;Na'Insurance CI, a•e Provided ru 'n- 0 t,44: , II (I' s g lE MI / Postage $ **[? ' 'UNIT ID: 0952 a rs- Certified Fee � h MA Return Receipt Feb •Th44.4,::# UT (Endorsement Required) t !_.CJ 1p Restricted Delivery Fee, .. AO (Endorsement Required) �yj O Total Postage&Fees' $ �+ Al J4; e Y ; 2G® rtl -CSI. o� m Sent ToDa flax— n Street,Apt N,, �_ `! ti 2,9 - L allll-- Li or PO Box No P x ' I� r/ p city,State,ZIP+I0 -F •l/ tor) iq IIP -t PS Form 3800,January.2001 11 - ' 6. IS See Reverse forinstruc Pi a • 7a iV/[K '(Domestic.Mai)Only;No Insurance d a.a 'row.e•- ru rn iy) Postage $ , g r>;� '' 'o y. Certified Fee -'i;1_ ' `1L 7� *4 Postmar /"- Return Receipt Fee �r--,�r� Here u7 (Endorsement Required) _ �V '� �� Z O aAll p Restricted Delivery Fee V :P IN; O (Endorsement Required) t.. O Total Postage&Fees $ e3Atf "i,,,,... 4,,-.:- N ti R1 Sent To --" C„ctw o0- +Vi(9)(1ia Thorp Street,Apt No, O ,12.._ � 11_J—v-V4-/� or PO Box No Nv-o orCss c p - ' O City •tate,ZIP+4 `` .►. Cu Ile ' 11 " N 116-70 PS Form 3800,January 2001 O U See Reverse for Instruc:s CERTIFIED MAIL RE. • (Domestic Mail Only;No Insurance Ce a•e Provided ►11.1 o _ � FAM t R:TI1 (? 974AflAi'ce. �' ,2 ni Postage ,$ . -411 4 ,!'"r. ID: 0952 , Certified Fee , , 0:) ,.,0. Postmark Lnn Receipt I � ( orsemeturnteceRequired)Fee I ` 7�n Here IP O Restricted Delivery Fee r c Cl- �:e KVD81,3 p (Endorsement Required) J r CI Total Postage&Fees $ ,.4-'7 ` ' 03/19/02 mO Sent To j1Of Int('S_ "�1-_C_ .S CI ftb,Inc. a Street,A/hilt No, // 11.{'� ' or PO Box No P•6,�_60x ! O Ciry,State,ZIP+4 of Mari i „ l'.3'.., '5 �. r PS Form 3800,January 2001 F --R-v-r'-f.r In truc . 1. . 'ostal - 7 - -, ® T . . (Domestic Mail Only;No Insurance C6 .ge Provided— ...0 IT' 1-r) a. il ___,,f,,-,, �f_ IT Postage Ipt',T 11l O 5 r'•U 6,0 k, Certified Fe:ie r"" t rL. Postmark Return Receipt Feet Art?4.,- Here u7 (Endorsement Required)V4 , !�' CI O Restricted Delivery Fee •/„- ° K.K.3 O (Endorsement Required) O Total Postage&Fees 19/4 rU f�1 Sent To alaril h_ �)fir' 0 Street,Apt No% Ir/-yI ^ / p p j /� '- or PO Box No 2-5556lo4_��/,� c yyy,_/E1 Po.8 {�3 l7 City,State,ZIP+4 L r Wt� Vl-Lot t I� ' 4`, 11 I I _g N I 1'i 3• PS Form 3800,January2001 --R-v-r - . . tree; .1.116111MME:i4 nisi: - ' -T A ' 4111110 • (Domestic Mail Only;No Insurance Cc:, -•e Provided a- V7 it) 1t_= i ii tE� q A i7 n ,EI �L.a t � VERB•-BEACH,i(FL u ."96 s ix 1. a L !S. c-? tr.-, P1 Postage $ /^/1 (-1. q UNIT III: 0952 t� e 'Certified Fee /2„,„ v .124, 0Q -D VVV l� {{�i` Postmark eturn Receipt Fee 'I� Here Lri ( ndorsement Required) 1 $ .dY CI v O Restricted Delivery Fee ('I C1er e K Tl8Ki p (Endorsement Required) 1 .Q Jnr O Total Postage&Fees $ -. ©�J�T/Q'ru ' rtl Sent r i" r �C,A) 0l :.*1;'''') -„.`., U Street, No,) ail CO or PO Box No.1 j Ij p00 1►at Dr. r O City,State,ZIP+¢►U� O pita G i/ ' PL ?�^b3 t,- Urir Wflni (� PS Form 3800,Janua 208 ED MA R • ' (Domestic Mail Only;No Insurance C4) a.e Provt.e. ru IJ7 -i`• r.:-=' 1:�`' f,' h '.! n Q-; ' ROCKVILLE 'i7<,,, i ►.� t 1.:_a ��'+ lc rn •ostage UNIT IUe 0952 • t�1) C+`ified ftMak l.i 1'1 Postmark Return R= eipt Fee 11�'� b Here O (Endorsement',quire. i IJ Restricted Delrve F' Clerk: KVUBK.7 p (Endorsement Requi.:,...4`'` , �1 O Total Postage&Fees Iffigra.: 03/19/02 IU Sent T • CI dwUn .P-.4-Vl Cqia1_a.7 CACP a Street,OApt Noo. I (Oy�r /�� � or PO Box No. V\VI .]� \ �� O City,State IPP+Q �,�1 J I aorta) N U 115 70 h- l/Ay" II'lOr VISIT Yc7I1Irll1- .M •� IT4 MTX&IIfiMITIT oas num owl ii7=viret till F\111X0 - Domestic Mail Only No Ins r., - ilikragimmtm Q- - - i {su +;µ- t-n VEl;MEACH z'F L S 329631 Ir 1 .i .-( �% c?; ''7: a ///ttt,,, Postage $ ^ 1;s,3f; UN ,J; ��¶ Certified Fee / , l 04� i'r ` `�Q { Postmark J2 u7 R rn Receipt Fee /i Here 173 ( rsement Required) I 1 g� 'L 0 Restricted Delivery Fee ;e KZ3 H 1� (Endorsement Required) ill: V�� CI Total Postage&Fees $ �,�� 01042,n ru 2 Nal rn / o >N al d-14't 0i 1 24.170h • fr l eA- ,, Street,Apt No; O or PO Box No 12._i flf obrl,no1 ��l 3F City State,ZIP+4` 'eM 0 ,,a ll it FL 32,6 PS Form 3800,January 200011 _ ee.•everse or nstru i.iv Mil tl•1ir• . ERTIFIED MAI RE ='' - • • (Domestic Mali Only;No Insurance :•e Provt•e. N ` rTn EAST-MARION, -Y 11919 - ' --Q . m Postage $ „}' �w"! /jt 0952 r- /He Certified Fee N '-� i3_`4: • ark Return Receipt Fee ,; a He'_ 11-11 (Endorsement Required) '� O . t_] Restricted Delivery Fee C1> z7,IN O (Endorsement Required) g. ,_!,, _ -/18/02.. '/� `�"C/ T'�� O Total Postage&Fees $ RI Om Sent To��/(}l(�i(_ Street,Ap( No,��I r- - -` -F " Ci IMl� / c_ 0 or PO Box No T "BOX O City,State,ZIP+4 ,11 ' / r V►I o_(1\1r )1q3°Iq3 PS Form 3800,January 2001 See Reverse for nsttuction- a: n Complete items 1;2,and 3;Also complete A Sigr1aiure item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. ( ❑ gS II Complete • Print your name and address on the reverse X J �� Addressee so that we can return the card to you. B Rec.iv..by(Printed Name) C pate of o livery IN Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front if space permits. Litt 3 DO 6 1 Article Addressed to D. Is delivery address different from item 1'9 0 es If YES,enter delivery address below. 0 No Ralph Martin, Jr. 2555 Old Orchard Lane , P.O. Box 203 • East Marion, New York 11939 3. Service Type • Certified Mail 0 Express Mail 0 Registered S Return Receipt for Merchandise ❑ Insured Mail 0 C.O D 4 Restricted Delivery'?(Extra Fee)_ _._— 0 Yes 2. Article Number --- (Transfer from service label) '--—7 00 1 Q3 20 0 0 0 5_ 6 ],3__5 5 6 PS Form 3811,August 2001 • :,Domestic Return Receipt 102595-01-M-250e UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE I _I I First-Class Mail Postage&"Fees Pani • USPS I II II I Permit No.G-10 • Sender: Please print your name, address, and ZIP+4 in this box • WICKHAM, WICKHAM &BRESSLER, P.C. MAIN ROAD, P.O. BOX 1424 I RE res N_ 1952 �1 e 2002 " :1 i,2�ii�„iiiti►lsi�i,=�i,iii,�►iii=�i,I i36i,�iii Eli�it�ii k(IVO' :14 I04:14M111r4111:1&%1 �31LTCOMPLETE THIS SECTION ON D I194:1' • Complete items 1,;2,and 3.AIso completir A Signature item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired ��/ 7 ❑Ag. II Print your name and address on the reverse v (Ge,u.•ti + , e— I t - �A Addressee so that we can return the card to you. B. Received by(Printed Name) C Date of Delivery ■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front if space permits. F. I+P�S S .3l 20 ID-2- D Is delivery address different from item 19 0 Yes 1 Article Addressed to: If YES,enter delivery address below: El No Gardiners Bay Estates Club, Inc; P.O. Box 4 East Marion, New York 11939 3. Service Type • Certified Mail 0 Express Mail Ik‘ rl ❑ Registered girReturn Receipt for Merchandise ❑ Insured Mail 0 C.O.D. 4 Restricted Delivery (Extra Fee) ❑Yes 2. Article Number --_--- -- (Transfer from service label) '__7 001 _0320 0005_6_7_13____S_602 PS Form 3811,August 2001 , Domestic Return Receipt 102595-01-M-2505 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE I I FirstUSPS Class Mail Postage&i Y411 T4aL • ► • • • ► COMPLETE THIS SECTION • Complete items 1,2,and 3.'Also complete i•'ature item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. ❑Agent • Print your name and address on the reverse 0.41A4.._`'� ` "t ❑Addressee so that we can return the card to you. B. Received by(Printed Name) C Date of Delivery • Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, , �, � / �T/v 2 9 or on the front if space permits. D. Is delivery address different from item 19 0 Yes 1. Article Addressed to. If YES,enter delivery address below: ❑ No Ralph Martin, Jr. 2555 Old Orchard Lane P.O. Box 203 East Marion, New York 11939 3.pS..�ervice Type • • -tit—Certified Mail ❑ Express Mail ❑ Registered '(3eturn Receipt for Merchandise ❑ Insured Mail ❑ C.O D. 4. Restricted Delivery?(Extra Fee) ❑Yes 2. Article Number (Transfer from service label), ? ,;._T7 01i 0 3 2 Q ;;H4-5 6711i3.752 _s PS Form 3811,August 2001 Domestic Return Receipt 102595-01-M-2509 _■ POSTAL SERVICE First-Class Mail 11 P6stage&Fees Paid USPS Permit No.G-10 • Sender: Please print your name, address, and ZIP+4 in this box • WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER, P.C. - -- MAIN ROAD, P.O. BOX 1424 MATTITUCK, N.Y. 11952 • • C -- ,r f RECFAirn PIAR 2 0 2002 iiSE:2+0g54 OS i ii ilii l i i lil ! -111 E»MK•/17/l:J441r41/0/AS:140ROMCOMPLETE THIS SECT!. •4 • Complete items 1,'2,and 3.•Also complete® Signature item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. - � ❑Ay,, • Print your name and address on the reverse X Ar / .0-i 1.4i2 ❑Addressee , so that we can return the card to you. B Received- (Printed Name) C Date of Delivery • Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front if space permits. 1. Article Addressed to. D Is delivery address different from item 17 0 Yes If YES,enter delivery address below 0 No Donald H. & Elizabeth H. Frazier .et 7E, 1821 Mooringline Dr' .'\\ 3F N 1.1 Vero Beach, FL 329.m'� : s Service Type ,:t%) 4R-Certified Mail 0 Express Mail `❑ Registered Return Receipt for Merchandise OP� ®IA 0 Insured Mail 0 C O D 4 Restricted Delivery'?(Extra Fee) 0 Yes 2 Article Number 7001__0320__ 0005_671.3_ 56],`9 (Transfer from service label) , PS Form 3811,August 2001 Domestic Return Receipt 102595-01-M-2509 _,sTAL SERVICE First-Class Mail Postage&Fees Paid USPS Permit No.G-10 • Sender: Please print your name, address, and ZIP+4 in this box • WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER, P.C. MAIN ROAD, P.Q. BOX 1424 '. MATTITUCK, N.Y. 11952 1- . RECEIVED MAR 2 6 2002 R!)11,;;5 II11 I1111IIII II I•M•III,!1111111111III1111111111111111111111� ' l2 14 NBA Mreeirlial*IVIIMIcj of/Lo COMPLETE TH , • Complete items 1,2,and 3.Also complete n re item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. /7 • Print your name and address on the reverse , so that we can return the card to you. Received by(Panted Name) CRat • Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front if space permits. - - 4/!/4 D. Is delivery address different from item 19 ❑Yes 1 Article Addressed to. If YES,enter delivery address below. 0 No Edward A. & Virginia Thorp 12 Norcross Street 'Rockville Centre, New York 11570 3 Service Type ® Certified Mail ❑pLr�,E_,xpress Mail ��� 0 Registered Return Receipt for Merchandise 0 Insured Mad 0 C O.D 4. Restricted Delivery?(Extra Fee) 0 Yes 2 Article Number 4 ,7 aa1 _a3 an :._a 011.5....._6-.7.1-1 s 6-2 6- (Transfer from service label) PS Form 3811,August 2001 Domestic Return Receipt 102595-01-M-2509 _r(VICE 0 11 First-Class Mail Postage&Fees Pgicl USPS — Permit No G-10 • Sender: Please print your name, address, and ZIP+4 in this box • _ ------_,„Th it WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER, P.C. 12 fi1 MAIN ROAD, P.O. BOX 1424 MATTITUCK, N.Y. 11952 I , 1- ii, 1,,1 .- k ECEWP 02-i';' ' 2-5 202 i II Ili i i 1 I III i i I 1 j• 1. 11.1 i.i. ii CIS iiiittiliiiiilnitifilwituffilililliii:iffidill:sulddi. 1/C)01 2- y4Ni . OM'L " SS el • r' THIS SECTION .1 . r IN Complete items 1,2,and 3.Also complete A. Si. - re item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. /1 / ,, ,�A��g�ent ■ Print your name and address on the reverse / Agent see so that we can return the card to you. B Received by(Printed Name) C. Date eltvery ■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, /�,, or on the front if space permits. fAg6/1 / (14-Aei/C/i//1// 3!l Oo'Z 1 Article Addressed to D. Is delivery address different from item 1? 1:1Yes Gardiners Bay Estates Club, Inc. If YES,enter delivery address to `AS o P.O. Box 44;. East Marion, New York 11939 (� 73 • 1 3. Service Type '� ' 'K Certified Mail ❑ Expr s ele }, CI .Registered Return Receipt-for erchandise 0 - ❑ Insured Mail ❑ C O D 4 Restricted Delivery (Extra Fee) ❑Yes 2. Article Number — -- ----------___- (Transfer from.•serv,ceilabel) ' : I• _–.7°PA,.0:3 a0: 0 0 0 5 6 7]13 3 7E4 5.1' _. •PS Form 3811,August 2001 • Domestic Return Receipt 102595-01-M-2509 VITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE I_I First-Class Mail I 11 Postage&Fees Paid I I USPS Permit No G-10 • Sender: Please print your name, address, and ZIP+4 in this box • WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER, P.C. ti MAIN ROAD, P.O. BOX 1424 MATTITUCK, N.Y. 11952 cc RECEIVED MAR 2 0 2007 7 '14 ,0, • ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD: NEW YORK In the Matter of the Application of ROGER WALZ and AFFIDAVIT OF - LESLIE WALZ SERVICE BY MAIL Parcel ID #1000-37-6-5 STATE OF NEW YORK) ) ss.: COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) Amy M. Beasley, being duly sworn, deposes and says: On the 18th and 19th days of March, 2002, I personally mailed at the United States Post Office in Mattituck,New York,by CERTIFIED.MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED, a true copy of the attached Legal Notice and map in prepaid envelopes addressed to current owners shown on the current assessment roll verified from the official records on file with the Southold Town Assessors Office, for every property which abuts and is across a public or private street, or vehicular right-of-way of record, surrounding the applicant's property, as follows: Edward A. &Virginia Thorp 1000-37-6-3.3 12 Norcross Street Rockville Centre,New York 11570 Donald H. &Elizabeth H. Frazier 1000-37-6-4 1821 Mooringline Drive 3F Vero Beach, Florida 32963 Ralph Martin, Jr. 1000-37-6-6.1 2555 Old Orchard Lane P.O. Box 203 East Marion,New York 11939 Gardiners Bay Estates Club, Inc. 1000-37-5-23.2 P.O. Box 4 East Marion,New York 11939 l� kveasiik(Amy M. :easl Sworn to before me this 020 d'`day of March, 202 Notary Public CHERYL CROHAN NOTARY PUBLIC,State of New York No.39-4970347 Qualified in Suffolk County Commission Expires February 4, I ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD:NEW YORK In the Matter of the Application of AFFIDAVIT OF -1e11-144112 of A licant POSTING p ) Regarding Posting of Sign upon Applicant's Land Identified as 1000- 3 - 6 - _------- COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) STATE OF NEW YORK) I, Prx47 residing at .315 2.cee,r7/— , New York, being duly sworn, depose and say that: On the /7 d ay of 2xi ,140,-;-4 personally placed the Town's official Poster, with the date of hearing and nature of my application, in a secure position upon niy property, located ten (10) feet or closer from the street or right-of- way - facing the street or facing each street or right-of-way abutting this property;* and that I hereby confirm that the Poster has remained in pla • for seven days prior to the d9.te of the subject hearing date,which hearing date a•hown to be r• / signature) Sworn to before me this 0-") day of .,19 Zo OZ • / JOYCE M. 9NSNotary Public.Stateto ofof New York )14,ajvaj,(_____4' No.4952246,Suffolk County ( otary Public) Term ExpirosJune 12, c)-_v03 *near the entrance or driveway entrance of my property, as the area most visible to passersby. MAR-22-2002 02:24P FROM: • TO:7659064 P:2'2 414116 ( ; ud ) _ • ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD:NEW YORK in the Matter of the Application of ROOFR WALZ and AFFIDAVIT OF LESLIE WALZ SERVICE DY MAIL Parcel IT)#1000-37-6-5 STATE OF NEW YORK ) ) ss.: COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) Amy M. Beasley,being duly sworn, deposes and says: On the 186 and 19th days ol'March,2002, 1 personally mailed at the United States Post Office in Mattituck, New York, by CERTIFIED MAIL,RETURN RECEIPT REQULS IED,a true copy of the attached Legal Notice and map in prepaid envelopes addressed to current owners shown on the current assessment roil verified from the official records on file with the Southold Town Assessors Office. 1.,r every property which abuts and is across a public or private street, or vehicular tight-uf-way of record,surrounding the applicant's property, as follows: Fadward A. &Vhginia Thorp 1000-37-6-3.3 12 Norcross Street Rockville Centre, New York 11570 Donald H. &Elizabeth H. Frazier 1000-37-6-4 Int Mooringline Drive 3F Vero Beach, Florida 32963 Ralph Martin, Jr. 1000-37-6-6.1 2555 Old Orchard Lane P.O. Box 203 Fast Marion,New York 11939 Gardiners Bay Estates Club, Inc. 1000-17-5-23.2 P.O, Box 4 Fast Marion,New York 11939 Jicjsz4, Amy M, :easle) Sworn to before me this /07 7A�'`day of March, 205 _ Notary Public CHERYL OROHAw f NOTARY PUBLIC,Stat®of Now Yo No 31-4970341 Ouahf od in Suffolk County C $ —, .�� c mmIsslon Gxplr�s Feoruay 4, MAR-22-2002 02:24P FROM: 70:7659064 P:1{2 • W ICKHAM, t7VICKHAM&BRESSLER, P.C. P.O. Box 1424, 10315 Main Road,Maltituek,New York 11952 Phone(631)298-8353 —Fax(631)298-8565 To: Pa..tia. Fax No.: l Lth A From: [ L.Ltc . _. . Re: 1,0a ir Includes: Gt ,.k x u I c Date:422j(Y2 - #of Pages including cover sheet 2— This transmission contains information confidential and/or legally privileged. It is intended for use only by the person to whom it is directed. If you have received this telecopy in error,please notify us by telephone immediately so that we can arrange for the return of the documents to us at no cost to you. If you do not receive all of the pages indicated,please call as soon as possible at the number referenced above. 4 „ ,,,,,,,,, iip APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS • ” 0 %UFFOL"( o ®�® ® Southold Town Hall Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman d i � � :t 53095 Main Road Lydia A.Tortora '1'; k � P.O. Box 1179 George Horning �,. ®^7 �� Southold, New York 11971-0959 � Ruth D. Oliva . �� ZBA Fax (631) 765-9064 �' � � Vincent Orlando = 1 +,0i0 Telephone (631) 765-1809 /''° http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF MAY 2, 2002 Appl. No. 4962 - ROGER J. AND LESLIE WALZ. Parcel #37 -6-5 Location of Property: 2505 Old Orchard Road, East Marion. BASIS OF APPEAL: Building Inspector's Notice of Disapproval dated May 2, 2001, denying a permit for a second-story addition stating that the proposed addition to a non- conforming structure is not permitted pursuant to Article XXIV Section 100-242A. The existing structure has a nonconforming side yard setback of 3 ft. from the easterly lot line and 6.5 ft. on the westerly line and the second-story addition represents an increase in the degree of nonconformity. 9 AREA VARIANCE REQUESTED: Applicants request side yard variances of 3 ft. and 6.5 ft. for a second-story addition instead of the code-required 10 ft. minimum for a single side yard and a total of 25 ft. for both side yards, all as shown on the maps (A-4, A-5, S-1) prepared by Fairweather-Brown Design Associates, Inc., dated March 16, 2001, May 1, 2001, May 14, 2001, and May 24, 2001. The second-story would create 1,615 ft. additional living space over an existing first floor living area of 1,087 sq. ft. and 722 sq. ft. attached garage. The expansion would create two bedrooms and a recreation room that would extend through the center of this very long, approximately 75 ft. +-, L-shaped house with widths that vary to a maximum of 38 ft. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held public hearings on this application on June 7, 2001; August 16, 2001; September 20, 2001; November 15, 2001; November 29, 2001, at which hearings written and oral evidence were presented. At the applicant's request, the hearing was re-opened March 28, 2002, at which time written and oral evidence were presented. Based upon all testimony, documentation, personal inspection of the property, and other evidence, the Zoning Board finds the following facts to be true and relevant: 1. PROPERTY FACTS: Applicants' property is located on the east side of Old Orchard Road in East Marion. The .215-acre lot (9360+- sq. ft.) was created prior to zoning as part of an old map subdivision known as Gardiner Bay Estates, Section Two. The lot is long and extremely narrow with water frontage of 54.89' on Gardiners Bay, and 257.4 ft. along the east property line and 265.0 along the west property line. Access to the property from Old Orchard Road is via a 20 ft. wide black top drive that angles sharply upward for a distance of 47 ft. in front of the adjoining property owners lot to the west. The property is improved with the applicant's one-story single-family residence, attached garage, porch, cabana and brick patios, all as shown on the site plans prepared by Fairweather-Brown Design Associates, Inc , dated May 16, 2001. a t 410 16 Page 2—May 2, 2002 Appl No 4962— R and L Walz 37 -6-5 at East Marion 2. The existing residence is an older waterfront home located on a very tiny, narrow lot, that is substantially elevated above the adjoining property owner on the west lot line. The applicants have owned the residence since 1980 and wish to expand the house in order to retire there in the future. Because the lot is so narrow, and the residence is already 75 ft. long, applicants propose a second-story addition to gain total living area of 2,202 ft. excluding an existing 722 sq. ft. attached garage. 3. The second-story would create 1,615 ft additional living space over an existing first floor living area of 1,087 sq. ft. and 722 sq. ft. attached garage. The expansion would create two bedrooms, a bath, recreation room and balcony that would extend through the center of this very long, approximately 75 ft. +-, L-shaped house and the east side, and over the full first floor on the west side The width of the house varies to a maximum of 38 feet. 4. The community consists of odd-sized substandard lots, some with residences such as the applicant's that were once summer cottages created prior to zoning. While the applicant's attorney submitted a map indicating many waterfront homes in the area have one-and one-half and two-story residences, the board finds that only three are less than 50-feet wide, and a majority are substantially larger than the applicants. 5. Nonetheless, some of the existing homes, particularly in the immediate waterfront area, are located close to the lot lines, and these neighbors offered support for the applicants' proposal. 6. Both adjacent residences, on the east and west of the applicants' property, are very close to the applicants' lot lines. On the east side, the adjoining neighbor's single-story residence is located 5 ft. to 6 ft. from the property line at the closest point. The neighbor sent a letter in support of the applicant stating that the nine ft. house-to-house distance allowed them to carry on conversations from their porches and share a flower bed. On this side, the applicant's architectural plans show a proposal to extend the existing first floor straight up with a gabled roof at the existing setback of three (3) feet. 7 The board notes that variances run with the land and that future owners may not appreciate the effects of a two-story, 75+-ft. long house set three (3) feet from the property line. The board also notes that because the applicant's existing house is only three (3)feet from the property line, fire vehicles have no access to the south water-side of the residence, and the proposed straight-up second story will only exacerbate the problem and further limit fire access to the east side of the residence. 8. Both the applicants' architect and attorney conceded that the proposed second-story with gabled roof on the east side was a "problem", and more massive and intrusive than the low, shed-type roof design on the east side of the house. They maintain that the 2 r '' a 40 Page 3— May 2, 2002 Appl No 4962— R and L Walz 37.-6-5 at East Marion straight design is necessary to achieve the applicants' desired 1615 sq. ft. of additional living space. 9. The board disagrees. The existing house is not a cottage but a substantial structure located too close to the lot lines on a very small lot. The property has constraints, and the negative impacts of a huge house on a tiny lot are not in the best interests of the health, safety and welfare of the community. The board believes the applicant can achieve additional living space by creating a smaller, less intrusive second-story addition on the east side. 10. On the west side of the applicant's existing residence, a brick path near the property line shows sign of erosion onto the adjoining property. The land slopes sharply upward from Old Orchard to the applicant's lot. The roof line of the objecting neighbor's one-half story residence is approximately level with the applicant's existing residence. The adjoining owner has expressed strong opposition to the proposed second-story addition. The neighbor's residence to the east also has a nonconforming setback (approximately 3.5 feet) to the lot line, and they maintain that the proposed addition will create a towering wall over their residence, and create problems of loss of privacy, water and septic contamination. Combined with the proposed setback of 6.5 ft. in this application, the total distance between the two residences would be nonconforming (approximately 10 feet total instead of 25-30 feet total for both dwellings). 11. To mitigate the impact to the westerly premises, applicants' architect designed a shed roof with an eave that would eliminate the gable roof and create a less severe roof line, similar to a modified pyramid. The second floor would not be incorporated over the L- shaped south side of the residence. The applicants have agreed to install french drains to contain roof run-off. REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: On the basis of testimony presented, materials submitted and personal inspections, the board makes the following findings: 1. A) Grant of the area variance on the west side of the residence will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The alternative drawing submitted by the applicants' attorney for a second- story addition with 10' and 15' side yard setbacks from the side property lines (that could be constructed without a variance) would create a straight-wall, towering effect, affecting the neighbor's property on the west side. Applicant's architect has designed a less massive, second-story addition with a lower roof line to mitigate the impact to the adjoining westerly neighbor. B) Grant of the area variance on the east side of the residence will produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby (3.5) 3 11b lir . , , Page 4— May 2, 2002 Appl No 4962— R and L Walz 37 -6-5 at East Marion properties. For reasons stated previously, the board believes that the requested variance to permit a 75 ft. long, straight-up, second-story, 3 ft. from the property line will be out-of keeping with the narrow width and small size of the property, and will be a detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the community. 2. The benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance. The applicant submitted a drawing indicating that a full-second floor could be added over the existing structure, which would not require variances and would comply with the code's 10 ft. minimum and 25 ft. total side yards. Neither the applicant nor the board believes that the example cited offers a reasonable design solution. The board does believe that the applicants can achieve the benefit of a second-floor addition on the east side with a modified pyramid roof line to provide a greater setback to the property line. 3. The variances requested are substantial. The applicants request total side yards of 9.5 ft instead of the code's 25-foot minimum. Although the magnitude of the second-story addition on the west side has been diminished by the proposed design, the design on the east side will create a 74+- ft. long, massive two-story structure, set three feet from the property line. 4. The alleged difficulty has been self-created. The code's minimum side yard setback were in effect at the time the applicant purchased the property in 1980 as a summer home. The desire to create a large house on a small lot can only be described as a self-created difficulty. 5. Because of the high elevation of the applicant's property over the adjoining westerly property, the existing erosion and roof runoff could be exacerbated by the proposed second-story addition. The board will condition its approval of a variance on the west side with the installation of French Drains. The requested variance at the east side will have an adverse impact on physical conditions in the neighborhood. The size and magnitude of the proposed second story will close off the waterfront, have an effect of wall-to-wall building, and create an unwarranted fire hazard for both firefighters and the residents. 6. Grant of the requested variance on the west side is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of second-story additions to a single- family residence, while preserving and protecting the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community. The requested east side variance is not the minimum necessary because the applicant can achieve additional living space by creating a smaller, less intrusive second-story addition 4 J 4 I I I 0 Page 5-May 2, 2002 Appl. No 4962- R and L. cNalz „fie/ 1/ 37.-6-5 at East Marion 0 \ RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD: In considering all of the above factors and applying the balancing test under New York Town Law 267-B, motion was offered by Member Tortora, seconded by Member Orlando, and duly carried, TO GRANT a Variance authorizing a second-story addition on the west side with a minimum setback of 6.5 ft. with the CONDITION that the second floor be constructed in full accordance with the site plan dated May 14, 2001 (S-1) prepared by Fairweather-Brown Design Associates, Inc., and made part of the record, and with a further CONDITION that French drains be installed to contain roof runoff on site, and reinforcement and reconstruction of the brick path; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, TO DENY a Variance authorizing a second-story addition on the east side with a minimum setback of 3 ft., and to GRANT ALTERNATIVE RELIEF authorizing a second-story addition with a minimum setback of seven (7) feet on the east side, with the CONDITION that the design and roof follow the modified pyramid design of the opposite (west) side second floor. A shed roof can be placed over the four (4) ft. distance from the existing roof line to the exterior wall of the second floor, or to the secondary roof of the second floor. This action does not authorize or condone any current or future use, setback or other feature of the subject property that violates the Zoning Code, other than such uses, setbacks and other features as are expressly addressed in this action. VOTE OF THE BOARD: Ayes: Members .= ringer Chairman , Tortora, and Orlando. (Absent were: Members Horning and YIiva.) This --solutio as ly a.2 r-d ,4-0). f, r` ..,,.--"GERARD P GOEHRINGER, CHAIRM A 1 ' - '- ' 5///0/0 L '-'f-.--r? /0;00 -- -_ (3D , -- , _,,. i P 5 ) COUN OF SUFFOLK\ f\u .. ie • � $(6%.\ _Ltd ,14.,'7 �i ROBERT J. GAFFNEY SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE THOMAS ISLES, AICP DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING DIRECTOR OF PLANNING ^ k , June 7, 2002 ' { 4/ An 14Z Town of Southold Zoning Board of Appeals Pursuant to the requirements of Sections A 14-14 to 23 of the Suffolk County Administrative Code, the following application(s)submitted to the Suffolk County Planning Commission is/are considered to be a matter for local determination as there appears to be no significant county-wide or inter-community impact(s). A decision of local determination should not be construed as either an approval or a disapproval. Applicant(s) Municipal File Number(s) Walz, Roger& Leslie 4962 Floyd King Trust 5045 Laoudis, Theodore &Angela 5077 Laoudis, Thoedore &Angela 5078 Ahlers, Paul & Patricia 5082 Carnesi, Anthony 5083 Kistner, John 5085 Wood, Joan 5087 Giacale, Louis & Sarah 5088 Bedell, John& Susan 5090 Young, Robert& Dorothy 5091 Arnold, Richard&Joan 5092 Edgewater III 5093 Buskard, Donald - 5094 Gusmer Realty 5096 Sleckman, James & Cathy 5097 Ketterer, Gwyneth 5103 Blackley, James 5107 DiBlasi, Robert 5112 Edgewater III 5120 Custom Designer Homes, Inc. 5121 Ellis, Scott& Constance 5122 CD LOCATION MAILING ADDRESS H LEE DENNISON BLDG. -4TH FLOOR ■ P 0 BOX 6 1 00 ■ (5 I 6) 853-5 190 100 VETERANS MEMORIAL HIGHWAY HAUPPAUGE, NY 1 1 788-0099 TELECOPIER(5 1 6) 853-4044 June 72002 *OLK COUNTY PLANNING DEPARIODIT Page 2 Como, Joseph& Christina 5128 Youngman, Arline 5129 Very truly yours, Thomas Isles Director of Planning S/s Gerald G. Newman Chief Planner GGN:cc G\CCHORNY\ZONING\ZONING\WORKING\LD2002 JAN\JUN\SD4962 JUN / f '''' / LOCATION MAILING ADDRESS H LEE DENNISON BLDG -4Th FLOOR ■ P 0 BOX 6 100 ■ (5 I 6) 853-5 190 100 VETERANS MEMORIAL HIGHWAY HAUPPAUGE, NY I 1788-0099 TELECOPIER(5 I 6) 853-4044 VP COUNTY OF SUFFOLK.) 1 5;t 4N. TV �=r'cayy'r 411. ;; •%-It i, 4 1 41 ROBERT J. GAFFNEY SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE THOMAS ISLES, AICP DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING DIRECTOR OF PLANNING June 7, 2002 (�s JCA! 1113 Town of Southold Zoning Board of Appeals Pursuant to the requirements of Sections A 14-14 to 23 of the Suffolk County Administrative Code, the following application(s)submitted to the Suffolk County Planning Commission is/are considered to be a matter for local determination as there appears to be no significant county-wide or inter-community impact(s). A decision of local determination should not be construed as either an approval or a disapproval. Applicant(s) Municipal File Number(s) Walz, Roger& Leslie 4962 Floyd King Trust 5045 Laoudis, Theodore &Angela 5077 Laoudis, Thoedore &Angela 5078 Ahlers, Paul &Patricia 5082 Carnesi, Anthony 5083 Kistner, John 5085 Wood, Joan 5087 Giacale, Louis & Sarah 5088 Bedell, John& Susan 5090 Young, Robert& Dorothy 5091 Arnold, Richard& Joan 5092 Edgewater III 5093 Buskard, Donald 5094 Gusmer Realty 5096 Sleckman, James & Cathy 5097 Ketterer, Gwyneth 5103 Blackley, James 5107 DiBlasi, Robert 5112 Edgewater III 5120 Custom Designer Homes, Inc. 5121 Ellis, Scott& Constance 5122 LOCATION MAILING ADDRESS H. LEE DENNISON BLDG -4TH FLOOR ■ P O. BOX 6100 ■ (5 16) 853-5 190 100 VETERANS MEMORIAL HIGHWAY HAUPPAUGE, NY 11788-0099 TELECOPIER(5 16) 853-4044 .,, -- June 7, 2002 S , , OLK COUNTY PLANNING DEPART, . r Page 2 Como, Joseph& Christina 5128 Youngman, Arline 5129 Very truly yours, Thomas Isles Director of Planning S/s Gerald G. Newman Chief Planner GGN:cc G\CCHORNY\ZONING\ZONING\WORKING\LD2002 JANUUN\SD4962 JUN LOCATION MAILING ADDRESS H LEE DENNISON BLDG. -4T1-1 FLOOR ■ P. 0 BOX 6100 • (5 I 6) 853-5 190 100 VETERANS MEMORIAL HIGHWAY HAUPPAUGE, NY I 1788-0099 TELECOPIER(5 I 6) 853-4044 die . June 4, 2002 Mr. Gerald G. Newman, Chief Planner Suffolk County Department of Planning P. 0. Box 6100 Hauppauge, NY 11788-0099 Dear Mr. Newman: Please find enclosed the following application with related documents for review pursuant to Article XIV of the Suffolk County Administrative Code: Appl. No. —4962 — Roger J. and Leslie Walz Action Requested: Front yard setbacks Within 500 feet of: ( ) State or County Road ( X) Waterway (Bay, Sound or Estuary) ( ) Boundary of Existing or Proposed County, State, Federal land. If any other information is needed, please do not hesitate to call us. Thank you. Very truly yours, Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman By: Enclosures 10 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS ' r ,//$,O�OSQf FO(,�co` Southold Town Hall Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman ���a� Gyd: 53095 Main Road Lydia A.Tortora t y Z P.O. Box 1179 George Horning " O t Southold,New York 11971-0959 Ruth D. Oliva y 0�/' ZBA Fax(631) 765-9064 Vincent Orlando = 491 jig +." Telephone(631) 765-1809 http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD May 10, 2002 Fairweather-Brown Design Associates P.O. Box 521 Greenport, NY 11944 Re: Appl. No. 4962 — Roger and Leslie Walz Variance Determination Dear Sir or Madam: Enclosed please find a copy of the variance determination with conditions regarding the above application. If you have any questions regarding the next step in this building permit/zoning review process, please feel free to call the Building Department (765-1802) for remaining documentation to complete the building permit file. We have today also furnished copies of the enclosed determination to both the Building Department and Eric J. Bressler, attorney for Mr. and Mrs. Walz. Thank you. Very truly yours, GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN Enclosure Copies of Decision to: Building Department Suffolk County Department of Planning r� � I. O. RECEIPT OF ZBA DECISION Appl. No. 4962—Roger Walz Decision Rendered May 2, 2002 1 Received 1N FE © 7WE' r 7 MAY I , )2 itipj IP lip NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS THURSDAY, MARCH 28, 2002 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Section 267 of the Town Law and Chapter 100 (Zoning), Code of the Town of Southold, the following applications will be heard during public hearings by the SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS at the Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York 11971, on THURSDAY, MARCH 28, 2002, at the time noted below (or as soon thereafter as possible). 7:05 p.m. Appl. No. 4962 — ROGER J. and LESLIE WALZ. This is a request for a Variance under Article XXIV, Section 100-242A, based on the Building Inspector's May 2, 2001 Notice of Disapproval regarding the proposed second-story addition to existing dwelling. The reason stated in the Notice of Disapproval states that the existing structure has a nonconforming setback of less than 10 feet and 15 feet on the side yards, and as a result, the addition of the second-story represents an increase in the degree of nonconformity. Location of Property: 2505 Old Orchard Road, East Marion, NY; Parcel 1000-37-6-5. (The hearing was concluded on November 29, 2001, and reopened at the request of the applicants' attorneys.) 7:45 p.m. Appl. No. 5058 - PETER & VAL LEONIAK — (Continuation from February 28, 2002). This is a request for Variances under Zoning Code Sections 100-30A.3 and 100-31, based on the Building Inspector's November 29, 2001 Amended Notice of Disapproval. The applicant proposes Parcels 1 and 2, each with less than 40,000 sq. ft. in size. Parcel #1 will also contain less than 125 ft. of lot width (frontage), and includes the existing accessory garage on a lot, presently vacant and without a principal use. Location of , Property: 2040 Pine Tree Road, Cutchogue; 1000-98-1-15, 16 and 17(approx. 1.5 acres as exists). The Board of Appeals will hear all persons, or their representative, desiring to be heard at the hearing, or desiring to submit written statements before the conclusion of each of the above hearings. The hearing(s) will not start earlier than designated. Files are available for review on regular Town Hall business days between 8 and 3 p.m. If you have questions, please do not hesitate to call (631) 765-1809. Dated: March 19, 2002. GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS Town Hall 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 N°1 J►4' FORM NO. 3 /)- TOWN OF SOUTHOLD f �� BUILDING DEPARTMENT ! �' U� �' SOUTHOLD,N.Y. 2 52001 NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL o x DATE; May 2, 2001 TO Amy Martin A/C Walz PO Box 521 Greenport NY 11944 Please take notice that your application dated March 16, 2001 For permit for 211d story addition to one family dwelling at Location of property 2505 Old Orchard Road East Marion County Tax Map No. 1000 - Section 37 Block 6 Lot 5 Subdivision Filed Map# Lot# Is returned herewith and disapproved on the following grounds proposed addition not permitted pursuant to Article XXIV Section 100-242A which states; Nothing in this Article shall be deemed to prevent the remodeling,reconstruction or enlargement of a nonconforming building containing a conforming use,provided that such action does not create any new nonconformance or increase the degree of nonconformance with regard to the regulations pertaining to such buildings. Existing structure has non-conforming setback of 3 feet from easterly side lot line and 6.5 feet on westerly side line, the addition of the second story represents an increase in the degree of non- conformity Authorized ature TOWN (:0 'i b;UTHOT D` _y-_= - ; - BUU D T,APPLICATION CHECKLIS! BUILDING DEP . • _ave or need the following,before applying plc TOWN 1:141;', �� Board of Health SOUTITOED,NY 11971 —, i 9 ' . 3 sets of Building Plans . TEL: 765-1802o sm L 0 � t D' .,. . , Survey . L''''1241'1"-- - PERMIT NO. Check - • - Septic Form • N.Y.S.D.E.C. . Trustees Examined ,20 Contact: Approved -,20 ," Mail to:. - Disapproved a/c 6 21/01 - . ` - , ' 3)/1)AAj" , Phone: Building Inspector APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT ' . ,Date , /6o , 200/ INSTRUCTIONS a. This application MUST be completely filled in by typewriter or in ink and submitted to the_Building Inspector with 3 sets of plans, accurate plot plan to scale. Fee according to schedule. b.Plot plan showing location of lot and of buildings on premises,relationship to,adjoining premises or public streets or areas, and waterways. - c.The work covered by this application may not be commenced before issuance of Building Permit. d.Upon approval of this application,the Building Inspector will issue a Building Permit to the applicant. Such a permit shall be kept on the premises available for inspection throughout the work. e.No building shall be occupied or used in whole or in part for any purpose what-so-ever until a Certificate of Occupanc- is issued by the Building Inspector. , , . APPLICATION IS HEREBY MADE to the Building Department for the issuance of a Building Permit pursuant to the , Building Zone Ordinance of,the Town of Southold, Suffolk County,New York, and other applicable Laws, Ordinances or Regulations, for the construction of buildings,,additions or alterations or for removal or demolition as herein described.The applicant agrees to comply with all applicable laws, ordinances,building code,housing code, and regulations, and to admit authorized inspectors on premises and in building for necessary inspections. u , .rte . � , / ,___..a' , (Signa%e of applicant or name,if a corporation) • ..e sa i %, , , - iiys (Mailing •i.ress .Lr..pplicant) State whether applicant is owner, lessee, agent, architect, engineer, general.contractor, electrician, plumber'or builder- • Name o er of premises ler v, ' //.5// ei /0,4-izJ ' : . - ;� (as'on the tax roll or latest deed) • If applicant is a corporation, signature of duly authorized officer - .(Name and title of corporate officer) •• . . . Builders License No. Plumbers License No. • . Electricians License No. ' Other Trade's License No. - - ' 1. Location of land on which proposed work_/� will be done: / c7/.6-0 -0 ® aee ct.N6 72-b gstp- Acle/ON ' House Number Street ' Hamlet - - County Tax Map No. 1000 Section 3 7 :Block Gp - .. , , s, Lot= ; Subdivision q />j,y S y Rs frfe.,�-, • 'Filed Map No. a7'5-�~ 'Lot' -e1 o` ' (Name) / D 2.: State existing use and occupanc , ises and intended use and occuAD roposed construction: a. Existing use and occupancy ' n `� - b. Intended use and occupancy i').1 /e.„- 4,pc.,e_.2JV - 3. Nature of work (check which applicable): New Building Addition - v - Alteration Repair- - Removal , Demolition - Other Work (Description) 4. Estimated Cost - 46'0) 000 . Fee . (to be paid on filing this application) 5. If dwelling, numbefof dwelling units / . Number of dwelling units'on each floor If garage, number of cars. ,fry 6. I'f business, commercial or mixed occupancy, specify nature and extent of each type ofuse. ,/i$' ' 7. Dimensions of existing structures, if any: Front /a - z Rear 761 t - Depth dila. 312'3-1-: Height /,:5 ' `1" 2: Number of Stories / Dimensions of same structure with alterations Or additions: Front V e - Rear 76 't - Depth 3,2.5-2-4e.E, Height �a /6 " Number of Stories vt% 8; Dimensions of entire new construction: Front - Rear Depth" Height - Number of Stories 9. Size of lot: Front 010 ' _ Rear ?51 4' Depth 94, r r- - , 10. Date of Purchase %980 ? Name of FormerOwner - 11. Zone or use district in which premises are situated )QE,fs,dP•,-r/.� . , , , 12. Does proposed construction violate any zoning law, ordinance or regulation: kiPi6.6 - ,C s,_ 'a/c-/-' 13. Will lot be re-graded ' kid �' Will excess fill be removed from premises: YES NO 0961 ye- ai.j 112e'-4 ei— ' - -40_, ; ., 14. Names of Owner of premises . ,9 4 Z Address 42!d `''/A- tiu Phone g. " 1/7"7 - 4064'/ _' Name of Architect ,Obey`5Y©um Address'4/3 "3- Ai eS-` Phone No /177-975749. Name of Contractor Address - Phone No. . 15. Is this property-within 100 feet of a tidal wetland? *YES NO V _ . ' - • IF YES, SOUTHOLD TOWN TRUSTEES PERMITS MAY BE REQUIRED 16. Provide-survey,to scale, with accurate foundation plan and distances to property lines. - ' ' 17. If elevation at any point On property i`s at 10 feet or below,must provide topographical data on survey. STATE OF NEW YORK) - " , SS: , COUNTY OF •.3.07 /k). . - ' fiir)X � / l !�'Ibeing duly sworn, deposes and says that(s)he is the applicant (Name ofdividual signing contract)above named, (S)He s the " CA e,--/- _ . . .. , . (Contractor, Agent, Corporate Officer, etc.) . . . of said owner or owners, d is duly authorized to perform or have performed the said work and to make and file this application; that all statements contained in this application are true to the best of his knowledge and belief; and that the work will'be performed in the manner set forth in the application filed therewith.` Sworn to before me this / 9 day of /�jt'/eh/ 20 0// -1 to k. -.A a_ ,(7%,,,,,. , ' ' \ iz I.At JA___A../ " ' , Notary Public : attire of-Applicant ELIZABETH A STATHIS - NOTARY PUBLIC;State of New York , " No.01 ST6008173,Suffolk Co - - - ; - Term Expires June 8,20� ; .- , s, ' . -b i s o f 3''iCf.km T signed No. °Et. For Offic/ q/ce Use Only: Fee$ * • , TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK APPEAL FROM DECISION OF BUILDING INSPECTOR ' AI /4 �O f DATE OF BUILDING INSPECTOR'S DECISION APPEALED: / TO, THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS: I,(We) (Appellant)knY /224,9-(0.-.74a-ckieeihy* ot...aiietc).MLYtee- r iwk) (Tel # /7/72-970-7'9 ) HEREBY APPEAL THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DATED � !D &2 - FOR: DENIED AN APPLICATION WHF,REBY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR ( tif Permit to Build , ( ) Permit for Occupancy ( ) Permit to Use ( ) Permit for As-Built ( ) Other. �,� .g!'411. ���/�P���l 1. -Location of Propert c:1 -0..C.c:1 -0..C. ad ®�°e�'1,' D q`� Zone District 1000 Section..4 y�.Block.h..Lot(s) 6P' Current Owner... - 2. Provision of the Zoning Ordinance Appealed. (Indicate Article, Section, Subsection _v", and pa (vrajah of Zoning Ordnance by numbers. Do not quote the law.) R E C E I D ArticleXl�l Section 100-v.� .. ...S . ub-Section 3. Type of Appeal. Appeal is made herewith for: . MAY 15 2001 ( Variance to the Zoning Ordinance or ZoningbM New York Town Law �fno�d town Clerk ( ) A Variance due to lack of access as required y Chap. 62, Cons. Laws Art. 16, Section 280-A. ( ) Interpretation of Article , Section 100 • - ( ) Reversal or Other: 4. Previous Appeal. A previous appeal (has) (has not) been made with respect to this property or with respect to this decision of the Building Inspector(Appeal # Year ) REASONS FOR APPEAL (Additional sheets may be used with applicant's signature): AREA VARIANCE REASONS: (1) An undesirable change will not be produced in the CHARACTER of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties, if granted, because: ` 4- cofd /?on- &alik (2) The benefit sought by the applicant CANNOT be achieved by some method feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance, because: Jae ...5!t 07e ` - t- (3) The amount of relief requested is not substantial because: Mr /,reie ,3i6lC' 70 E- / iov--/e/�J0-- (4) The variance will NOT have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district because: �o�- T,� /7 let)/(t- //y/,iebv� 74€ f ii��h/vG67' v/a y ,7 &,i 0<4-A14 (5) Has the alleged difficulty been self-created? ( ) Yes, or (�No. This is the MINIMUM that is necessary and adequate, and at the same time preserve and protect the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety, and welfare of the community. ( ) Check this-box if USE VARIANCE STANDARD re comple - • a d attached. i ' / / ' Sworn to before me this Signature . Appellant or Authorized Agent) 75-'—,day of ?t , 2019 . (Agent m submit Authorization from Owner) L� ,F77 A - Notary Public_____ g , . _ ZBA App /00 LINO,P.KOWALSKI SL'OS'AoN soJcdx3 uosssiururea Notary Public,State of New y , 900 3110unS ail paisilerio 1 • No.52-4524771 LLLPZ9t'- 9'°N Qualified in Suffolk:oL A Mehl}o ems•ancrod kWh Commission Expires Nov.3O S1VMON J VflNI1 Nil 411410 - Appeal Application, Continued BOARD OF APPEALS : TOWN OF SOUTHOLD COUNTY OF SUFFOLK:STATE OF NEW YORK x Application of Appeal Application (Continued) Property ID# REASONS FOR USE VARIANCE • x Continuation of Appeal Application for a Use Variance (when applicable): For Each and Every Permitted Use under the Zoning Regulations for the Particular District • Where the Protect is Located (please consult your attorney before completing): (1) The applicant CANNOT realize a REASONABLE RETURN because: (2) The HARDSHIP relates to the property and does not apply to a substantial portion of the district or neighborhood because: (3) The relief requested will not alter the essential CHARACTER of the neighborhood because: (4) Has the alleged difficulty been self-created? ( ) Yes, or ( ) No. (5)This is the MINIMUM that is necessary and adequate, and at the same time will preserve and protect the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety, and welfare of the community because: (6) The spirit of the zoning ordinance will be observed. (7) The public safety and welfare will be secured and substantial justice done. (Signature of Appellant or Authorized Agent) Sworn to before me this day of , 20 . (Notary Public) ZBA App 08/00 - M ---,. V) /jid J7 _ c _4,-- TO1i.. .IF SOUTHOLD PIS. :PERTY RECORD CARD DWNER STREET r VILLAGE DIST. SUB. LOTS, ' ..� –hQ/ �-D Ca Et_ �W L7- '1• 4 . OLl oReimi W " . � mil f ' fir G J-i 14-1 /1.� _7L,.'u-^ , / aZ� FORMER OV)/NE� N E ACR. t :U\c?L VA d IC 1 Pe va..4 c\U)(c dr2,2,#5 I - S W TYPE OF BUILDING ES. j p SEAS. VL. FARM COMM. CB. MISC. Mkt. Value L. ID IMP. TOTAL DATE REMARKS A� /� 7 �J /1 y l roc') ..6-6 eo o otO /�``t'- 1.-.1 bey 2 741 to,59S 0 ke-H -6 `H e I Vat-£ 1.pre.r- /l v o t, '°' ''e+ 6 66-0 0 -V9 j// 1 W2,/42., �i ae .v 7 I .p4 9 . Oc� c5tcs —4-d Dave))4o0 j. Y. ,4.,Eofwavd 2ktis aL 120 ,®�kniu4k) iPEr?.i a R1 P Lz Au)F ' :6a�.1. r - AGE BUILDING CONDITION \IEW NORMAL BELOW ABOVE FARM Acre Value Per Value ( ®\' ' Acre ilia 1 illab 2 iliable 3 'oodland vampland FRONTAGE ON WATER b-U ` , ' °0 y / 4 0 0 •ushtand FRONTAGE ON ROAD ) t:-t .` • ' ouse Plot DEPTH f Js`ei r BULKHEAD ',+' n DtaI DOCK • S r' V t'`, - .. leiii, :.1. y ' ' ': , ' :' ' ' ''':,. ,'. '' ' ' , 1P17, , ' • , "o ' r' I ,T I, 1„tAt.LAa.C6,�1��F1 ''! i} i• 'm r ; -,j i „' !'•:'„ r; i'` 1 l r 1`•'i t ,. • ' N;._5,4 t"G'30"In... G J Mia �._._._ .•_ ''_..._` -;__ .�' ._._.. :'` 1 j { _' �� _ Fete` -\l' ! I r.) 11 i 311' r ~r - �� ! .-",.67,.. , . , , ' , I r > n 1Cr' war. .datratt Ni ,,, , e •/ ' 'iI , . Z,, , ; , rt" 01 T F.a „ t3.akn or the New Yeade �, �•; .I d � { �) _ _ �� mar. �}�' i• { f ;Il+ t i,; ,.�:sQ �F �!/�c; cO�X�� s mail Trot 1' "a .C." �p�1CK Vq�� thytgnd au,veyori Wcedd seal or ' j i , I f •: 1\1!11�, '. , I ,, tliZICK. ! r COqN vPJi,' ; i' MndhalmlBWonlistedlwnwnand - t :,,,, / _ , to the assignees of the lending heti. • -- - �I ._ ...r 4 ! ;�, ,/ , Wm.Guarantee.am no trandstabta I yC I.; / t4 additional tnstgrgiery oraebtequer,t .. .� :I' �;.. TITLE NO. JZ1T.SOQ- 1 f .,,r.c'.�'' I' - ' -- . ' 1 '' ' 1 : - l h 1 ' 42' ,. 1 J� ,` ,t.r::, I. I,f- k, '•k tet,'[J1 ''''.—....-'2....:.:—....,.........--:.' L74L ' 1. 1 ;', �:� T. .-,7"147 --::' ' .' , ' :!7' t:'- 'Al «a ,SEC 7 iiI i_;'ri' ., '� ) . . ' )+,.;i. . , j.f= .•OifJCE.�.Af-MAP,-.7.s,• . 1 ' - �� ,' , ' .., • ',. . r 1, - { ! , .r00 �� , ' :siIAl:-kKI i:* •F., '' '1: riTi 1''t=t),,A.A,P4I"t:k:,..wt:', , i I , h4 ' M WWW!� �, :.i.-1I. r. ,Yjl t l/IC ,h' Iir'.j1�14, {. l•'v clt% .•^ ' i' `` i' Lr,•n .. i.,. .... l , . Sr . , :.. .r. .� , t '� Page 15,June 7,2001 s \Qf ZBA Public Hearing Transcript PXTown of Southold \, MARIE BENNENATI: Yes you did. Thank you. CHAIRMAN: You're welcome. Hearing no further comment I'll make a motion to closing the hearing reserving decision until later. SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION * * * 7:20 P.M. Appl. No. 4962—ROGER J. and LESLIE WALZ. This is a request for a Variance under Article XXIV, Slection 100-242A,based on the Building Inspector's May 2, 2001 Notice of Disapproval regarding application's proposed second story addition to existing dwelling. The Notice of Disapproval states that the existing structure has a nonconforming setback of three,feet from the easterly side lot line and 9.9 feet from the west side line, and as a result, the addition of the second-story represents an increase in the degree of nonconformity. Location: 2505 Old Orchard Road, East Marion,NY; Parcel 37-6-5, Fairweather-Brown Architects. CHAIRMAN: How are you tonight? What would you like to tell us? AMY MARTIN: I'm Amy Martin, part of Fairweather-Brown,representing Roger and Leslie Walz. Unfortunately, they are not here tonight they had to be out-of-state. They have owned this property since approximately September 1980. They wish to add a second-story to this home, as they hope to retire in the near future. As the Board knows that the area of Gardner Bay Estates in the waterfront area is a jungle of very strange and • N unusual lots. A lot of cottages are on small non-conforming properties. This one in particular is quite irregular in shape; it's a line#1238 lot with only 20 feet . On the right side where the kitchen is proposed, there is there now and it's sufficient to the propertylline. The addition that is proposed is a second story, yet there is no change to the footprint, at all (inaudible) line#1278 . The 6.2 property line and flat area around where proposed will remain a one single story structure. The U shape will change a shed was making it 10 %2 feet from grade. Where it's presently 14.6 feet to the ridge edge at the sound. So it comes out from the house, instead of going across. This whole section of area that they wish to remodel is in the center of the home on the one side lot, in neither of the side yards. On the east side there are a few feet from the'property line and the neighbor told me that it angled and that it ranged from 5 %2 feet from his property line to about 12 feet on the water end. Change in elevation on the part were irregular. We are adding approximately 7 feet to the garage end. lines from the two other sections. Basically the west end of the Martin house will be, I'm sorry. The Martin house to the west is a 1-1/2 structure as it exists and in the area there are other two-story structures. Up until recently to add on to, a second floor to a home on the same footprint, it would have been allowed but the law has been reinterpreted in a different direction. CHAIRMAN: Mrs. Martin, you Low me as not the person that would ever say derogatory things, but this a phenomenally large structure. I think that in that realm, it's hard to understand how large this structure is going to be without looking at it in some way manner or form. I don't know what to suggest to you at this point, other than the fact e , } n f Page 16,June 7,2001 ZBA Public Hearing Tianscnpt Town of Southold --,) that we understand that the house is a ranch now, a one-story structure. I stood at both the base of the garage, the foot of the garage, and I stood at the area which is most closely related to the beach; and I had trouble understanding the height and the magnificence of what this house is going to be, as you are proposing it or your client is. I just don't know how to deal with it at this point, and that's not a derogatory statement. MR. BROWN: (inaudible) CHAIRMAN: Somehow, Mr. Brown, we never miss you at one of these hearings. You've been very busy, haven't you? MR. BROWN: Very busy. The footprint, in terms of the second-story addition, is that when we started the design and well into the work going into the design, we had every reason to believe that the Building Department was continuing to interpret this portion of the Code involved here, in that, as there were no changes to the footprint, there was no significant difference in terms of the NAH pre-existing non-conforming conditions of the structure. It wasn't until we were almost finished with the 0 that we were informed by the Building Department that they had decided to reinterpret that portion of the code. In terms of the size, it is a very long house; there is no question about that. It's a very narrow house. It's literally, in some respects a railroad car design. The addition that we are proposing is purely two bedrooms and a recreation room on the second floor. We've kept the roof as low as possible and still conform to State Codes in terms of habitable space. In fact on the east side we are forced to provide a dormer situation in order to maintain appropriate headroom for the egress window. We have kept; we changed to a to a minimum, in order to allow, in order to provide second floor habitable space. The addition, basically, runs straight through the center of the long portion of the house. There is a small L at the south end, where we are actually moving a reversed . gable and providing a one-story shed roof, one story shed roof. Which actually reduces the immediate impact on the neighborhood. CHAIRMAN: Well the neighbor is the one that has the greatest setback is that correct? MR. BROWN: Yes. We have been informing our clients that the neighbor to the East has had no objection. And they are the ones who to my knowledge, will greatly impact CHAIRMAN: The problem I have is he issue of the East side, and the height of the roof, where the drainage calculations from water, torrential rain, could in effect over shoot the gutter and end up on the neighbors property,just because the height of the roof. I realize that this is a fairly, it's not a low pitched roof, but it's a pitched roof now, and I assume that's what's happening now. I just, in even looking at it, I don't want to further exacerbate that situation. MR. BROWN: I think it's necessary to exacerbate the situation. Certainly, while I haven't, at this point, calculated the size of the gutter,based on rainfall, certainly there is room for, in terms of the size of the gutter. Beyond that we have in the past employed i / ,______ n - ,m111 Page 17,June 7,2001 ZBA Public Hearing Tianscript Town of Southold what's called a French Drain, which is a trough built below the foundation of the building, dug to a depth of usually 18", filled with gravel and a perforated pipe which would run the drainage that was missed by the gutter off into a drywell. We have done that in the past. We've done it in place of gutters in the past. This procedure is fully approved by the D.E.C.and any other agency. Quite honestly, in terms of the footprint, once again, there would be no increase in the amount of runoff; because we're not changing the footprint one square inch. CHAIRMAN: I understand that, but still, the pitch could be changed on the roof line which could cause that aggravated situation. MR. BROWN: Which could be regulated by type of CHAIRMAN: Right, let's further see what happens. Mr. Dinizio any questions? MEMBER DINIZIO: No questions. CHAIRMAN: Miss Collins? MEMBER COLLINS: I don't have questions. I'm just concerned that the Building Department, having decided to take this position on interpreting the Code Section increasing the degree of non-conformity puts us into a situation of almost judging design. Under their old interpretation, if you had the setback, you could keep the setback and people did humungous things with their existing setbacks. MR. BROWN: You could even increase a footprint as long as you didn't MEMBER COLLINS: As long as you didn't go any further than where you already were. Some of the results of that were fairly awful. Now in your case they've taken a different view, and I haven't really figured out how I'm going to sort it out. I'm not sure where we are headed on this. I do share the Chairman's view, that I found standing there with the blueprints and looking at the building, I was finding it very, very hard to see how the new building, the new roof line and details fit with what was there already. I couldn't picture the new building inside the old building. MR. BROWN: It is difficult because of the position of the house on the property. The only thing that I can suggest is that we could prepare a rendering of the proposed structure based on a point of view of someone standing in front of the garage. CHAIRMAN: It maybe helpful, because we may have to reduce some of the roof lines. MR BROWN: As I've said, we have worked very hard on keeping,understanding the situation. We realize the house is tight enough. We did everything we could do to minimize any change in the profile. t Page 18,June 7,2001 Iry ZBA Public Hearing Tianscnpt Town of Southold -) CHAIRMAN: While you're doing the rendering, could you do two other things too? Could you use either a one by two or one by four and in both situations affix that to the ridge end of both sides of the house, so we know what the total maximum height is, when we go back and look at the property? MR. BROWN: Okay. CHAIRMAN: Just tell us when that is. I mean nothing to deface the present house, a couple of nails, possibly spruce so it won't waiver in the breeze. Mrs. Tortora? MEMBER TORTORA: One of the things I guess that we've been seeing as a Board increasingly over the last couple of years is just this kind of a proposal where someone has non-conforming setbacks and they have a ranch house, in your case, you're three feet from the property line, and they want to go up or they want to expand or whatever. It's very difficult to tell what it's going to look like, although, I'm getting educated pretty quick on this. The reason why is very simply, the results of some of the structures, and I would have to red flag this one as one that could have that potential. It can be humungous when you are putting two stories, huge structure on a very, very narrow lot, three feet from your neighbor's property line. Your neighbor may not object now, but when he sees it he may feel differently. But, Ican tell you one thing, we have been very surprised at the results of some of houses;particularly these two-story houses, when they are enlarged to such magnitude, particularly when you're looking at three feet from the property line. Big house, small lot or long lot, one way or another it can be over- ) powering. MR. BROWN: I would only say, I understand your concerns. Of the four houses from the beach, the four houses starting from the road, starting from the neighbor to the west; one is already one and a half stories, and one is already two stories. This would be another two story out of the four houses, as you can see fairly clustered together. MEMBER HORNING: I would say the Building Department is throwing it on our laps to deal with a new way of interpreting. MR. BROWN: I'm sure you can understand our sense of frustration about having figured the plans and discovering when I went back a new interpretation changing the whole field that you're planning on. MEMBER HORNING: So do your plans have any alternative design plans? MR. BROWN: At this point, I can't imagine that they did, because as I said, we had, it was very hard from the very beginning understanding the circumstances that we were in. To minimize the impact of this addition,by, as I said, keeping the roof line as low as possible to be able to provide habitable space on the second floor; and, in fact, not incorporating the second floor onto the L-shaped portion of the south side. } 1' t 1 Page 19,June 7,2001 ZBA Public Hearing Transcript Town of Southold MEMBER HORNING: So what you are saying is that the overall proposed building J height is the minimum? MR. BROWN: The minimum we felt we could provide and still provide habitable space upstairs. CHAIRMAN: So, in reality, what you're going to give us is a rendering of, you're going to affix those boards so that we can see what the height situation is. My question is, what is the timeliness of this application? Can we deal with this application in August? MR. BROWN: Obviously, the only concern that I would have regarding that is that, under normal circumstances I would say, if we were able to get a variance from you in August, successfully, and have the Building Permit by September so that the work could be done through the winter with no impact on the community, I would say great. But as I understand it right now, the Building Department has a backlog of approximately four months. CHAIRMAN: But, you're still in line, even though you don't have MR. BROWN: That may be, but I'm sure, you understand my concern and frustration. CHAIRMAN: The problem I have is that the July calendar is oh-la-la. MR. BROWN: Certainly, I don't want to make your lives any more difficult. If August is better for you, then August it is. CHAIRMAN: All right, we'll take some testimony tonight, if you would bring us the rendering or we can have it that night. But if we could study it at the same time. MR. BROWN: You'll have it before the August hearing. CHAIRMAN: Give us a call when you have the boards up, and we'll go back and take a look. We always love to go to Gardners Bay Estates in the summertime. It makes you feel like summer. Okay, we thank you. I have to tell you sir, that you and Miss Martin are wonderful ladies and gentleman, wonderful to deal with and, as always, in the past. You are a true gentleman, it really is a pleasure. MR. BROWN: Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN: Is there anybody else that would like to speak in favor of this application? Anybody like to speak against the application? Yes, ma'am? Good evening. NORMA MARTIN: Good evening, I'm Norma Martin. We live directly to the west of the Walz's home, and I have some comments and concerns I'd like to voice regarding this pending decision. Because of slope in the way of the land, with their house being on the highest portion of this slope, the height of their single-story house is approximately the - - e Page 20,June 7,2001 YP ZBA Public Healing Transcript Town of Southold same height as our house, which is a story and a half. I feel that adding a second story to this existing single level structure will result in something that far exceeds the height and detracts from the look of the surrounding dwellings. Granted as you look at the first four homes on the beach, ours being a story and a half, theirs being a story and then the other two-story house belongs to the fourth and it is on a considerably larger piece of property than is the Walz house. Also to be considered, I should think, would be the impact from the cesspool that would result in two bedrooms and one bath, that I understand are included in the plans. This addition would mean that there would be five bedrooms and two baths in this house. With our house situated directly next door on the downward side of the slope from their existing cesspools, I wonder what affect it will have on us. I am sure that when the Walz purchased this house, one of the things that impressed them was the look of Gardners Bay Estates. This traditional and understated private community, which has been in existence for approximately 72 years, has been achieved and maintained through the years by the diligence and cooperation of the homeowners and the Association. Although we have a Real Estate Committee, it is my understanding that the Walzs have yet to submit these for review and consideration. I am concerned as to why they bypassed this most important step. It insinuates to me that they are not concerned with what effect they have on their neighbors. When you become a resident of Gardners Bay Estates and a member of the Homeowners Association, it is assumed that you will abide by the guidelines that have been agreed upon by all; not develop your own agenda and expect to be allowed to be exception to the rule. We already have a very, very visual example just down the street on Old Orchard Lane; designed by the same architects, I might add, of what can happen when a homeowners vision and architects view of what is appropriate collide with what the neighbors feel looks best and is in the best interest of the appearance of a community as a whole. It is for the above reasons that I am opposed to these plans. Thank you for listening. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Good evening Mr. Martin, how are you? RALPH MARTIN: By having this house with a second story on, will affect the cut-off of any and all air circulation of our bedroom which are secured to the east of my home. My bedroom,my grandchildren's bedroom, and the guest bedroom. By going up, you limit the air; you lose some of the sunlight you might get. If I wanted to live next to a wall, I would have lived in New York City perhaps. I came out here, my wife and I did, for just the way this Town of Southold is and was; and I hope that this Committee will realize the fact that, that's the way I think our houses should be done, try and keep our rural atmosphere. I remember we had two traffic lights in town, now we have four or five. It seems to me that people like to move out here to the East End because of the rural atmosphere and the way people are. Many times, often times, I won't say many times, when people do move out here for what we have after they get settled, they want to start to change and bring the West end into our community. It doesn't really fit, and it happens it seems to me more so than not. We were never even addressed by the Walzs when they thought they might wish to put a second story on the house, but that's their business. But I still am a neighbor of theirs directly to the west, and my property line to my chimney, the property line, is about three feet. So that gives us nine feet between houses. It's 6.6 from their house and my property line; and I believe from my chimney, which is next to 1144 Page 21,June 7,2001 ZBA Public Hearing Tianscnpt Town of Southold two bedrooms, is about three feet, three and one half feet. Then to go up two stories with a bit more, I think it's just a little bit too much in my opinion. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Martin, I would like to see this, your house and what you're saying upstairs if you don't mind me making an appointment with you. Could I just have your telephone number? RALPH MARTIN: 477-0428 CHAIRMAN: They're going to put these ridge markers up, and once they're up, I'll give you a call and I'll come over some Saturday or whatever at your convenience. Okay. RALPH MARTIN: Fine, Mr. Chairman. I thank you very much for your time. CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone else that would like to speak against? Yes ma'am. JOAN A. BRIDGET EGAN: I have been a homeowner in Gardner Bay Estates since 1964. I couldn't agree more with Mr. and Mrs. Martin, and I think one of the most important highlights of what he said, is the fact that what happened with real estate changing and the fact that a lot of people bought these summer homes, now they're getting a little bit older, they sell the house west and they move here. Which is understandable, I did the same myself. We couldn't go wide, we couldn't go deep, and we went up a story, a half a story. These changes and overpopulation and the progression of these things. Hopefully the Walzs will live a long, long life and we don't have too many children in Gardner Bay Estates that we have to educate. But if these things go on, and they become year round homes, which is what I think is what Mr. Walz wants, you're going to have more, more, more. I think that the changes that have happened in Gardner Bay Estates, some of them, I don't know how they passed Zoning, that would be Mr. Frenzel's property that is on Old Orchard Lane. It is a horror, an absolute horror. There is nothing we can do about it,but I think somewhere along the line here you have to say stop. I think here, Mr. Martin and the other people tonight, including myself. I have served in every capacity in Gardners Bay Estates before it was homeowners,before, before. Mr. and Mrs. Walz have never even participated in any way, in any community activities that I know of and I think I would know of it. So all of these things can give me a very sour grapes. I think it's important that we maintain what we have and I'm sure there's some solution to this. I've been in the Walz house several times, when the Vanripers had it, and I don't know,maybe they could do better with a basement, putting things in a basement rather than going up. I think it would also effect the air corridor as far as ventilation for the homes going north, that might be Mrs. Frazier and it could go on to the Collins home. I think they're a lot of things other than just where the rain falls. I think the weight, also, of putting this structure up there on a slope like that, it can have a mud slide and it certainly could affect the Martins and I don't know the name of the people who live in the small home which could eventually effect our roads. It's a progression of things and I say stop. Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN: Anybody else, we are going to recess? Go ahead sir. Page 22,June 7,2001 ZBA Public Hearing Tianscnpt Town of Southold FRANK THORP: I am Frank Thorp; I live at 180 South Lane, two houses to the east of the Walzs. I also represent my brother Edward and his wife Virginia at 80 South Lane who is the immediate house next to the Walzs. A couple of things, my house, which is the two-story house referred to, is only five feet from the property line. The Walzs deed does not require them to submit an approval of plans. That was in the original deed. Some of the original deeds to the Gardners Bay Estates Company did not require certain things, including 8-foot setbacks from the side yard. Obviously, in this particular deed did not require the approval of the company for building plans which were then passed on to the Association. My brother and I strongly approve of the plans that have been proposed, we feel it will greatly enhance the community and will maintain and, perhaps, even add to our property value. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Hearing no further comment, yes, you have one thing you want to say? AMY MARTIN: Just wanted to give you one thing. We had our draftsman acquire the properties of the surveys of the two adjoining properties just to show you. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Hearing no further comment at this hearing, I make a motion recessing until August 16th, 2001. SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION 8:00 P.M. Appl. No. 4953 —HENRY L. FERGUSON MUSEUM, INC. This is a request for Variances,based on the Building Inspector's April 11, 2001 Notice of Disapproval which states that a permit for an addition to the existing museum building is denied for the following reasons: (a) Article III, Section 100-32 requires a minimum front yard setback of 60 feet; and (b) Article XXIV, Section 100-243A.1 a for the reason that the proposed addition will increase the size of this nonconforming nonresidential building, resulting in an increase in the overall building footprint of more than 15 percent. Location: Equestrian Avenue, Fishers Island,NY; Parce19-4-11.1 Stephen L. Hamm III, Esq. BARBARA HAMM: Good evening, I'm Barbara Hamm and I represent the Ferguson Museum. I have an Affidavit of Sign Posting for you and five (5) sets of papers. CHAIRMAN: I knew you looked familiar; from the Lynch application. BARBARA HAMM: I'm on that tonight too, and Steve still isn't coming back after the Southampton Lumber fiasco. MEMBER COLLINS: Tell him we miss him. k IJ \, PiIge 15,June 7,2001 ® 6� ZBA Public Hearing Transcript6Itr Town of Southold MARIE BENNENATI: Yes you did. Thank you. CHAIRMAN: You're welcome. :I-Tearing no further comment I'll make a motion to closing the hearing reserving decision until later. SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION * * * 7:20 P.M. Appl. No. 4962—ROGER J. and LESLIE WALZ. This is a request for a Variance under Article XXIV, Section 100-242A,based on the Building Inspector's May 2, 2001 Notice of Disapproval regarding application's proposed second story addition to existing dwelling. The Notice of Disapproval states that the existing structure has a nonconforming setback of three feet from the easterly side lot line and 9.9 feet from the west side line, and as a result, the addition of the second-story represents an increase in the degree of nonconformity. Location: 2505 Old Orchard Road, East Marion,NY; Parcel 37-6-5, Fairweather-Brown Architects. CHAIRMAN: How are you tonight? What would you like to tell us? AMY MARTIN: I'm Amy Martin, part of Fairweather-Brown,representing Roger and Leslie Walz. Unfortunately, they are not here tonight they had to be out-of-state. They have owned this property since approximately September 1980. They wish to add a second-story to this home, as they hope to retire in the near future. As the Board knows that the area of Gardner Bay Estates in the waterfront area is a jungle of very strange and unusual lots. A lot of cottages are on small non-conforming properties. This one in particular is quite irregular in shape; it's a line#1238 lot with only 20 feet . On the right side where the kitchen is proposed, there is there now and it's sufficient to the property line. The addition that is proposed is a second story, yet there is no change to the footprint, at all (inaudible) line#1278 The 6.2 property line and flat area around where proposed will remain a one single story structure. The U shape will change a shed was making it 10 1/2 feet from grade. Where it's presently 14.6 feet to the ridge edge at the sound. So it comes out from the house, instead of going across. This whole section of area that they wish to remodel is in the center of the home on the one side lot, in neither of the side yards. On the east side there are a few feet from the property line and the neighbor told me that it angled and that it ranged from 5 1/2 feet from his property line to about 12 feet on the water end. Change in elevation on the part were irregular. We are adding approximately 7 feet to the garage end. lines from the two other sections. Basically the west end of the Martin house will be, I'm sorry. The Martin house to the west is a 1-1/2 structure as it exists and in the area there are other two-story structures. Up until recently to add on to, a second floor to a home on the same footprint, it would have been allowed but the law has been reinterpreted in a different direction. CHAIRMAN: Mrs. Martin, you know me as not the person that would ever say derogatory things,but this a phenomenally large structure. I think that in that realm, it's hard to understand how large this structure is going to be without looking at it in some way manner or form. I don't know what to suggest to you at this point, other than the fact I • Page 16,June 7,2001 ZBA Public Hearing Transcript Town of Southold that we understand that the house is a ranch now, a one-story structure. I stood at both the base of the garage, the foot of the garage, and I stood at the area which is most closely related to the beach; and I had trouble understanding the height and the magnificence of what this house is going to be, as you are proposing it or your client is. I just don't know how to deal with it at this point, and that's not a derogatory statement. MR. BROWN: (inaudible) CHAIRMAN: Somehow, Mr. Brown, we never miss you at one of these hearings. You've been very busy,haven't you? MR. BROWN: Very busy. The footprint, in terms of the second-story addition, is that when we started the design and well into the work going into the design,we had every reason to believe that the Building Department was continuing to interpret this portion of the Code involved here,in that, as there were no changes to the footprint, there was no significant difference in terms of the NAH pre-existing non-conforming conditions of the structure. -It wasn't until we were almost finished with the 0 that we were informed by the Building Department that they had decided to reinterpret that portion of the code. In terms of the size, it is a very long house; there is no question about that. It's a very narrow house. It's literally, in some respects a railroad car design. The addition that we are proposing is purely two bedrooms and a recreation room on the second floor. We've kept the roof as low as possible and still conform to State Codes in terms of habitable space. In fact on the east side we are forced to provide a dormer situation in order to maintain appropriate headroom for the egress window. We have kept; we changed to a to a minimum, in order to allow, in order to provide second floor habitable space. The addition,basically, runs straight through the center of the long portion of the house. There is a small L at the south end, where we are actually moving a reversed gable and providing a one-story shed roof, one story shed roof. Which actually reduces the immediate impact on the neighborhood. CHAIRMAN: Well the neighbor is the one that has the greatest setback is that correct? MR. BROWN: Yes. We have been informing our clients that the neighbor to the East has had no objection. And they are the ones who to my knowledge, will greatly impact CHAIRMAN: 'The problem I have is he issue of the East side, and the height of the roof, where the drainage calculations from water, torrential rain, could in effect over shoot the gutter and end up on the neighbors property,just because the height of the roof. I realize that this is a fairly, it's not a low pitched roof,but it's a pitched roof now, and I assume that's what's happening now. I just, in even looking at it, I don't want to further exacerbate that situation. MR. BROWN: I think it's necessary to exacerbate the situation. Certainly,while I haven't, at this point, calculated the size of the gutter,based on rainfall, certainly there is room for, in terms of the size of the gutter. Beyond that we have in the past employed • h • Page 17,June 7,2001 • ZBA Public Hearing Transcnpt Town of Southold what's called a French Drain, which is a trough built below the foundation of the building, dug to a depth of usually 18", filled with gravel and a perforated pipe which would run the drainage that was missed by the gutter off into a drywell. We have done that in the past. We've done it in place of gutters in the past. This procedure is fully approved by the D.E.C.and any other agency. Quite honestly, in terms of the footprint, once again, there would be no increase in the amount of runoff;because we're not changing the footprint one square inch. CHAIRMAN: I understand that,but still, the pitch could be changed on the roof line which could cause that aggravated situation. MR. BROWN: Which could be regulated by type of CHAIRMAN: Right, let's further see what happens. Mr. Dinizio any questions? MEMBER DINIZIO: No questions. CHAIRMAN: Miss Collins? MEMBER COLLINS: I don't have questions. I'm just concerned that the Building Department,having decided to take this position on interpreting the Code Section increasing the degree of non-conformity puts us into a situation of almost judging design. Under their old interpretation, if you had the setback, you could keep the setback and people did humungous things with their existing setbacks. MR. BROWN: You could even increase a footprint as long as you didn't MEMBER COLLINS: As long as you didn't go any further than where you already were. Some of the results of that were fairly awful. Now in your case they've taken a different view, and I haven't really figured out how I'm going to sort it out. I'm not sure where we are headed on this. I do share the Chairman's view, that I found standing there with the blueprints and looking at the building, I was finding it very, very hard to see how the new building, the new roof line and details fit with what was there already. I couldn't picture the new building inside the old building. MR. BROWN: It is difficult because of the position of the house on the property. The only thing that I can suggest is that we could prepare a rendering of the proposed structure based on a point of view of someone standing in front of the garage. CHAIRMAN: It may be helpful,because we may have to reduce some of the roof lines. • MR BROWN: As I've said,we have worked very hard on keeping,understanding the situation. We realize the house is tight enough. We did everything we could do to minimize any change in the profile. S 1 Page 18,June 7,2001 ZBA Public Hearing Transcript Town of Southold CHAIRMAN: While you're doing the rendering, could you do two other things too? Could you use either a one by two or one by four and in both situations affix that to the ridge end of both sides of the house, so we know what the total maximum height is, when we go back and look.at the property? MR. BROWN: Okay. CHAIRMAN: Just tell us when that is. I mean nothing to deface the present house, a couple of nails,possibly spruce so it won't waiver in the breeze. Mrs. Tortora? MEMBER TORTORA: One of the things I guess that we've been seeing as a Board increasingly over the last couple of years is just this kind of a proposal where someone has non-conforming setbacks and they have a ranch house, in your case, you're three feet from the property line, and they want to go up or they want to expand or whatever. It's very difficult to tell what it's going to look like, although, I'm getting educated pretty quick on this. The reason why is very simply, the results of some of the structures, and I would have to red flag this one as one that could have that potential. It can be humungous when you are putting two stories,huge structure on a very, very narrow lot, three feet from your neighbor's property line. Your neighbor may not object now,but when he sees it he may feel differently. But, I,can tell you one thing,we have been very surprised at the results of some of houses;particularly these two-story houses, when they are enlarged to such magnitude, particularly when you're looking at three feet from the property line. Big house, small lot or long lot, one way or another it can be over- t powering. l MR. BROWN: I would only say, I understand your concerns. Of the four houses from the beach, the four houses starting from the road, starting from the neighbor to the west; one is already one and a half stories, and one is already two stories. This would be another two story out of the four houses, as you can see fairly clustered together. MEMBER HORNING: I would say the Building Department is throwing it on our laps to deal with a new way of interpreting. MR. BROWN: I'm sure you can understand our sense of frustration about having figured the plans and discovering when I went back a new interpretation changing the whole field that you're planning on. MEMBER HORNING: So do your plans have any alternative design plans? MR. BROWN: At this point, I can't imagine that they did,because as I said, we had, it was very hard from the very beginning understanding the circumstances that we were in. To minimize the impact of this addition,by, as I said,keeping the roof line as low as possible to be able to provide habitable space on the second floor; and, in fact,not incorporating the second floor onto the L-shaped portion of the south side. 0 AI ,, , Page 19,June 7,2001 ZBA Public Hearing Transcnpt Town of Southold MEMBER HORNING: So what you are saying is that the overall proposed building ,----) height is the minimum? MR. BROWN: The minimum we felt we could provide and still provide habitable space • upstairs. CHAIRMAN: So, in reality, what you're going to give us is a rendering of, you're going to affix those boards so that we can see what the height situation is. My question is, what is the timeliness of this application? Can we deal with this application in August? MR. BROWN: Obviously, the only concern that I would have regarding that is that, under normal circumstances I would say,if we were able to get a variance from you in August, successfully, and have the Building Permit by September so that the work could be done through the winter with no impact on the community, I would say great. But as I understand it right now, the Building Department has a backlog of approximately four months. CHAIRMAN: But, you're still in line, even though you don't have MR. BROWN: That may be,but I'm sure, you understand my concern and frustration. ` CHAIRMAN: The problem I have is that the July calendar is oh-la-la. ®) MR. BROWN: Certainly, I don't want to make your lives any more difficult. If August is better for you, then August it is. CHAIRMAN: All right,we'll take some testimony tonight, if you would bring us the rendering or we can have it that night. But if we could study it at the same time. MR. BROWN: You'll have it before the August hearing. CHAIRMAN: Give us a call when you have the boards up, and we'll go back and take a look. We always love to go to Gardners Bay Estates in the summertime. It makes you feel like summer. Okay, we thank you. I have to tell you sir, that you and Miss Martin are wonderful ladies and gentleman, wonderful to deal with and, as always, in the past. You are a true gentleman, it really is a pleasure. MR. BROWN: Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN: Is there anybody else that would like to speak in favor of this application? Anybody like to speak against the application? Yes,ma'am? Good evening. NORMA MARTIN: Good evening, I'm Norma Martin. We live directly to the west of the Walz's home, and I have some comments and concerns I'd like to voice regarding this pending decision. Because of slope in the way of the land, with their house being on the highest portion of this slope, the height of their single-story house is approximately the a Page 20,June 7,2001 ZBA Public Hearing Transcript Town of Southold same height as our house, which is a story and a half. I feel that adding a second story to this existing single level structure will result in something that far exceeds the height and detracts from the look of the surrounding dwellings. Granted as you look at the first four homes on the beach, ours being a story and a half, theirs being a story and then the other two-story house belongs to the fourth and it is on a considerably larger piece of property than is the Walz house. Also to be considered, I should think, would be the impact from the cesspool that would result in two bedrooms and one bath, that I understand are included in the plans. This addition would mean that there would be five bedrooms and two baths in this house. With our house situated directly next door on the downward side of the slope from their existing cesspools, I wonder what affect it will have on us. I am sure that when the Walz purchased this house, one of the things that impressed them was the look of Gardners Bay Estates. This traditional and understated private community, which has been in existence for approximately 72 years,has been achieved and maintained through the years by the diligence and cooperation of the homeowners and the Association. Although we have a Real Estate Committee, it is my understanding that the Walzs have yet to submit these for review and consideration. I am concerned as to why they bypassed this most important step. It insinuates to me that they are not concerned with what effect they have on their neighbors. When you become a resident of Gardners Bay Estates and a member of the Homeowners Association, it is assumed that you will abide by the guidelines that have been agreed upon by all; not develop your own agenda and expect to be allowed to be exception to the rule. We already have a very, very visual example just down the street on Old Orchard Lane; designed by the same architects, I might add, of what can happen when a homeowners vision and architects view of what is appropriate collide with what the neighbors feel looks best and is in the best interest of the appearance of a community as a whole. It is for the above reasons that I am opposed to these plans. Thank you for listening. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Good evening Mr. Martin,how are you? RALPH MARTIN: By having this house with a second story on, will affect the cut-off of any and all air circulation of our bedroom which are secured to the east of my home. My bedroom, my grandchildren's bedroom, and the guest bedroom. By going up,you limit the air; you lose some of the sunlight you might get. If I wanted to live next to a wall,I would have lived in New York City perhaps. I came out here,my wife and I did, for just the way this Town of Southold is and was; and I hope that this Committee will realize the fact that, that's the way I think our houses should be done, try and keep our rural atmosphere. I remember we had two traffic lights in town, now we have four or five. It seems to me that people like to move out here to the East End because of the rural atmosphere and the way people are. Many times, often times, I won't say many times, when people do move out here for what we have after they get settled, they want to start to change and bring the West end into our community. It doesn't really fit, and it happens it seems to me more so than not. We were never even addressed by the Walzs when they thought they might wish to put a second story on the house,but that's their business. But I still am a neighbor of theirs directly to the west, and my property line to my chimney, the property line, is about three feet. So that gives us nine feet between houses. It's 6.6 from their house and my property line; and I believe from my chimney,which is next to 111 0 • Page 21,June 7,2001 ZBA Public Hearing Transcript Town of Southold two bedrooms, is about three feet, three and one half feet. Then to go up two stories with a bit more, I think it's just a little bit too much in my opinion. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Martin, I would like to see this, your house and what you're saying upstairs if you don't mind me making an appointment with you. Could I just have your telephone number? RALPH MARTIN: 477-0428 CHAIRMAN: They're going to put these ridge markers up, and once they're up, I'll give you a call and I'll come over some Saturday or whatever at your convenience. Okay. RALPH MARTIN: Fine, Mr. Chairman. I thank you very much for your time. CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone else that would like to speak against? Yes ma'am. JOAN A. BRIDGET EGAN: I have been a homeowner in Gardner Bay Estates since 1964. I couldn't agree more with Mr. and Mrs. Martin, and I think one of the most important highlights of what he said, is the fact that what happened with real estate changing and the fact that a lot of people bought these summer homes, now they're getting a little bit older, they sell the house west and they move here. Which is understandable, I did the same myself. We couldn't go wide,we couldn't go deep, and we went up a story, a half a story. These changes and overpopulation and the progression of these things. Hopefully the Walzs will live a long, long life and we don't have too many children in Gardner Bay Estates that we have to educate. But if these things go on, and they become year round homes,which is what I think is what Mr. Walz wants,you're going to have more, more, more. I think that the changes that have happened in Gardner Bay Estates, some of them, I don't know how they passed Zoning, that would be Mr. Frenzel's property that is on Old Orchard Lane. It is a horror, an absolute horror. There is nothing we can do about it,but I think somewhere along the line here you have to say stop. I think here, Mr. Martin and the other people tonight,including myself. I have served in every capacity in Gardners Bay Estates before it was homeowners,before, before. Mr. and Mrs. Walz have never even participated in any way, in any community activities that I know of and I think I would know of it. So all of these things can give me a very sour grapes. I think it's important that we maintain what we have and I'm sure there's some solution to this. I've been in the Walz house several times, when the Vanripers had it, and I don't know, maybe they could do better with a basement, putting things in a basement rather than going up. I think it would also effect the air corridor as far as ventilation for the homes going north, that might be Mrs. Frazier and it could go on to the Collins home. I think they're a lot of things other than just where the rain falls. I think the weight, also,-of putting this structure up there on a slope like that, it can have a mud slide and it certainly could affect the Martins and I don't know the name of the people who live in the small home which could eventually effect our roads. It's a progression of things and I say stop. Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN: Anybody else,we are going to recess? Go ahead sir. • 7 111 Page 22,June 7,2001 ZBA Public Hearing Transcript Town of Southold FRANK THORP: I am Frank Thorp; I live at 180 South Lane, two houses to the east of the Walzs. I also represent my brother Edward and his wife Virginia at 80 South Lane who is the immediate house next to the Walzs. A couple of things, my house, which is the two-story house referred to, is only five feet from the property line. The Walzs deed does not require them to submit an approval of plans. That was in the original deed. Some of the original deeds to the Gardners Bay Estates Company did not require certain things, including 8-foot setbacks from the side yard. Obviously, in this particular deed did not require the approval of the company for building plans which were then passed on to the Association. My brother and I strongly approve of the plans that have been proposed,we feel it will greatly enhance the community and will maintain and, perhaps, even add to our property value. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Hearing no further comment, yes, you have one thing you want to say? AMY MARTIN: Just wanted to give you one thing. We had our draftsman acquire the properties of the surveys of the two adjoining properties just to show you. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Hearing no further comment at this hearing, I make a motion recessing until August 16th, 2001. SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION 8:00 P.M. Appl. No. 4953 —HENRY L. FERGUSON MUSEUM, INC. This is a request for Variances,based on the Building Inspector's April 11, 2001 Notice of Disapproval which states that a permit for an addition to the existing museum building is denied for the following reasons: (a)Article III, Section 100-32 requires a minimum front yard setback of 60 feet; and(b)Article XXIV, Section 100-243A.1 a for the reason that the proposed addition will increase the size of this nonconforming nonresidential building, resulting in an increase in the overall building footprint of more than 15 percent. Location: Equestrian Avenue, Fishers Island,NY; Parce19-4-11.1 Stephen L. Hamm III, Esq. BARBARA HAMM: Good evening, I'm Barbara Hamm and I represent the Ferguson Museum. I have an Affidavit of Sign Posting for you and five(5) sets of papers. CHAIRMAN: I knew you looked familiar; from the Lynch application. BARBARA HAMM: I'm on that tonight too, and Steve still isn't coming back after the Southampton Lumber fiasco. MEMBER COLLINS: Tell him we miss him. • 6 PAGE 52-SEPTEMBER 20,2001 - - ZBA PUBLIC HEARING TRANSCRIPT TOWN OF SOUTHOLD still one parcel. That's Lydia's point and that's very interesting that it didn't occur to us when were looking at the next-door property. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: Jim that email message is not part of the file. You've got to decide on whether that should be put in the file. CHAIRMAN: Put it in the file. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: You want to put it in. CHAIRMAN: It was comment regarding this piece of property, this application that's before us and therefore we should make it part of the file because that's caused some inquisitiveness on our part. There's nothing wrong with your application. We understand the situation; there are just some issues that are raised there regarding this. So what I would like you to do is take this to the Planning Board, we'll just recess it without a date and we'll re-advertise it. MEMBER COLLINS: We'll talk to the Town Attorney to find out if we're doing the chicken before the egg or the egg before the chicken and so on and so forth. I'm not sure because this is only the second one we've actually had. CHAIRMAN: So, we'll just go from there. If you would do that we would appreciate that. JAMES FITZGERALD: Okay, sure. CHAIRMAN: Is there anybody else that would like to either for or against this application? Seeing no hands, I'll make a motion recessing it without a date. SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION * * * 10:09 P.M. Appl. No. 4962 — ROGER AND LESSLIE WALZ. (Carryover from prior - • hearing calendars). This is an Appeal requesting a Variance under Article XXIV, Section 100-242A; based on the Building Inspector's May 2, 2001 corrected Notice of Disapproval. The Notice of Disapproval states that the existing structure has a nonconforming setback of three feet from the easterly side lot line and 6.5 feet from the west side line, and as a result, the second-story addition represents an increase in the degree of nonconformity. Location of Property: 2505 Old Orchard Road, East Marion; Parcel 1000-37-6-5. CHAIRMAN: Who is representing whom here? Mr. Bressler, twice in the same night? ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: There's a rarity isn't it. I'm here on behalf of the applicants. I understand that we have a carried over hearing. C „ PAGE 53-SEPTEMBER 20,2001 - ZBA PUBLIC HEARING TRANSCRIPT TOWN OF SOUTHOLD CHAIRMAN: Is there a great possibility that we could carry this over again? I mean you're certainly welcome to bring in your witnesses and so on and so forth, but anything you could do to expedite this we would appreciate. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: You know that's in my nature. Yes, we shall I understand Mr. Chairman and it may be necessary to take special steps but I understand the objectors are here. You adjourned this specifically to give them an opportunity to be here. So I think they ought to have the opportunity to hear what we say. Here we go. Mr. Chairman and Members of the Board, this is an interesting application I think. I think it's a significant application. I think the application consists basically of two parts. Notwithstanding the way this thing was initially styled and brought on. I think it brings up two issues and I would urge you to consider it on this basis and if you need any amendatory papers. This is a highbred application in fact. What we are dealing with is an Appeal from a Determination of the Building Inspector. That determination resulted in a denial of an.... application to increase the size of a nonconforming building by going up. So the issue' before the Building Department and before you tonight in the first instance is whether or not under the relevant Section 100-242A whether going up is something that results in an increased nonconformity. It's my understanding that up until extremely recently the answer to that question was no. Because as long as you stayed within the footprint or indeed as long as you stayed within an area that was defined by a line that ran through a point which closest to the lot line, as long as you stayed within that envelope there was no greater nonconformity or degree of nonconformity. Indeed very recently that was just what this Board held. I'm sure the Board is familiar with, what I'm familiar with and for the record I would like the Determination of the Findings and Facts. In that particular case there was a building situation upon a lot that was nonconforming and the building was situated at an angle such that the greatest nonconformity occurred and they heard which was real nonconformity and was more determined when as long as a structure stayed within an envelope which was measured by a line parallel to the boundary that went through that point everything was okay, and that to my understanding in the twenty-. five years or so that I've been doing it is the way everything looked. The Building Department did it that way and this Board did it that way and I've been given to understand that before my time and since the inception of Zoning it is done that way too. - Ekerybody understood just what that meant. It's been brought.to my attention as a result ' j.• •lirthedenial we got here and in conversaion•ith members .of the'Building Department where very recently there has been what is to me an Inexplicable change after roughly fifty years that the Building Department's Determination as to how they're going to deal with these things and now, if you stay within the envelope and go up you will be disapproved. I'm not sure why, I'm not sure how; but we find ourselves before this Board seeking relief. I don't know of any reason why that should necessarily be so at this particular time. There has been no change in the Ordinance and a model of any change anywhere that would lead to this result. The first wrong of this application is reversal. Do what this Board has been doing consistently and indeed what the Building Department has been doing consistently for all these years. There's been no change in the Ordinance and I think it would not be rational to adopt some sort of change in the absence of some sort legislative action. I've not been able to determine any valid reason why there should be that kind of a change. I don't believe that the Building Department s PAGE 54—SEPTEMBER 20,2001 - ZBA PUBLIC HEARING TRANSCRIPT TOWN OF SOUTHOLD was in error all those years, and while I may disagree with the Board from time to time, certainly my position tonight is that the Board was correct in adopting those determinations. And we urge the Board to adhere to its precedents and apply a uniform rule to my client that's been applied in the past. CHAIRMAN: Let's just leave that issue right there. What you really need to do is to file an Interpretation with us if you want us to over claim that issue. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: I've sent in a reversal actually. CHAIRMAN: I mean you need to file an Interpretation to actually have us file us a reversal, in order words, at the eleventh hour you can't bring that issue in. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: No, that was my application to amend, Mr. Chairman to bring that since you indicated at the outset that there was no debt before the proceedings my application is to file with you the necessary papers to bring that within the purvey of this Determination so as not to duplicate the efforts of the Board. And have everything under one umbrella. CHAIRMAN: So you will do that now? ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: I will do that. I make the oral application and I represent to you that I will follow up with the necessary papers to bring that to you so we don't waste time and effort here. And that's all I've got to say about that application at this time. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: I have a question, would that have to be advertised? CHAIRMAN: The Interpretation has to be advertised. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: That's going to take time. • EIiiIC•-BRESSLER, ESQ.: I'm asking for a Reversal, which would necessarily require you.to interpret, right.. That's all I think what I want to say, or can say about at this, s` particular' time. Assuming atrgued 'that they get the house back I would like to briefly address the second prong of the application. Should you chose to agree with that the Building Department's Interpretation, which obviously I urge you now to; but should you chose to do that there's a second prong to the application and that is if that's going to be the rule down there, then we're in front of you for a variance. That has been properly advertised and we are here seeking relief. I read the initial presentation so I won't go over that material again. What I would like to do is to address in the first instance, I would like in that regard to put before the Board I've actually go two of these. CHAIRMAN: What are we looking at here? PAGE 55-SEPTEMBER 20,2001 0 ZBA PUBLIC HEARING TRANSCRIPT TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: You are looking at a map of a community called Old Orchard, Gardiners Bay. CHAIRMAN: We knew it was Gardiner's Bay. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: That's what it says, this is Gardiner's Bay but it says there so you can identify it for the record. It says in the upper right hand corner Community called Old Orchard. And you are looking a blow-up of the tax map and you are looking at a number of homes that are marked in blue and each of those lots including the ones not marked in blue that are on the waterfront are enabled with the names of the owners. What I'd like to do is match up, if I could, each of those parcels with a photograph which are labeled on the back. What is the purpose of all that? The purpose of all that is to demonstrate to the Board what the nature of the waterfront lots, the thirty-seven waterfront lots in Gardiner's Bay are. And if you look at these blue ones and you count them you will see two-level homes. That's what this is designed to demonstrate. This means that by far the large majority of these homes are two-level. Why is that important? It's important because that's what we're asking for, and it will not change the character of the neighborhood. It is similar to most of what's there. Now there was an issue where at the last meeting, concerning the impact of this particular project on one of the neighbors. The Board has in its file based upon my review a series of letters from people in the area. One of which from an immediate neighbor, he is alleging that there is going to be an impact on light and air. This project was designed to have minimal impact on that neighbor to the west. I'm going to ask Mr. Brown to come up and just address you briefly with a couple of exhibits and what he's going to be doing is truthful. He is going to be showing you photographs of the south and north elevations of the house with the new constructions superimposed. And what this is going to show you is that roof line on the west side of the house, has been designed in such a manner as to soften the impact of the neighbor from what currently exists. Specifically on that side of the house there is an extension that comes out in a triangular fashion and it is of a height that goes out to the entire edge of the house. We're proposing to eliminate that and gradually go up from the first floor, up a little•bit higher with a gradual roofline. It would actually result in less impact to the neighbor than gburrently exists. So this house has been designed in a manner , to minimize impact while at the-same time giving to these people it is essentially no . - different from what most of their neighbors already have. You're also going to set.from Mr. Brown two studies that he has prepared. One on light and one on air.' 'Fascinating things, really I saw them outside. The light is going to show you that there is no impact on light on the neighbor except for the briefest period of time on calendar basis at a time prior to 5:00 a.m. in the morning. There is a tiny, tiny sliver when there is a tiny bit of impact and you will see how that works. So in essence there is no limitation on sunlight reaching this house. Why is that? Well that house is in front of ours. And can't move the sun means that they get better sun that we do at least in terms of when the rays arrive first. So there's no blockage. You're also going to see in terms of breeze, air; you're going to see a chart that has been prepared by Brookhaven National Lab, which indicates where the wind comes from on a daily basis. He's charted that out in terms of the compass. And again, because their house is in front of ours they get the benefit of the prevailing southwesterly and there's no adverse impact. In fact the only adverse impact PAGE 56-SEPTEMBER 20,2001 ZBA PUBLIC HEARING TRANSCRIPT TOWN OF SOUTHOLD on the air and the wind, if you want to call it adverse, is that they're sheltered from the nor'easters' because our property is more to the east of theirs. If you want to call that a detriment I guess we'll live with that. I would think of it as, a benefit, I don't want the nor'easters' coming down on my house. So in terms of light and air, there is no negative impact, in fact, there is a positive impact on the neighbor in terms of shelter from the nor'easters'. That having been said I ask Mr. Brown to come up, show you the demonstrative evidence and put it in your record. ROBERT BROWN: May I approach? CHAIRMAN: Sure. ROBERT BROWN: I realize some of these may be difficult for you all to see at once. CHAIRMAN: For anybody in the audience we, of course, are not going to close this hearing. Everybody has the right to look at it and so when we're done with the presentation we may reserve any discussion that we have with it after we study them. ROBERT BROWN: I just want to start with a photograph taken in front of the Waltzes house towards the west. So I think this clearly. CHAIRMAN: Where is Mr. Martin, he might want to come up and see this. Is Mr. Martin in the audience? Anybody else that has an interest? Mr. Martin why don't you stand over there and watch the whole thing. Mrs. Martin how are you? Anybody else have an interest in this issue on the opposition side? Or on the for side, you're welcome to stand over there. Okay, let's go. ROBERT BROWN: In view of the question that the Walzes house is facing me west, it is my opinion that this photo clearly shows that when you consider that the second floor addition only starts at this point off the Walzes house and goes up here that the impact on the vast majority of the neighbor's house is, in my opinion, insignificant. We go then to, yqu asked at our,last meeting for some presentation of the actual impact and I realize that thPse.:aft. fairly faint, but .av*rplayed on these photographs is what the proposed • construction.would look like. The roof peaks are taken, you can see in the photograph, are the poles that rest on the structure to show the peak of the roves. CHAIRMAN: Could you mark that one up a little bit more? MEMBER TORTORA: That's the top of the roofline there? It's very hard to see. CHAIRMAN: Could you mark that one up takes that one back tonight and mark it up a little bit more? ROBERT BROWN: I'm not quite sure what you want. CHAIRMAN: We'll take C.,3/D PAGE 57-SEPTEMBER 20,2001 ZBA PUBLIC HEARING TRANSCRIPT TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ROBERT BROWN: You want the roofline marked up? CHAIRMAN: Yes. ROBERT BROWN: I'll do it right now if somebody has a pen. This is where there is a gable end roof that we are replacing with a shed roof that you can see that much of roof is being removed from the west. CHAIRMAN: The cutout still stands there right? ROBERT BROWN: This portion of the cutout? • CHAIRMAN: No the cutout down below where the tree is, in back of that tree. Is that in front of that house? ROBERT BROWN: This is the'part of the house that will remain, and the roof, instead of going up to here, will now come across here. CHAIRMAN: Again, you have plenty of time to comment on, this is not a quiz situation. ROBERT BROWN: Let me explain this briefly, this is centered on the center of the house to the west to show where the impact is. These arched lines represent the sun in the sky on the 21st of any specific month. The months denoted by the roman numerals on the. So the highest the sun is in the sky in the morning because the Walzs house is to the east, you can see that on June 21st from 4:45 to approximately to 5:00 a.m. this portion of the Walzs house in fact does shade the center of the neighboring property. After that point and on any other time in the year, there is absolutely no sunlight impact from the house to the northeast. And finally, in the upper left hand corner is a sample from Brookhaven National Labs, this was just a few days ago, the top to bottom indicates degrees of the compass. You can see from the outline of this house that it blocks air from approximately 355 degrees to 60 degrees. That is indicated by the red on the chart. I think its fairly clear from this being recordings of wind direction according to the angle from which its coming that the vast majority on this day and on other days that I sampled, even more so in some cases, the vast majority of the wind is coming from directions other than the northeast. But I don't think it takes Brookhaven National Labs for us to know that the wind comes off the water in the summer, it comes from the northeast, northwest rather on a winter day, and if its coming from the northeast, I'd just assume be blocked. I hope that helps you. CHAIRMAN: We will certainly study it Mr. Brown. We'll certainly study these there's no question about it. And if we have any question on it ROBERT BROWN: If you have any questions please feel free to call me. If you need any calculations. PAGE 58-SEPTEMBER 20,2001 ZBA PUBLIC HEARING TRANSCRIPT TOWN OF SOUTHOLD CHAIRMAN: We'll do it at the next hearing, Eric is going to modify this and we're going to open them together. Thank you. What else do you have to say Mr. Bressler? ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: At this particular time, and keeping in mind, we will be back once more, given the lateness of the hour. CHAIRMAN: Okay, Mr. Martin and Mrs. Martin you will study these, you'll have questions and we'll quiz the applicant's counsel and architect at the next hearing. We just have to determine when the next hearing is going to be. Our problem Mr. Bressler is that we are absolutely loaded for the October meeting. So we are loaded as we are tonight. You can't get more saturated than this. I have a feeling this is going to be part of the November calendar. That's the only way I can suggest here. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: If that's your first available date, we'll take it Mr. Chairman. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: It's the fifteenth. You're going to get it in next week I guess right? CHAIRMAN: Yes. So hearing no further comment from anyone, I'll recess the hearing and we will then take both issues and if we have any questions on those issues at that point, we may also request a member of the Building Department to come in and discuss that. Since we have a unique situation, we have Mr. Forrester who actually did the Notice of Disapproval but now holds another position in the Town, we may ask him to come and now Mr. Verity holds that position and we may ask them both to come, we don't know, we'll see what happens. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: I had previously contacted Mr. Verity, but due to the lateness of the hour, he was able to stick around and I'm not sure if he did you would want to hear from him now. CHAIRMAN: So, I offer that as a resolution, ladies and gentlemen. • SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION • * * * Recess for five minutes . 10:48 p.m. Appl. No. 5003 —KACE LI, INC. This is an Appeal requesting a Reversal of the Building Inspector's Notice of Disapproval dated August 13, 2001, denying an application for a building permit for two-family dwellings under Article IV, Section 1000-42A.2. The reason stated in the Notice of Disapproval is that the proposed project indicates several two-family dwellings on a single parcel, and that the Code allows only one such structure per lot as a permitted use. Zone District: Hamlet-Density (HD). Location of Property: South Side of North Road (a/k/a/ C.R. 48) (now or formerly referred to as "Northwind Village" site), 500+- feet east of Chapel Lane, Greenport; Parcel#1000-40-3-1. SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS TRANSCRIPT OF PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD MARCH 28, 2002 (Prepared by Paula Quintieri) Present were: Chairman Goehringer Member Tortora Member Oliva' Member Orlando Board Secretary Kowalski Absent was: Member Horning(as agreed) PUBLIC HEARINGS: 7:05 p.m. Appl. No. 4962 — ROGER J. AND LESLIE WALZ. This is request for a Variance under Article XXIV, Section 100-242A, based on the Building Inspector's May 2, 2001 Notice of Disapproval regarding the proposed second-story addition to existing dwelling. The reason stated in the Notice of Disapproval states that the existing structure has a nonconforming setback of less than 10 feet and 15 feet o the side yards, and as a result, the addition of the second-story represents an increase in the degree of nonconformity. 2505 Old Orchard Road, East Marion; 37-6-5. (The hearing was concluded on November 29, 2001, and reopened at the request of applicants.) CHAIRMAN: Mr. Bressler we received your letter. We, of course, spoke to you prior to the letter and we're waiting to hear what you have to say regarding this application. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: Well, Mr. Chairman, I think we're at the end of the road here. You have ruled the way you have ruled on the first half of the application; and, at least for the time being, that is the rule that applies to these particular projects. That being the case, my comments tonight will be addressed toward the application of that rule to this specific project. Hard cases make bad law, am I adding to the law. And I think if we were to examine this particular application we'd all be constrained to agree. I think the important thing to focus on at this particular juncture is measured against that particular rule, what is the relief that is sought by the applicant in this particular case. It is beyond argument that the applicant is entitled to something, even under the rule that this Board has announced. In fact, the applicant is entitled to build with 15 feet on one side and 10 feet on another side. That is so. So the question before you is, is that the best possible result of this situation. We have said from the beginning, even before the pronouncement of that rule, that that is not so. That is not the best possible result for the applicant; it's not the best possible result for the neighbors. It's not the best possible result for anybody. Now why is this so. This is so because the neighbor to the east has no objection to moving the bulk of the second story next to him. The neighbor to the west has an 1110 U Page 2,Mai ch 28,2002 ZBA Public HeaiingTiansciipt Town of Southold objection to what I can see to virtually anything, and doesn't want anything near him. So, as a result of this, the proposed plan calls for the bulk of this second story to be next to the neighbor who doesn't object, and as far away as possible from the neighbor who does. That's what the plan proposes. As of right, all the applicant can do is build in a position that is further away from the neighbor who doesn't care and is closer to the neighbor who does object. This is an irrational result. All we have done, in order to aid the Board in looking at what the application and this new rule would require and why it doesn't really work in this situation, I've asked Mr. Brown to draw up the building as it exists, the building that could be built, absence relief from the Board, and the building that is proposed to be built far away from the object ant and close to the neighbor who doesn't care. I've also asked him to calculate what the effect of the proposed project would be on the objecting neighbor and he has calculated that there would be a reduction in bulk or volume within the nonconforming zone close to the objecting neighbor. And he has calculated that in cubic feet. So the net result of all that is, there is a reduction in bulk close to the objecting neighbor, it is further away from the objecting neighbor and it's near to a place where nobody cares. You will also hear from Mr. Brown, that architecturally this is the best possible design, given the lay of the land. You will hear from him architecturally it's the best possible design, given the interior design of the house. In short, this maximizes the benefit for everybody and it minimizes the detriment for everybody. There is no reason not to grant this. Mr. Brown do you have these drawings? CHAIRMAN: Good evening Mr. Brown, how are you? ROB BROWN: Good evening. Fine thank you, how are you? If I may? CHAIRMAN: Surely. ROB BROWN: I would just like to add a bit of history for the newer Members of the Board. In fact, when this design was conceived and actually well until the working drawing phase, this design was based on an Interpretation of the Code by the Building Department which made this design perfectly legitimate and acceptable. It was not until the working drawings were almost completed, that the Building Department changed their Interpretation of the Code. That's just a little background. What I have here is a simple diagram, which shows, if I may explain it on the top, is the existing condition. This shows the three properties contiguous. This is viewing from the north, looking the last house from the center. The fourth house to the west is to the left, and the Martin residence to the right is to the West, the fourth house is to the east. The top shows the existing conditions and directly below that is the proposed plan. As you can see the reduction of the gable roof on the west side of the Walz residence, as proposed, would reduce the volume of structure in the nonconforming area by 120 cubic feet. There are three reasons, three basic design concepts behind this original proposal. The first is when you're dealing with slope terrain you want to move the mass, the large proportion of mass upslope for the simple matter of visual stability. In this case, the second factor behind this design was the fact that its structurally logical and, therefore, economical to build a second floor directly over a first floor rather than having to suspend over air, which . Page 3,March 28,2002 ZBA Public Hearing Tiansciipt Town of Southold would be the case below. The third, and I think you might see some irony in this, is that the design, if we were to conform to the setback regulations, actually has a far more significant impact on the house to the west than the proposed design. You could, of course, put the 15 feet on the east side, I'm sorry the 10 feet on the east side, and the 15 feet on the west side. ROB BROWN: Certainly, and you will understand that this diagram is showing a worst case. MEMBER TORTORA: It's not to scale. ROB BROWN: The fact of the matter is the preponderance of the mass would be closer to the house to the west than to the east. MEMBER TORTORA: The dwelling is not to scale. ROB BROWN: It's roughly to scale. MEMBER TORTORA: The three feet that you're showing from the property line on the east. CHAIRMAN: He just showed you there's a 15 on that side. MEMBER TORTORA: No, I mean on what's existing. MEMBER OLIVA: The proposed, Mr. Brown, I mean Mr. Martin's complaint it seems to me with your roof line the way it is, all that run off, unless you do some gutters and leaders and putting some drywells in there, all that soil and everything else is running right down into his property and the property that is today on the west side of the Walz property is eroding. ROB BROWN: Well, if I may, first of all. MEMBER OLIVA: Because of just runoff, not property. ROB BROWN: But if I may, we've never stated any objection to gutters, drywells, French drains or any other matter. We felt that that was not a matter for this Board, but for the Building Department. Secondly, the proposed design does not have a single square inch more of roof area than the existing house does. And certainly we would do anything to mitigate runoff, but we didn't feel that was an issue to this Board. That's between us and the Building Department in my opinion. MEMBER TORTORA: About a year, not even a year, about at one of the earliest hearings, I was going through the files today and I noted that you said that you were applying to the Town Trustees because the project is within their jurisdiction. That's in Page 4,Maich 28,2002 ZBA Public Healing Tiansciipt Town of Southold the minutes of one of the meetings and yet I don't see any Trustee permit or Letter of Non-Jurisdiction. ROB BROWN: That I'm sure is a clerical situation if we applied, I'm sure its been approved. I mean we're going back a very long time now. We've been at this ten months, just with this Board. MEMBER TORTORA: You're quite right ROB BROWN: To my knowledge you have whatever documentation was needed. If that's not the case, then obviously anything you do would be subject to. MEMBER TORTORA: The only reason I ask this, Mr. Brown, is because genuinely the Trustees do, are very concerned about matters of runoff, particularly when it involves wetland areas and waterfront area, as they are very concerned. ROB BROWN: And we take it very seriously too. MEMBER TORTORA: Yes, it can have a tremendous impact and that's why generally, these applications are reviewed by the Trustees first and we take very seriously their comments. ROB BROWN: Well, again there is zero difference in the roof area between the proposed plan and the existing structure and if there were any concern, I mean aside from any concern that any Board might have, this is something that as any responsible architect, designer or engineer would consider, runoff is an issue under any conditions in any situation and its something to be dealt with. Certainly, if this Board wanted to make that a condition of their approval we would welcome that, but it certainly wouldn't make us any less or more interested in doing that, that's something that we have to do. MEMBER TORTORA: I'm sure if you could just show us either the Trustee permit or Letter of Non jurisdiction, and put it into the record we would appreciate it. ROB BROWN: I am certain we can get that for you. MEMBER TORTORA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Brown it would be very interesting to see this from the opposite side, from the waterside. Is there any possibility of you assembling that from the waterside? ROB BROWN: Mr. Goehringer the plans that I presented many months ago, that showed a photographic rendition of the existing with an overlay of drawing, of the proposed was from the other side, I really, with all due respect that's kind of beating a dead horse. CHAIRMAN: Okay. Any other questions of Mr. Brown? IIP 411P Page 5,Match 28,2002 ZBA Public Heating Ttanscttpt Town of Southold MEMBER ORLANDO: No questions. CHAIRMAN: Okay, thank you. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: In closing, I would just like to say; it has been an extremely long for my client. He's retired. Despite all this, he still wants to retire out here and build and he needs to have a decision. With all due respect, I don't feel that another rendition form the waterside is going to change the facts. The facts are what they are. The proposal has minimized the effect on the west side, we all know that; the bulk was moved over to the east. If that's something that the Board thinks is a good thing, then we urge you to approve. If you don't think that that is a good thing, under the circumstances, then don't approve it. And we either build as of right, take an appeal or both, I don't know. But give us a decision. The Martins have been here objecting for months. You can now see there is nothing else we can do. And everything else that we might consider, whether its 10 or 15 on one side and the other, it doesn't really matter, its going to be worse. CHAIRMAN: But, you asked for this re-hearing, we didn't ask for it. But, we're here ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: Let me just clarify that. You asked whether I would waive something, and the answer is no, I'm not going to waive it. The fact that I'm here, I think is a good thing, I think especially the new Members of the Board needed the opportunity to hear what this was about. I think because the Board announced a new rule, it would be not a good thing to rule on the variance without taking into account what the new rule's impact was on this particular project. In particular, Mr. Brown's computation of the reduction in volume on the Martin side I think is something that the Board can rightfully take into account in terms of evaluating the project. I think that's important and I think before the rule is announced nobody even knew that that was even marginally relevant. Well, now it is and we've introduced evidence to the Board to show that there is a reduction and that is the amount of reduction. We've also shown you that we've moved it as far away as we possibly can and anything else is going to be closer to them. Whether it's a foot, two feet, three feet, whatever it is, its going to be closer to them and its going to end up in something less desirable for them. That's where I think the bottom line is, given the fact that the neighbor to the east doesn't object, we urge you to look at this plan and see whether or not you agree with us that this is the best possible resolution for everybody in the neighborhood. Or would I send Mr. Brown back to the drawing board and think about doing something else. • CHAIRMAN: Mr. Bressler, the neighbor to the east told us that when they laid out the sub-division, and that neighbor is here tonight, that he agreed with a 6-foot by 8-foot side yard, this Board has never agreed with a 6 foot or an 8 foot side yard. You are telling me that he is, this house is 3 feet from the property line on that side and he is 6 feet from the property line, or how close is his house from the property line? MEMBER OLIVA: 6 feet. CHAIRMAN: 6 feet, okay. So 6 and 3 is 9, we're talking 9 feet between the two houses S Page 6,Match 28,2002 ZBA Public Healing Transcupt Town of Southold ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: He has no objection. CHAIRMAN: I don't care if he has any objection. I have an objection. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: Wait a minute Mr. Chairman, you said two things; the first, I take issue with and I find it totally unacceptable that you have stated on the record that you don't care what the neighbor thinks. I think that's wrong. I think you have to care to a degree. Now you might. CHAIRMAN: Let me rephrase my question. Just a minute (raising his voice) I have ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: May I finish my sentence? CHAIRMAN: No I'll finish. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: No, I can't finish my sentence? CHAIRMAN: No you can't finish your sentence. No. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: What kind of a ruling is that, that I can't finish my sentence? CHAIRMAN: Because, pardon me Mr. Bressler. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: Mr. Chairman, I have never been treated where I have not been able to finish a sentence. Please. Now you say that you care, yes I agree. That what you think matters a lot. You are on the Board, what all of you think matters. But to say that you don't care that the neighbor doesn't object I think is unfair. That's my point. I'm not saying its determinative, I'm saying that you ought to take it into account when one neighbor says I object a lot over here, and the other one says I don't. That's my only point. No one says you're bound by it, but I think you have to, as reasonable people, listen to what they say in the neighborhood, that's all. CHAIRMAN: I never said I would not listen sir, all I said was that I still contend that 9 feet between these two houses, at the height that is going to be constructed, is too close and that's my opinion. I'm not thrusting that opinion on anybody else, that is my opinion as a fireman for thirty-four years in the Town of Southold. That's all I'm telling you. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: My only ploy is, I don't think its fair for any Member of the Board to say that they don't care what a neighbor says. You may not be bound by it. CHAIRMAN: I will change my statement. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: But, I object to that. Page 7,Match 28,2002 ZBA Public Healing Tianscnpt Town of Southold CHAIRMAN: Well, you can object to whatever you want, I said I will change my statement. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: Okay, fair enough. My point is we've done everything in accordance with what we think the neighbors will live with and what they want. And if this Board doesn't want to do that, then we will be guided accordingly. And if we need to move this over, closer to the Martins, then that's what's going to happen. We're here at the end of the line, as I said at the beginning, its up to you people to decide what you're going to penult here and what you're not going to permit. My job is only to tell you the way I see it and that's the way I see it. The man to the east doesn't care. The man to the west has a vital objection and wants it as far away as he can, and we've tried to meet that. MEMBER TORTORA: Mr. Bressler,just a quick question? I went back to the transcript to get, to try, one of the transcripts it was INAUDIBLE, some of the parts were inaudible and that happens sometimes when people move away from the microphone. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: And talk over one another, and I do apologize for that. MEMBER TORTORA: Yes, gentlemen. CHAIRMAN: Did I stop him, he continued. MEMBER TORTORA: Okay. Just to get some stuff on the record here that we kind of lost in the transcript. What is the square footage of the ground floor of the house now? ROB BROWN: We can certainly get that for you, I didn't bring that information with me. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: Keep going, if we can't answer it. MEMBER TORTORA: I know there's a two-car garage and there's, on the bottom now of the house? ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: Yes. MEMBER TORTORA: And that would remain correct? ROB BROWN: Yes. MEMBER TORTORA: I was trying to figure it out, it's about 1800 — 2000 square feet now, I don't know? I'm sure you have that information. ROB BROWN: Not with me I'm afraid. I thought that that was old news. Al) Page 8,Maich 28,2002 ZBA Public Hearing Transcript Town of Southold MEMBER TORTORA: It would be old news if we had a perfect world where nobody jiggled papers and everybody spoke into the microphone and everything could get transcribed, but it was not picked up in the transcription. ROB BROWN: I'll see if I have it with me, if not I will certainly get that to you as quickly as possible. MEMBER TORTORA: Just one thing I want to note, Town Law has not changed. Our Interpretation will still consider and be focused on the criteria set forth in New York State Town Law. That the criteria are, will it be a detriment, benefit to the applicant versus the detriment to the community, correct? ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: Absolutely, the only thing that's changed is your Interpretation of what can be done with the nonconforming uses. MEMBER TORTORA: That does not change New York State Town Law and the criteria under which we're supposed to look at a variance. It changes nothing. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: Oh no, that doesn't change. What changes is what you're looking at, not what standards you apply. You are now looking at something which you've called a nonconforming area, but yes, you must apply the same factors absolutely. MEMBER TORTORA: And as to the degree of the variance, I don't care what method you're using, the Code requires 25 foot total side yards ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: That's correct. MEMBER TORTORA: and by any measure, a request for 9 feet is substantial. There is no disputing that. What I see here is you're trying to mitigate that. I see that you are trying to mitigate that. This is a very old sub-division. The lots, in my opinion, its my opinion, its not a statement from the Board or anything else, its my observation. The lots are substandard, they're small, and they're tiny little lots. Mr. Martin, the neighbor who is the objector, his property is 6 feet from yours. Unfortunately, his property is underneath your property, so your property is here, and Mr. Martin is here. So when you want to put a two-story house on, there is a towering effect. And that is a fact. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: It's a fact. MEMBER TORTORA: When we walked around the property I was struck by one thing, I was struck the fact that the brick patio on the, I'm trying to think, the Martin side is the west? Okay, the patio on the Walz property is next to the Martin property is actually sloping like this. It's looks like it's falling. And we see things like this. This isn't something that you can put in a report or any type of textbook, this is something that you visually see, you see that the property is eroding and it's eroding onto the Martin property So, I would hope, that you would be able to devise a plan that would prevent your soil from ending up on the Martin's property. Just as I'm sure, if the situation were . fid ` Page 9,Maich 28,2002 IP4110 ZBA Public HeanngTiansciipt Town of Southold reversed, and Mr. Walz house was where Mr. Martin's is, he would want the same and you, as his attorney, would ask for the same. So that's a consideration. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: I don't think that there's any doubt that Mr. Brown will design this in such a manner that erosion, at least from the water, will not be a factor here. MEMBER TORTORA: Could we throw in soil too? ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: I don't know what you're suggesting? MEMBER TORTORA: In other words, when a ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: The only thing that we're doing is going up and we're not changing the roof area, so what is it that you're proposing. MEMBER TORTORA: I know, you have one piece of property that's like this, and another that's like this. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: Are you proposing some sort of bulk heading, along that line to prevent MEMBER TORTORA: I'm no expert and I don't intend to be. I think you have, at your expertise, people who could suggest ways to mitigate that. I'm not an expert. I am only telling you what I saw in personal inspection. ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: We certainly don't have any objections to that, it's just without any guidance, it raises a whole of issues, but I don't have any real objections to. MEMBER TORTORA: Just think about. As I mentioned to Mr. Brown, the other thing is, we do rely on the Trustees to review the projects and, in reviewing them, to issue a determination based on their criteria of wetlands, decking and everything else. So I would like to see their permit and/or their Letter of non-jurisdiction. That's all. ROB BROWN: We can certainly get that to you. To be very honest with you, in clerical terms, I don't deal wit (inaudible). MEMBER TORTORA: See you're going to be lost in one of these transcripts. BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: We're not picking you up. ROB BROWN: I personally did not handle all of the paperwork involved with all the permits that we deal on a regular basis. I have every reason to believe that we did make that application and we have the documentation, if that's not the case, I will certainly get it for you. But one way or another, I will make that available to you. And certainly in answer to your other question, and your comment, the Walzs asked me from the very 11111 Page 10,Maich 28,2002 ZBA Public Heating Ttanscnpt Town of Southold beginning of the design of this to take into consideration the fact that the Martins house is lower than theirs and to design it in such a way as to minimize the impact. I must say, from the bottom of my heart, that is exactly what we tried to do. I don't know if there is any other way that we could've designed this that lessened the impact the Martins have on anything at all and that's from the bottom of my heart. MEMBER TORTORA: The height of this is 21 feet? The one that, not the new one, is very tall. ROB BROWN: The final height to the ridge or to the. CHAIRMAN: Main roof. ROB BROWN: The main roof I believe is about 21 feet yes, to the best of my recollection. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Bressler I would like to afford Martins a copy of what Mr. Brown has given, if you would please and let them concentrate on that for a couple of minutes. And we'll see what develops throughout the hearing here. We'll now ask if there's anybody else that would like to speak in favor of this application? Mr. Thorpe how are you tonight? FRANK THORPE: My name is Frank Thorpe, I represent my brother Edward and his wife Virginia who are the people are immediately to the east. I would just like to clarify something; I never said that there was an 8-foot setback with this particular lot. These original deeds did not have the 8-foot setback the subsequent deeds in Gardner's Bay Estates did. My deed, my brothers deed, the deed to this particular house, the deed to the Martins particular house and the deed to the east of the Martins house did not contain those restrictions at all. Subsequent deeds sometime in the later 30's did. The map of Gardners Bay Estates was filed in 1927 with the County of Suffolk. That map of Section II and I. That's what set up all these particular lots as such. Section III is half acred zoned. CHAIRMAN: So where did the 8 feet come in then? FRANK THORPE: The 8 feet came in CHAIRMAN: I mean in your discussion? In your opinion? FRANK THORPE: I believe later, mid to later 30's. CHAIRMAN: Now that was a covenant in the deed saying that that's what you had to have as a minimum side yard? FRANK THORPE: Correct. 1101 Page 11,Match 28,2002 ZBA Public Heating Tianscript Town of Southold CHAIRMAN: Okay, and your side yard presently on the house that you're representing for your brother is 6 feet, is that correct? FRANK THORPE: No, 5 feet. CHAIRMAN: 5 feet. FRANK THORPE: At one point. And when it was added on to, in 1976, did not require any subsequent thing, because it was no closer than the original 5 feet. CHAIRMAN: Okay, thank you. Is there anybody else that would like to speak in favor? Mr. Martin? RALPH MARTIN: Good evening ladies and gentlemen of the Board. I feel like a soldier in a foxhole, all these big guns shooting at me. Nonetheless, I shall carry on. On Saturday, March 2nd at 7:30 in the morning my wife and I were served with a request for judicial intervention by Mr. Eric Bressler on behalf of the petitioners Roger and Leslie Walz on which we were named as respondents, along with the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Southold. Our involvement with the Walzs application has been the result of our being advised and invited by registered letter of the Zoning Board of Appeals to attend the application hearing and to express our objections if any. We had voiced our objections in a businesslike way and have not slandered or nor have made ourselves, and have made ourselves available to the Walzs, their attorney and their architect to discuss amicably why we are not in favor of their proposed second story addition. Apparently they were not desirous of any such discussion since a meeting was never arranged. We have a right to our opinion and have expressed it before this Board in the proper manner. Therefore, we are puzzled as to why we have been named in this lawsuit. However, since there are new Board Members, and this application hearing has been re-opened, we wish to request that our previously submitted comments and photographs, which are all part of the file, be considered during your deliberation. To reiterate briefly, their lot is less than 47 %2 wide on which has been built an approximately 38 foot wide, single-story house. The addition they propose will loom overwhelmingly large on a small, narrow piece of property with the exception of one, we know of no other two-story home in the community that is built on such a narrow lot. Also, since there are house is at the highest elevation of the slope of the land between the two houses we are very concerned about the additional drain on and possible overflow of their septic system. llasmuch, as there will be an increase in the number of bedrooms and bathrooms, should the existing septic systems fail and all overflow, the affluent could not our property but possibly leach into the nearby shallow waterway as well. The Suffolk County Department of Health has very specific regulations regarding sewage disposal systems and minimum septic tank areas and capacities. And you would hope that the Building Department would seek the County's approval of the septic system. It would appear that in order to be in compliance with the current County of Department of Health Regulations a new and/or enlarged system would be required. However, we can't imagine where it would be constructed on a small lot. We would also like to know if the Town Trustees have made a determination of jurisdiction regarding this construction due r ill S . ., Page 12,Maich 28,2002 ZBA Public Healing Tiansciipt Town of Southold to its closeness of tidal water. The size of the house they are proposing is more in keeping with the south shore than Gardners Bay Estates. One has only have to ride around in some of the smaller more established waterfront communities in Southold to see what happens when residents whether full or part-time decide that they should be able to do whatever they wish and the Building Codes are made for everyone else but them. Ladies and gentlemen I thank you for your time and I will give you a copy of what I have just said. CHAIRMAN: Yes, Mr. Brown? ROB BROWN: I would just like to clarify one point. I've had several conversations on the phone with Mr. Martin requesting a meeting with him to discuss plans and how they came about and they how they affect him. And he declined to meet with me if the Walzs were not present. Thank you. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Martin, let's just wrap this up please. RALPH MARTIN: I wish to rebut that. We did call the gentleman and ask for a meeting with the Walzs. The Walzs apparently could not attend, for whatever reason it was, and I wanted them to be there as our neighbors to see if this could be worked out amicably. It never happened. LESLIE WALZ: Mr. Chairman, you should know that we were asked to meet with Mr. Martin. I'm very sorry we didn't meet. My husband was in the hospital, I wonder why! CHAIRMAN: Mr. Bressler is there anything you would like to wrap up with? ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ.: Yes, thank you. Thank you Mr. Chairman, I think it is evident from what you've heard by way of objection tonight, that the principle issues before you are not really addressed by those objections. What the Trustees do, the Trustees will do. What the Health Department does, it will do. And they are charged by law of doing certain things, as are you. So those objections don't really go to the heart of this particular application. What I heard is that there is an objection to having a second-story. We all know that the Walzs are entitled to something. Something that's going to be less desirable for the Martins, than what is proposed, and I think that's the issue here. I think when you consider what you're going to do about this you ought to take into account the fact that from the very beginning this project has been designed to provide the maximum relief given the lay of the land, the location of the dwellings on the land, and now we're before you asking for that type of relief. I'm fond of saying from time to time, that no good deed goes undone and no good deed goes unpunished. Now I feel that this is where we are, we designed this thing the way we designed it. I know, Mr. Chairman, you asked, is there anything that we could do? I think, for the Martins, I think that the drawings make it clear that we have moved as far away as we can. We have reduced by 120 cubic feet, the volume of structure that is on their side. There is not greater roof area. The runoff will not be any greater since the roof area is not increased. There will be gutters, leaders and drywells and anything else that we can do to mitigate whatever 4 \. , , , Is.a,,,,,I ~ + 400 SIP Page 13,Match 28,2002 ZBA Public Healing Tianscupt Town of Southold effects there may be. What we propose, we think is a reasonable plan given the nature of the opposition and given the nature of the agreement and we would urge you to afford us that relief measured against the standards that this Board has announced, the program that we have designed for this building meets the spirit of that particular ruling in beauty and the light of the neighbors concerns and I think that's what we're looking at here and that we would urge you to grant relief and we urge you to do it in an expeditious manner so that the Walzs now know what they're going to do since Spring is upon us. They would like to retire here and we would like to know what we're going to do if anything. Thank you. CHAIRMAN: Seeing no hands and hearing no further comment, I'll make a motion closing the hearing reserving decision until later. SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION * * * • ' 03/29/2002 11: 21 6314770973 FAIRWEATHER BROWN PAGE 01 tk- 3)2 . -61 794 )t,je,cu DESIGN ASSOCIATES,INC. P.O.Box 521 413 Main Street Greenport,N.Y. 11944 631-477-9752 (fax)631-477-0973 March 29, 2002 Zoning Board of Appeals Southold Town Re' Walz SCI'M# 1000-037-6-5 Following are the Measurements requested: First floor(existing) livingspace 1087 square feet Second floor(proposed) livingspace 1615 square feet Proposed total living space 2702 square feet Existing Garage 722 square feet Re ir,. ctfutly submitted, 0!r1 own awl awl aull auli -cloJcl loecpaG ../ loecips -cloiel I I I ,11-1DRI AO SV, ODUOpIGVN ZIOAA POUgplGgej OCLIOLli 07UgPIGgN LliveN I-1121 0 N 1; ff ii , . CEO ODZI W : if—. 3 3 f 5 i ' .....-- , ------1 --7-Z-, --f7 _, ..-:::--; --..N. A., i "'Z''''' -,,.:_,,,_ .A-7...„----..:=, -----:".--, ...-7,-_,1‘, ."--." --,../. 21111 01.11I 2U11 OR -cioJcl loeci4as pecnas -cloJcl I I I I CES0c1011d .111,•11 gIVOC 00U g P IG72,1 1.114.1e1A1 3.311°I91" Z I eM I-1.IA 0 N aougpiGaN ackloqi •1 "r-1.11_,,„,.. _4 r,. !t . i 02021 CI:JD COD , I 11 ---.'••---.7:-=-=-E-4 ------ -,q1z,.44 -"-4---Zi-,, MOM MOM MIMI MEM 2111M MOM , • , .v. ' 11:1---'-'"-2'7 f 4g2}olcinn oz I -xcucicie I - --NI-", sum mos sin• Ael/9/1.11J011J02-1.10LI 4c,0 11.11110A GO GlIpJ _ gull gull owl gull •cioJci recpas =Pec140G •do.icl I I I I -DNILSDCH augpisoN zieArk `""'"'" aouapisaN aciJou gouapiGasd u14...JetAl 1-1 121 0 N 7,....___ ,-; r., _ ,• :- ;; .;,.. •—ltultu -`,-,-, g-L1=4 1 i---7-----`_----1• L :. '.3 i '5---'4:, if z 3 •1 ,- =.F. 1'' € • _L,.,,,„ 1 tfi .d 1 1, 4111, f. • GJ '/9C 2 Ref: Roger&Leslie Walz--Appl. #4962 Presented to ZBA 3/28/02 On Saturday, March 2, 2002, at 7:40 in the morning,my wife and I were served with a "Request for Judicial Intervention" by Mr. Eric Bressler, on behalf of Petitioners Roger and Leslie Walz, on which we were named as respondents, along with the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Southold. Our involvement with the Walz' application has been as a result of our being advised and invited, by registered letter, from the Zoning Board of Appeals,to attend the application hearing and to express our objections, if any. We have voiced our objections in a business-like way, have not slandered or libeled and have made ourselves available to the Walzes,their attorney and their architect to discuss, amicably, why we are not in favor of their proposed second-story addition. Apparently,they were not desirous of any such discussion, since a meeting was never arranged. We have a right to our opinion and have expressed it before this Board in the proper manner. Therefore, we are puzzled as to why we have been named in this lawsuit. However, since there are new Board members and this application hearing has been re-opened, we wish to request that our previously submitted comments and photographs, which are all part of the file,be considered during your deliberation. To reiterate briefly: Their lot is less that 47.5 ft. wide, on which has been built an approximately 38-foot wide, single-story house. The addition they•propose will loom overwhelmingly large on this small,narrow piece of property. With the exception of one, we know of no other two-story home in the community that is built on such a narrow lot. Also, since their house is at the highest elevation of the slope of land between our two houses,we are very concerned about the additional drain on, and possible overflow of, the septic system, inasmuch as there will be an increase in the number of bedrooms and bathrooms. Should the existing septic system fail and overflow,the effluent could not only spill over onto our property,but possibly leach into the nearby shallow waterway as well. The Suffolk County Department of Health has very specific regulations regarding sewage disposal systems and minimum septic tank area and capacities, and we would hope that the Building Department would seek the County's approval of the septic system. It would appear that, in order to be in compliance with current County Dept.of Health regulations, a new and/or enlarged system would be required. However, we can't imagine where it could be constructed on this small lot: We would also like to know if the Town Trustees have made a determination of jurisdiction regarding this construction, due to its closeness to tidal water. The size house they are propgsing is more in keeping with the South Shore than Gardiners Bay Estates. One has only to,ride around some of the small,more established waterfront communities in Southold Town to see what happens when residents,whether part- or full-time, decide that they should be able to do whatever they wish and the building codes are meant for everyone else but them. Thank you. Ralph Martin, Jr. __J �U� —•mac_.. �� of Reference: Reference: Roger&LesLog of telephone convemations with Mr. Brown Li Appl. #4962 for ZBA 11/29/01 << �(1 On Wed., 11/21/01 (the day before Thanksgiving) at 1:44 in the afternoon, Walz' (c�'tk, architect,Robert Brown, called and left a message indicating that he had been advised by the vx,(tj• chairman of the ZBA to contact us in..4.a..4.aeffort to set up an appointment to discuss the "Walz project" and answer any*estions we may have. He concluded his message with"perhaps I will call back on Monday". On Friday, 11/23/01 at 9:40 a.m, we returned his call (477-9752) and indicated that we would be more than happy to meet with him and the Walzs (and Mr. Bressler, should they so desire) at their earliest convenience. We asked that he let us know when would be a good time for them and we would make every effort to be available. At 1:45 p.m. Mr. Brown called us back and advised that the Walzs were unable to come `out since they had "closed up the house for the winter" and "have other plans". If they have, in fact, "closed up for the winter", it will be the first time we can remember that they have left furniture outside,have not put up the storm shutters and have left the kitchen window ajar. Mr. Brown said he was their representative in this matter and Ralph replied that he would discuss it with his wife and also seek advice from another party. Tuesday, 11/27, is OK with Mr. Brown. We are to call him and let him know what we decide. On Monday, 11/26/01 at 1:15 p.m.,we contacted Mr. Brown and advised him that we saw no point in meeting with him without the Walzs being present. We explained that, inasmuch as they are the applicants for the variance and we are their next door neighbors with whom it was suggested they open a line of communication and respond to whatever questions we may have, it seems reasonable-to expect that they would want to participate in whatever discussion took place. Also, it's possible that we may have some questions that Mr. Brown may not have the answers to. We have indicated our willingness to sit down and discuss this in an effort to resolve the problems that exist,but it seems pointless to take up everyone else's time at a meeting that the Walzs have declined to attend. Ralph Martin, Jr. 2555 Old Orchard Lane East Marion,NY 11939 631-477-0428 ,1 •APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS • ct„fiFfO( ' to itkovSouthold Town Hall Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman ���/1 0A: 53095 Main Road Lydia A.Tortora t y P.O. Box 1179 \)a i George Horning Southold,New York 11971-0959 c\ 0,, Ruth D. Oliva �� ®�•11 ZBA Fax(631)765-9064 Vincent Orlando : RI •,.•i Telephone(631) 765-1809 .....�'� http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD February 27, 2002 Fax 298-8565 \Eric J. Bressler, Esq. Wickham Wickham&Bressler, P.C. Main Road Box 1424 Mattituck, NY 11952 Re: Appl. No. 4962—Roger Walz Variance Request • Dear Mr. Bressler: As a follow-up to our telephone conversation today, this will confirm that the Board of Appeals adopted the following Resolution at its meeting held Thursday, February 21, 2002: RESOLVED, that the hearing be reopened and scheduled for March 28, 2002, with all notices as required under Chapter 58 to be provided by the applicant; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the applicant furnish a letter in detail explaining the grounds for a reopening of the hearing. This Resolution was duly adopted (5-0). Very t .. Gerard P. Goehringer r Chairman • NSMISSION VERIFICATION REPORT TIME : 02/28/2002 09:57 DATE,TIME 02/28 09:56 FAX NO./NAME 2988565 DURATION 00:00:30 PAGE(S) 01 RESULT OK MODE STANDARD ECM LAW OFFICES WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER, P.C. 10315 MAIN ROAD, P.O. BOX 1424 MATTITUCK, LONG ISLAND WILLIAM WICKHAM NEW YORK 11952 MELVILLE OFFICE ERIC J. BRESSLER 275 BROAD HOLLOW ROAD ABIGAIL A.WICKHAM - SUITE III LYNNE M.GORDON 631-298-8353 MELVILLE, NEW YORK 11747 JANET GEASA TELEFAX NO. 631-298-8565 631-249-9480 TELEFAX NO.631-249-9484 February 19, 2002 VIA FACSIMILE Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold,New York 11971 Re: Walz application for reversal/variance Dear Mr. Goehringer: Thank you for your letter of February 11,2002 regarding this matter. After careful consideration we believe that it would not be appropriate or beneficial for the newly reconstituted board to determine this matter without the new members having the opportunity for the give and take which inevitably accompanies the hearing process. The recently adopted interpretation invites input and analysis of the application as measured against this standard. We understand that the matter can be accomodated on the March 28, 2002 calendar and ask that you do so in the interests of resolving this matter. Please do not construe this letter as a waiver of any right or remedy of the applicant. Thank you for your consideration. Very truly yours, Eric . Bressler EJB/al cc: Mr. &Mrs. Walz EJB/zbaltr FEB-19-2802 10:37A FROM: TO:7659054 P:2%2 /71' -I LAW OFFICES u WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER, r.c. 10315 MAIN ROAb P 0. BOX 1424 wll IaFI w1cKlIAM MATTITUCK. LONG ICI AND CRIT,1 ijREssL:R NLAN YORK I I9�,i2 MELVILLE OF�IGE ADIGAII A WICKMAAq s'J`v BROAD HOLLOW ROAD aUITE III LYNNE M GORDON 631 29 -13.353 MELVILLE, NEW YORK 11747 JANCT QCASA TrLEFMX NO, 53I-2S18-13565 631 ,'4.y-:3480 TELCFAX NO 41::1 E47-2$484 February 19, 2002 VIA FACSIMILE Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Southold Town Zoning hoard of Appeals 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold,New York 11971 Re; Walt application for reversal/variance Dear Mr, Goehringer: Thank you for your letter of February 11, 2002 regarding this matter. After careful consideration we believe that it would not he appropriate or beneficial for the newly reconstituted board to determine this matter without the new members having the opportunity for the give and take which inevitably accompanies the hearing process. The recently adopted interpretation invites input and analysis of the application as measured against this standard, We understand that the matter can be accomodated on the March 2g, 2002 calendar and ask that you do so in the interests of resolving this matter, Please do not construe this letter as a waiver of any right or remedy of the applicant. Thank you for your consideration. Very truly yours, Eric, . Bressler LJtl/nl cc; Mr it Mrs Walz h;117/�hcrllr FEB;1,9-2002 10:37A FROM: T-c't`',659064 P: 1/2 WY-m1AM, WICKHAM & l3RESSLER, Y.C. P.O. Box 1424, 10315 Main Road,Mattituck, New York 11952 Phone(631) 298-8353—Fax(631)298-8565 To:-14 , eA1fl1í, Fax No.: 705 Ciocpq From: Includes: .tak.. -_ Date: 2. j q/ ("1i #of Pages including cover sheet: 1 This transmission contains information confidential and/or legally privileged. It is intended for use only by the person to whom it is directed. If you have received this iciccopy in error,please _ notify us by telephone immediately so that we can arrange for the return of the documents to us at no cost to you. If you do not receive all of the pages indicated,please call as soon as possible at the number referenced above, J . iNSMISSION VERIFICATION REPORT S • TIME : 02/11/2002 16:36 DATE,TIME 02/11 16:36 FAX NO./NAME 2988565 DURATION 00:00:40 PACE(S) 01 RESULT OK MODE STANDARD ECM AFPEMS BOARD MEMBERS �i��''"���� SVFF®`� = Southold Town Hall 1sI • Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman ���h�®� ®may 53095 Main Road • P.O. Box 1179 Lydia A.Tortorat Southold,New York 11971-0959 ® ZBA Fax(631)765-9064 George Horning ® ii�� Telephone(631) 765-1809 Ruth S. Oliva •- Vincent Orlando BOARD OF APPEALS i'll° � 0 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD February 11, 2002 Fax 298-8565 Eric J. Bressler, Esq. Wickham,Wickham & Bressler, P.C. Main Road P.O. Box 1424 Mattituck, NY 11952 Re: Appl. #4962—Walz Setback Variance Request Dear Mr. Bressler: This letter is a request regarding the above pending application,which, as you know, has been pending reviews under the procedures required by New York Town Law. Recently, two Zoning Board positions were filled by new individuals, Members Ruth Oliva and Vincent Orlando (filling the positions held by Lora S. Collins and James Dinizio, Jr.). Before a vote of the Board may take place and a determination rendered on this application, the two new members will be conducting full reviews of the record and familiarizing themselves with the property and areas under consideration. Would you please confirm whether or not the applicant will approve of a determination procedure, with a vote of the Zoning Board to include the two new Zoning Board Members, after familiarization of the entire record, without opening the hearing, re- noticing a new hearing, etc. In either event, would you please sign below, noting the applicant's answer, and returning the original to us? Your approval is an authorization for the above procedure, which would authorize a waiver of re-opening, re-noticing and holding a new (additional) hearing, but which will not affect the actual decision resulting from the votes in the near future. Your disapproval also will not affect the actual decision resulting from voting in the near future. If you have any questions, please feel free to call our office. Thank you. Sincere y yours, r y Gerard P. Goehringer Chairman ( ) Yes, I approve of the procedure to waive a new hearing procedure as noted above, or ( ) No, I disapprove of the procedure and request a new hearing procedure. Signed: kei '0 (0 Joseph T. Trencheny 120 South Lane East_M, ri n, NY 11939 j q [Moir: 1 '7.0179 \:,\ I JUL 9 2006 July 6, 2001 ` 1\ Mr. Gerard Goehringer, Chairman Southold Town Board of Appeals 53095 Main Road Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971-0959 Dear Mr. Goehringer: I write with interest regarding the proposed home renovation by Roger and Leslie Walz of Old Orchard La. East Marion,NY. After speaking with them this past weekend,they informed me that their plans are on hold due to necessary approval by the Town of Southold. Upon reviewing the plan with them,I see that the renovation calls for the addition of a second story with added bedrooms,bathroom and recreational area with no expansion past the existing footprint of the house. Please keep in mind that the vast majority of the homes in this area are two-story situated on non-conforming lots used for both seasonal and year round occupancy. My concern in this postponement lies in that many homes in this area,including mine, are in need of renovation and updating. To have this plan stalled or possibly disallowed and have precedent set due to an individuals' desire not to allow change is certainly not in the interest of this community. I have been acquainted with the Walz family for the better part of twenty years. I am confident that the plan as well as the finishing work proposed will not only enhance their property, but those surrounding it as well. Truly,they are neighbors that have continued to improve their home over the years and this plan for renovation should be granted for their enjoyment. Additionally, please notify me of any additional public hearings as I will be interested in attending and m, -hanks for your attention to this matter. 4-- ` : ren••eny 1 .1ti 09/1012001 09:56 6314770973 FAIRWEATHER BROWN PAGE 01 4 AMWEAlliE"WIWN -ft DESIGN ASSOCIATES,INC. C r _s F-O.13ox 571 SEP 10 2001 l i i 11 413 Maio Street 1 1! Greeopert,N.Y. 11944 _ I f 631-477-9752 (Poi)631-477-0973 j September 10,2001 Chairman Goehringer Zoning Board of Appeals Southold Town Re: Walz Appl, No, 4962 SCTM# 1000-037-6-5 in response to your"reminder" of August 31st: The "ridge poles" have been attached to the above named residence to indicate the proposed heights of the renovation. This is in response to your request at the hearing of June 7th. (To have been reheard August 16th but was post-poned by your letter of June 20th until this hearing of September 20th). • Respectfully submitted, Amy M n permit Agent 6 , 1 10) ii b C7 ,..-r- g1 VAgYp edy.- ---- :,------ - 25 01 \( a--/--/ ) e ,, )(. //937 ( \ S ? 6____:__j ,Zrig-,,ae ?.°.e/ %,..)210- C, 4,A46e ,..0, , 4.f.e.z.,-/4ia_z.,.‘ //79 \v-:zit- -e--/---L-z-, )-(,7, //57 /- zgie-i --- 2 1,i.---(-4-,, z,/: .. _.....4,,z_e_. ....../....e_v_6".Le_eL tie,- "e**4.."151A.e.40Z _ --/--6,.'--- , ( ',;,o...4•1.--,e_ .... -,/ a, , ,.1--2), -- ,,,-.,/ za4-,--1:4-e.-e" (7ea--xz ,;214--,a ea-e-,--04-x-ee....- ..e-.4- --7A-e---e--4-1-1 - /.....4...,<_ ef--a-e- oee- 1 (_,(.,,,.._ _,„,......6_,,,„e ,zez-e) ,...„.... . ,.__ , 4,-- e-40,-- ,..-.'- ..„.• ......4.-„,...,,,_ ' _e-d .-- , *4 mi';4,-,iNI."'.4..; 4:,•,:,'; -...."' ., , Ilk ,. .' :' .- , ' .''''':•11; ";-+ *. - ," .- I. ;... • rilq . --.)., i , .. - v., i- -. (/ - iiilto- • (, ' /- '`*-- -I 1 . .--- ":01:f.:e L , • . .,. .- _ .,.0 ... Hi ' ' . _ i , _3,, . Alb 111111) 5 - 4 (2-kut/o C rt:July 31, 2001 Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Board of Appeals ! 2°1_,,,,,°19.....2.L1,11 WO to Town of Southold _1Southold Town Hall c\\4 pO 53095 Main Road [11.0_1J/U2.13 '�°r� P.O. Box 1179 Southold,New York 11971 Re: Walz Residence 2520 Old Orchard Lane Gardiner Bay Estates East Marion Dear Chairman Goehringer, I am writing to you in reference to the application before the Board of Appeals concerning the renovation/expansion of the residence immediately adjacent to me on the south. I have reviewed the plans prepared by Fairweather-Brown Design Associates,Inc., on behalf of Roger and Leslie Walz;I also attended the Board of Appeals meeting in Southold Town Hall on Thursday,June 7, 2001. The plans do not enlarge the footprint of the existing house and appear sensitive to neighbors on all sides. The second floor addition has been added in such a way as to minimize its impact on the neighbors and any limitation on our views. I find it attractive and a plus for the neighborhood. As one of the neighbors most affected, I want you to be aware that I am supportive of their application. If you have questions regarding my thoughts,please feel free to contact me directly. Sincerely, eeLi,aixz49 N, 7-1,5 ,e-e--z.- Elizateth H. Frazier 2415 Old Orchard Lane East Marion,NY Cc Gardiner Bay Estates Architectural Committee Roger and Leslie Walz -TRANSMITTAL MEM iw TO: ZBA Chairman and Members FROM: ZBAOffice Staff DATE: �'o210( SUBJECT: ile Update With reference to the above application, please find attached the following new information added to the official ZBA office file: • Comments: Number of Pages)ttached: c_ TrMemo.doc --,TRANSMITTAL TO: ZBA Chairman•and Members FROM: ZBA Office Staff DATE: ;00l / SUBJECT:- rile Update With reference to the above application, please find attached the following new information added to the official ZBA office file: • • Comments: Number of Pages Attached: L TrMemo.doc ` � - - ) di ���� `~� --( }�`- . OrlfirtJ6-1-30) , . / / « q � ,`kIttlo � ~ 180 SOUTH LANE ^m�7r � P .O . BOX 5 *' U . EAST MARION , [� �� h� oug W 11939-0C, !:- JULY 26,2001 JUL 27/UU .. �� ~ ii . GERARD P . GOEHRINGER , CHAIRMAN [/ SOUTHOLD TOWNBOARD OF APPEALS "•BOARD �� ° ' SOUTHOLD TOWN HALL ' - J -�l " P.O . BOX 1179 SOUTHOLD , NY 11971 � . RE : APPEAL OF ROGER AND LESLIE WALZ DEAR MR . GOEHRINGER , . . � I AM WRITING IN SUPPORT OF THE BUILDING APPLICATION APPEAL OF ROGER AND LESLIE WALZ FOR THEIR RESIDENCE AT 2505 OLD . ORCHARD LANE , EAST MARION. , ' . , MY HOUSE TO THE EAST IS LOCATED FIVE FEET FROM MY PROPERTY LINE , WITH MY GARAGE ONLY TWO FEET FROM THE LINE . THE HOUSE NEXT TO ME IS ONLY THREE FEET FROM MY PROPERTY . THE HOUSE JUST EAST OF THE WALZ HOUSE IS FIVE FEET FROM THEIR LINE , AS IS THE HOUSE TO THE WEST . IT IS THEREFORE NOT UNUSUAL IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA TO HAVE HOUSES CLOSE TOGETHER . . THE HOUSE TO THE WEST OF THE . WALZ HOUSE IS A TWO STORY ' STRUCTURE AS WELL AS ALMOST ALL THE HOUSES TO THE EAST . THE WALZ PLAN WOULD CONFORM WITH THE OTHER STRUCTURES IN THE AREA . MANY OTHER HOUSES IN THE AREA HAVE BEEN ALLOWED ADDITIONS ' AND ALTERATIONS AS LONG AS THEY STAID WITHIN THEIR FOOTPRINT . I BELIEVE THAT ROGER AND LESLIE WALZ SHOULD BE ALLOWED THE SAME PRIVILEGE . , SINCERELY � °' �� ' � . FRANK o . THORP , JR . , , , ^ . . , (4,;_j � . , , BUN Fh' PF 401 '1) • /0 - r-•eleaC" k/ • • APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS •i �1 Southold Tbwn Hall " ' ` 53095 Main Road Gerard P. GoahriRger, Chairman � ,„ 4� �• 4./. /� �� t �� L. V I P.O. fox 1179 James Dinizio, Jt , .Z• Lydia A.Tortola \.11' x"{s �� �' :" II$'ID Southold, New York 11971 Lora S Collins _ �� 1° ZHA Fax (631)765-9064 George Homing l `a�.•' �1 v }Telephone(63 1) 765-1609 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN Or SOUTTIOLD FINDINGS. DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF JUNE 8, 2000 • Appi No 4804 -q$TRID GAQDiS 1000-126.11-8 STREET& LOCALITY: 7020 Pe0Ork Bay Boulevard, Laurel DATE OF PUBLIC HEARiNr3• April 8, 2000, May 4, 2000 EINDfNGS Offer PROPER Y FACTS/DESCRIPTLQN; The applicant's property consists of a total lot area of 19,227 sq R , lot depth of approx. 340 feet, width of 82 feat on Peconlc Bay Boulevard and 68 56 feet on Peconrc Bay. Applicant demolished a 1-1/2 story house under B P 128308-Z, in order to rebuild on Its foundation with en expansion. According to the survey of John Fetrantello dated 0/28/93 and updated 8/31199, the foundation of the former house was sM at a 45 degree angle to the east and west lot lines Because of its orientation, the closest points to the lot lines were at comers, 14 9 feet on the west end 4 feet on the east The foundation setback from the bulkhead as 70 2 feet_ An open patio extended about 18 feet from the house toward the Bay, to a setback of 52.5 feet from the bulkhead At the time the property was first viewed by Board members, the former house had been demolished and the existing foundation had been expanded by new foundation work. @ASISQF AF_TIJCATlON. This is a request for a Variance under Article XXIV, Section 100-242A based on the Building inspector's February 14, 2000 Notice of Disapproval wtilch states that: (1) the proposed covered deck 10 Meet deep, to replace the open patio on the Bay side, would have a setback of 81 feet from the bulkhead, and its construction would violate the 76-foot setback requirement of Code Section 100- 239.48. (2) the corner of an addition at the northwest corner of the house would be 10 feet from the westerly property line, less than the existing 1449" nonconforming setback of 14 9 feet and thus in violation of Code Section 100-242A. AREA VARIANCE RELIEF REQUESTED' Applicant requests a Variance authorizing covered porches on the Bay side and northwest corner of the house. The revised site plan submitted Apnl 27, 2000, date stamped by the Board on May 1, shows the waterside porch to be 31.2 feet from the outer edge of the bulkhead, and the northwest corner porch to be 13.1 feet from the property line at the closest point. The latter porch has been reduced from the original proposal, vottich entailed a 10-foot setback .s . e : lb. : . e L e, . 1 : s :, e,. • Based on the testimony and record before the Board, and personal inspection. the Board makes the following findings. (1) The house is less flan 75 feet from the bulkhead Therefore, any construction above grade on the Bay side requires a vanence The former patio was at grade level at ■ setback of'52 5 feet from the bulkhead Th® proposed porch would be on plies up to 1a Mees above grad., and covered (2) The proposed covered porch facing the Bay, although less deep then the former open patio. would be a much more massive structure and would add significantly to the bulk of the house The 60 'd (i)-27) dLV : ai 00-Et - Lnr -. -- 0J10l1 /187 .IFFF BUT' FR PE glibPA(?[ 63 Pacje 2- )une 8, 2000 28A App! No 4804 -Astrid Caddis Partici 1000-126-11-6 at Laurel Code requirement for a setback from a bulkhead serves not only to protect the shoreline physically but also to prevent the intrusion of building mass into open shore areas. The size and bulk of the proposed covered porch facing the Bay would produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood and detriment to nearby properties (3) The pre-existing northwest comer setback of 14.9 feet is nonconforming and thus sets the limit for westerly setbacks under Code section 100-242A, anything less requires a variance Applicant's original plan called for an addition to the house footprint with a corner only 10 feet from the westerly line. The revised site plan received on May 1, 2000, shows a covered porch at this corner with a setback of 13.1 feet This is nota substantial reduction from the pre-existing setback, and will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or detriment to nearby properties. (4) Applicant purchased an older house, demolished it, and is budding a much larger, more massive structure Applicant was able to plan the new structure starting from the pre-existing foundation, and the difficulties applicant has encountered In complying with the Zoning Code are essentially self created (5) There is no evidence that the action set forth below will have an adverse effect or impact on physical or environmental conditions (8) The action set forth below is the minimum necessary and adequate to enable applicant to enjoy the benefits of a new house of the sort he has planned while preserving and protecting the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community. RE$OLUTION/AcTIgN: On motion by Dinizio, seconded by Chairman Goehringer, It was RESOLVED, to DENY the requested variance for a covered porch set back 61 2 feet from the bulkhead, and further RESOLVED, to GRANT the requested variance for a covered porch at the northwesterly corner with a setback of 13 1 feet as set forth in the revised site plan received by the Board on May 1, 2000 VOTE OF THE BOARD. AYES: Goehringer, Dinizio, Co • . . YS. Tortora and Horning (suggesting denial as alternative). GERARD P GOEHRI ER, CH RMAN For filing about 6/15/00 111?-'sp,) Ot ' d d817 : at 00-£I - 1 - - TRANSMITT L MEMjj al TO: ZBA Chairman and Members FROM: ZBA Office Staff DATE: 7tsl4I SUBJECT:• File Update With reference to the above application, please find attached the following new information added to the official ZBA office file: id-; 4419&02 _ yov. f r41-6,-.5/1124, Comments: Number of Pages Attached: L I TrMemo.doc to/ 4 1111 , e GARDINER'S BAY ESTATES HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION INC. P.O. BOX 4, EAST MARION, NY 11 3;•M ©1 -vi7 July 2 2001 I ;\ JUL 7 eao, Boa-rdYof-%Appeal s Town of Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Re:--- Apel ica-tion--No: -4962-Roge-r- J. -and Leslie Walz Honorable Board: Gardiner ' s Bay Estates Homeowners Association Inc. does not have a Building Code and refers homeowners to conform to the Town of Southold Zoning Code and the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building COde . However the GBEHOA Inc . has a real estate committee which requires a person to submit plans for any new construction, alterations , additions as a courtesy for suggestions . There is no convenant in deeds or excerpts of the deed that a two story residence cannot be built in the Estates , so long as it conforms to the Zoning Code of the Town of Southold. The GBEHOA Club which proceeded the GBEHOAInc. allowed two story residences to be constructed in the ' 30s to ' 60s . Statements have been made with reference to the above application that a second story to the existing residence will interfer with air, light, view. The applicants residence is located on ahiah_er ' elevation than the adjoining residence and will not interfer with air, light and view as it will not be added horizontally. Back in the ' 20s a sub-division of various odd shape lots was approved and no thought was given to side yard set backs, front and rear yard set backs and percent of occupancy of property. Small summer cottages were builton odd lot shapes and sizes and now home owners are retiring to their ideal location and would like to have larger homes for family and friends . The Real Estate Committee neither approves or objects to the application for expansion. SIncer�e1y, 6 6 ) Harold challer "/' Warren A. Sambach Sr. APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Iii,��'���®� ®� ��- Southold Town Hall rard P. Goehringer, Chairman ��0 A4. ` r . ®� 53095 Main Road James Dinizio,Jr. 0 1 t�; , P.O. Box 1179 Lydia A.Tortora � ,fit,,,„ ? Southold,New York 11971-0959 )i) ,,ILora S. Collins , 4.� , ��� ZBA Fax(631)765-9064 George Horning Telephone(631) 765-1809 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD August 31, 2001 By Fax Transmission 477-0973 Fairweather Brown Design Associates, Inc. Attn: Rob Brown/Amy Martin P.O. Box 521 Greenport, NY 11944 Re: Appl. No. 4962 — Roger Walz Application Dear Mr. Brown/Mrs. Martin: This letter replaces yesterday's August 30, 2001 sent in error to your office. Board Member(s) are requesting the status regarding possible placement of ridge markers (by your office other individuals). It is possible that if this is not available for viewing starting about September 10, 2001, the hearing may be re- calendared for the following hearing calendar (tentatively October 16th) Thank you. Sincerely yours, #410„. „., ,: , P, :., , ., Gerard P. Goehringer Chairman (771,-- -1 , -. Ilk 10 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS �i,'',,,� /�,•11(k VFF®`j'`, 1.°01.4•Y , Southold Town Hall Gerard P Goehringer, Chairman ��• ®G�; 53095 Main Road James Dinizio,Jr. % o • . % P.O. Box 1179 %Lydia A.Tortora ,? Southold,New York 11971-0959 Lora S. Collins :0 •' IO ZBA Fax(631)765-9064 p\\3eore Horning *f4 Nig `0®.0i' Telephone(631)765-1809 ))\''9 � BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD K ' / ,,,1v ) August 30 2001 st or,\ o, P 1 By Fax Transmission 477-0973 l' 6/ "" Fairweather Brown Design Associates, Inc. kli h" Attn: Amy Martin P.O. Box 521 Greenport' NY 11944 Re: I. No. 4962 — RogerWalz A plication PP 9 Dear Mrs. Marti ,: The Board Me beg T-9_ re u ti g the status in placement of proposed ridge markers by a 1.an w ,0 er or not they have been placed on a map r er referenc� Boa d Members have indicated that if this is not as mak available on or aboutt"�September 0, 2001, the hearing will be re-calendareTor a later date (October 16 ©ossibly) Thank you. ` Sincerely yours, #4-sufze-t.ZP - - - /, Gerard P. Goehringer Chairman SMISSION VERIFICATION REPORT TIME : 08/31/2001 11:22 DATE,TIME 08/31 11:21 FAX NO./NAME 4770973 DURATION 00:00:30 PAGE(S) 01 RESULT OK MODE STANDARD ECM ANSMISSION VERIFICATION REPORT! TIME : 08/30/2001 11: 02 DATE,TIME 08/30 11:02 FAX NO,/NAME 4770973 DURATION 00:00:29 PAGE(S) 01 RESULT OK MODE STANDARD ECM TRANSMITTAL MEW) 1 r` TO: ZBA Chairman and Members FROM: ZBA Office Staff DATE: 01.2//o SUBJECT: File Update With reference to the above application, please find attached the following new information added to the official ZBA office file: •i4.(6.,6 • Comments: • Number of Pages Attached: TrMemo.doc • APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS1'SUFFO(,(co - 1110 ,0 Gy ; Southold Town Hall Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman �� c ; 53095 Main Road James Dinizio,Jr. t y Z P.O. Box 1179 Lydia A.Tortora V36' 0 Southold,New York 11971 Lora S. Collins ;= 1�ljo 40*/ ZBA Fax(516)765-9064 George Horning * �; �'� Telephone(516)765-1809 ..... .iii BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD June 20, 2001 • • Fairweather-Brown Design Associates, Inc. P. 0. Box 521 Greenport, NY 11944 Attn: Mrs. Amy Martin RE: Appl. No. 4962—Roger and Leslie Walz Dear Mrs. Martin: Enclosed please find copy of a letter from Ralph Martin, neighbor to the Walz property. Mr. Martin has requested a postponement to this hearing of September 20, 2001. Please be advised the hearing will be continued to the September 20th meeting date. Thank you. Very truly Gerard P. Goehringer Chairman GPG:pq Enc. } -- z45 P 4110 ilE © RUED tikti-EIV 200:j (dt' J POB 203 I East Marion,NY 11939-0203 June 18, 2001 Mr. Gerard Goehringer, Chairman Southold Town Board of Appeals Town Hall 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Re: Roger J. and Leslie Walz Southold,NY 11971-0959 Appl. No. 4962 Dear Mr. Goehringer: May I respectfully request the August 16, 2001 re-hearing on the above application be postponed to September 20, 2001? Since I am a most interested and affected party,I wish to be in attendace,however the original date is in direct conflict with my being out of town. Thank you in advance for whatever consideration you can give to this request. '671-1P," - RMJR:ntm Ralph Martin,J1C-.7.-- _ (2D / ADDITIONAL INFO F( 3OARD MEMBERS 4/S97 /�'fO/ ‘\Q) � Re: Appl. of-- L�`„c� , Hearing Date: 6/VD/ From: UU 12. E '3 ,p aciv. 0,6r, 0�� (3j -/ FAIRWEATHER-BROWN DESIGN ASSOCIATES,INC. P.O.Box 521 413 Main Street Greenport,N.Y. 11944 631-477-9752 (fax)631-477-0973 May 14, 2001 Zoning Board of Appeals Southold Town Re: Walz SCTM# 1000-037-6-5 Attached please find our application for an appeal to the disapproval received from the Building Department. The Walz's would like to expand it "up" not "out". The existing footprint is 3' from their east property line and 6'6" from their westerly line and these current foot print set backs does not meet the zoning code. A second story is their only option for increasing the living space. Respectful) submitted, • y M. Permit Arent A off 644, a ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE / ®#� Town Hall, 53095 Main Road TOWN CLERK ; P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRIAGE OFFICER "- � `� �1 Fax (631) 765-6145 RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER �_ Tj� rr�� •s11°. °1� Telephone (631) 765-1800 FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER ��� OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD TO: Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals FROM: Elizabeth A. Neville, Southold Town Clerk DATED: May 16, 2001 RE: Zoning Appeal No. 4962 00_ Transmitted herewith is Zoning Appeal No. 4962 by' Amy Martin of Fairweather-Brown for Walz for a variance. Also included is: Notice of Disapproval dated May 2, 2001; copy of Application for Building Permit; letter from Amy Martin to ZBA dated May 14, 2001; ZBA Questionnaire; survey; and plans. \ - r \ ,. oe° t. PROPOSED 2ND FLOOR (')?) \ D� ADDITION TO EXISTING 0, �`� �.G� I STORY FRAME HOUSE. N o \ GP O \ \ .\ 7,44 -.57/L A CI \ 1 -V,<\ \ 0 \ o \ \ <` \ , \ 3✓ \ 2 \ , \ \ \ . \ ' \ , S \ "7 -57 \ , / -- c` / \ BASED ON 4. // \ MAP SURVEYED FOR \ ROGER J. - LESLIE WALZ AT EAST MARION \ / TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, N.Y. SUFFOLK COUNTY TAX MAP INFO: , / 1000-037G-5 LOT NO.'S REFER TO MAP OF GARDINERS \ BAY ESTATES SECT. 2, FILED IN THE SUFF.CO.CLERKS OPFFICE AS MAP 275. \ \ \ S O, � c SITE PLAN SCALE: I"=20'0" r 1 Y ft FORM NO. 3 P-4 11 W7 Olrei TOWN OF SOUTHOLD II BUILDING DEPARTMENT MAY I O 2001 ,, ccs P;a,-4,10 5 SOUTHOLD,N.Y. \,I iL)1 „'-r 64 5 ,uoLu� `�°��• ��a � 1NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL DATE; May 2, 2001 TO Amy Martin A/C Walz PO Box 521 Greenport NY 11944 Please take notice that your application dated March 16, 2001 For permit for 2nd story addition to one family dwelling at Location of property 2505 Old Orchard Road East Marion County Tax Map No. 1000 - Section 37 Block 6 Lot 5 Subdivision Filed Map # Lot# Is returned herewith and disapproved on the following grounds proposed addition not permitted pursuant to Article XXIV Section 100-242A which states; Nothing in this Article shall be deemed to prevent the remodeling,reconstruction or enlargement of a nonconforming building containing a conforming use,provided that such action does not create any new nonconformance or increase the degree of nonconformance with regard to the regulations pertaining to such buildings. Existing structure has non-conforming setback of 3 feet from easterly side lot line and . feet on westerly side line, the addition of the second story represents an increase in the degree of non- conformity Authori:-• Signature i NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS THURSDAY, JUNE 7, 2001 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Section 267 of the Town Law and Chapter 100 (Zoning), Code of the Town of Southold, the following application will be heard at a public hearing by the SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS at the Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York 11971, on THURSDAY, JUNE 7, 2001, at the time noted below (or as soon thereafter as possible): 7:05 p.m. Appl. No. 4962 — ROGER J. and LESLIE WALZ. This is a request for a Variance under Article XXIV, Section 100-242A, based on the Building Inspector's May 2, 2001 Notice of Disapproval (as corrected) regarding applicant's proposed second-story addition to existing dwelling. The Notice of Disapproval states that the existing structure has a nonconforming setback of three feet from the easterly side lot line and 6.5 feet from the west side line, and as a result, the addition of the second-story represents an increase in the degree of nonconformity. Location of Property: 2505 Old Orchard Road, East Marion, NY; Parcel 1000-37-6-5. The Board of Appeals will hear all persons, or their representative, desiring to be heard at the hearing, or desiring to submit written statements before the conclusion of the above hearing. This hearing will not start earlier than designated. Files are available for review during regular Town Hall business hours (8-4 p.m.). If you have questions, please do not hesitate to call (631) 765-1809. Dated: May 25, 2001. GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS Town Hall 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 `,jam . QUESTIONNAIRE FOR FILING WITH YOUR Z.B.A. APPLICATION A. Please disclose the names of the owner(s) and any other individuals . (and entities) having a financial interest in the subject premises and a description of their interests: (S parate sheet may be attached. ) . B. Is the subject premises listed on the real estate market for -. salr being shown to prospective buyers? ( ) Yes ' • ( ) No. (If Yes, please attach copy of "conditions" of sale. ) C. Are there proposals to change or alter land contours? ( } Yes ( No - D. 1. Are there any areas which contain wetland grasses? /141 2. Are the wetland areas shown on the map submitted with this application? /Y2 3 . Is the property bulkheaded between the wetlands area and the upland building area? / 4. If your property contains wetlands or pond areas, have you contacted the Office of the Town Trustees for its determination of jurisdiction? /11/ 96L-4-'4 E. Is there a depression or sloping elevation near the area of proposed co truction at or below five feet above mean sea level? 1l0 (If not applicable, state "N.A. ") F. Are there any patios, concrete barriers, bulkheads or fences which exist and are not shown on the survey map that you are submitting? JY® If none exist, please state "none." G. Do you have any constru ;fin taking place at this time concerning your premises? /V,, If yes, please submit a copy of your building permit and map as approved by the Building Department. If none, please state. H. Do you or any co-owner also own other land close to this parcel? /Y) If yes, please explain where or submit copies of deeds. I. Please list prese• use or o era 'ons conducted at this parcel �- -i and proposed use r r . / & _, 257/0/ Au . . zzed ,, -.. -ture and Date 3/87, I0/90Ik /oz)4410 Illr APPLICANT TRANSACTIONAL DISCLOSURE At • The Town of Southold ' s Code of Ethics' prohibits conflicts of interest on the part of town officers and employees. The purpose of this form is to provide information which can alert the town of possible conflicts of interest and allow it to take whatever action is necessary to avoid same. YOUR NAME: 1 ® " ���/ e-- (Last 'nan(e, fir t name,„ m dle initial, unless you •are applying in the name of someone else or other entity, such as a company. If so, indicate the other person 's or company ' s name. ) NATURE OF APPLICATION: (Check all that apply. ) Tax grievance Variance Change of zone , Approval of plat Exemption from .plat or official map Other (If "Other, " name the activity. ) • Do you personally (or through your company, spouse, sibling, parent, or child) have a relationship with any officer or employee of the Town of Southold? "Relationship" includes by blood, marriage, or business interest. "Business interest" means a business,, including a partnership, in which the town officer or employee has even a partial ownership of (or employment by) a corporation in which the town officer or employee owns more than 5% of the shares.. YES . NO - If you answered "YES, ". complete the balance of this form and date and sign where indicated. Name of person employed by the Town of Southold Title or position of that person Describe the relationship between yourself (the applicant) and the town officer or employee. Either check the appropriate line A) through D) and/or describe in the space provided. The town officer or employee or his or her spouse, sibling, parent, or child is (check all that apply) : A) the owner of greater than 5% of the shares of the corporate stock- of the applicant (when the applicant is a corporation); $) the legal or beneficial owner of any interest in a noncorporate entity (when the applicant is not a corporation) ; . C) an officer, director, partner, or employee of the applicant; or D) the actual applicant . DESCRIPTION OF RELATIONSHIP • K ' T2) / Submitted th -. / 0 day of ./I. ...(900 // • Signature ; L 1 i 411" Print name 0 6 e - -' Town Of Southold P.O Box 1179 f -.- Southold, NY 11971 * * * RECEIPT * * * Date: 05/15/01 Receipt#: 7454 Transaction(s): Subtotal 1 Application Fees $400.00 Check#: 7454 Total Paid: $400.00 Name: Walz, Roger& Leslie 2505 Old Orchard Rd East Marion, NY 11939 Clerk ID: LINDAC Internal ID:32112 i , *. SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS TRANSCRIPT OF HEARINGS HELD DECEMBER 13, 2001 (Prepared by Paula Quintieri) Present were: Chairman Goehringer Member Dinizio—arrived at 6:43 p.m. ii")°11( Member Tortora Member Horning Board Secretary Kowalski Secretary Quintieri1-71-rilve/aP DRAFT COPY dated 1/23/02 (to be inserted) 8:38 p.m. —Appl. No. 4998 —ELIZABETH SENT. L (continued at applicant's request). This is a request for a Variance under Article X ' V, Section 100-242A, and Section 100- 244, based on the Building In, ector's Jul- 27, 2001 Notice of Disapproval. The applicant is proposing additions t. existdwelling with side yard setbacks at less than 10 feet on one side and less th. 15/feet on the other. Location of Property: 220 Lakeview Terrace, East Marion; Par c 1000-31-9-16. G. Strang, Architect CHAIRMAN: We're ready for/ou sir. Are you going to give us your presentation tonight? GARRETT STRANG: Yes, think I'd like to :. that for several reasons. One, obviously the last time we were together on this applicatio ' back in October it was assumed at that time the Board would ,ave time to deliberate and make a decision on a similar application which woul impact this one which due .• the complexity in Town it has not been able to happen. R ther than wait for that to go through and if a decision is such that it requires us to col-M.1 e this action, we would need additional time. So I would rather make this presentation onight and if your decision on the other application is such that it makes this moot then it can just go to the wayside. CHAIRMAN: Could I just hold you up at that point one second, Mr. Strang? I just want to mention to the Martins in back of you that we have not made a decision, nor are we making a decision on either one of those two applications that are adjacent to your house tonight. We only started deliberating last time about two words, and now we're moving forward with them at that point. i iy ;Y'1 T , { :1,,=:_11,,,1:, _ 1',T : ,,I-4:f ;!yis E? z- u=-- is] c . t. u ember 13,2001 FJt 'i 9' - of ZBA Public Hearings ;,: :,:-.:' f Southoldi `- BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: Are you removing it from the agenda Jerry on - ::7 Walz? r CHAIRMAN: Yes, tonight we're removing it. ' BOARD SECRETARY KOWALSKI: No, right now are you? CHAIRMAN: I am removing it from the Agenda as a deliberation item tonight. Pardon me sir, go ahead. GARRETT STRANG: That's quite all right. As I was saying, after I make my presentation, I'm sure y u won't be deliberating or making a decision on this until sometime in the future, so when your other decision comes down it may impact , but at least I'll ave a copy of the information in front of you so that if you need to make a decision on this application you will have what you need. Specifically, the application is presented which is for an addition to an existing small cottage on a small parcel. The existing pr mise is a one-story single-family dwelling; it consists of a bedroom, a bathroom, a kitchen, a living room and a porch, which is approximately 560 square feet. It is about sixty years old. My client purchased it earlier this year with the intention of making it a vacation\home for themselves and their family. They live out of the area, so when they come theX come with their children, their grandchildren. Their needs, they understand that the lo is small, the house is small and they are limited to what they can do. Their needs speci ically include having a three bedroom, one and a half bath house to accommodate their n-eds for their family. We are proposing a five-foot addition on the waterside porch and that's pretty much the limitation on the waterside. But in addition, obviously, we're prop•sing to add a one and a half story addition to the roadside of the house, which would en ompass the additional bedrooms and baths. The existing structure that's there presently ill remain in its existing size and configuration, it will only receive cosmetic improv: ents, specifically the roof, the siding and windows, and things of that nature and whatever the Code requires to improve this structure. There will be a new sep is system installed on the roadside and there will also be connected to the Suffolk Count Water Authority duly installed water main. The setbacks to the proposed construction, hich is slightly greater than those, that are consisting presently, which we know are non- •nforming. The total size of this dwelling, completed with the proposed addition is to b- approximately 1350 square feet, total. Which is from my research pretty much in ke:sing with the neighbor's parcels in the immediate area. We have presently in hand an approval from Southold Town Trustees, which I will submit to the Board. In meeting with he Trustees and meeting with them at the site, and making a presentation and listening to their concerns at a public hearing, they were in favor of the proposed one and a half stvry addition to the rear of the house and maintaining the existing one story structure on the waterside of the house. They felt that that was the right way to go. They felt that that wo,.ld be preferable in putting a two- story structure there, or a second-story on the existing o .e story house. Which is also my and my client's feelings as well. They felt that the small .,•dition on the waterside of the house is really a non-issue and made no impact on the n-'ghbors or on the site. The c.) . . • 4 ,. o I I --t-4-1---- ..rit - ? ,p. t.....,;1,,, i . 0.. . - , • •,.. . • .,.• e, Nor!. „Ai ,,,,, ,..3 k . .•;r 4., :c- ... Oir!,.'‹, -.k i dor" iir---:,< ,,,,..;...“ , -..--•0 , , i..!, .,, .1 .. , . ..:: 0„,,,,!,,difk,,, v,, '.- • .; . i , , i . ? ,..,A- ' r,..... PA • Yoli -...,.. k t -4 A .11.,:41 .fi,i..... Iv r%item, '„,i,t.‘, ., ...-•::. .4! • ! 1 .. ..:. • st., , , , 1 I... .. ._,.„ ,,„,,,,... , . .,...,. ...„ . ._7\pA, ...„., .....,„..,4,, • -,,, ,,, • „,..„,. . .. ,,,. f4 ilf , .- le i'.91- ----- 'Tv i• ers-,-.:::.f.11-,=:11,5•.: , =7- ,:. - ' • "...' *. I air 1 -.„' t , _._:___-------- ..• .. , . .,- . ,# , —,'-..-4-.'• ,.i,..i.,;1.0f,..,..,l..-,..4...1- i' -..'.''- ,• A_-,i:"•• ....,,,.v,...... 4. . ',f i,,..Iv i.l;v•k.P.t•.i.r..-..s. ..., .‘,"'... . iiA. ,.:., 17. 1 % ._ .',.;4I,f,,..i:Z...:4;-:,4 41.-' ‘, .al-l•'i.4- ,-,'. i • • .--- — . — -_ . ti Ilk‘r, ,4 . , .-1, • • 1 1 ' • t 14 t . I .e y ,Itivek , ' IF , - ii. --.1 ! ,• •-•f _ " =-nb.. • do; 1 — iii r ' ... -... s /„...„.. If - - t A... Ilk, . .hes.„. /1,1 .1. - , , ,, " III • . \ - -- ''• • . . •T.-111A; , •-•.. .--- - ilk . ... ...714 ha N! .s... , *EA • _.:___ _ ii.... --wiermik‘al •••,........- 41: . . . .0, i V 1111111-3 ---- - .....=_-_ ...: i. Ty iti slij . _ 9\'' Y''.: yve _-...----.. ...... • '' 'y •''' ... ---111114'... ... iiiilik d t - ''.... 11,115Lto-41-§OH'. • ri . - - '. -----\ - _'-;.": -:_--0:ip 11-, ''''1. .741t, it_ -4r.-.:.10. ..1 .i .-• ----"A ii. -4 ,.. i' 1,,,Illit. ) • • ii•44^-,dmir 6%. '----:.7........',7-l'..• _ : . .-, .44... .•' .,, , ' t, Isil .,—,. -A •••-•'.- - . . 4 jirg‘,f111111-- '''&.--Ir ,, ,.7 IllitilirIllt,, ? • , , 1 . . i . . _ • .... , . ...„„....:. Akill.k.„.; 1..,..... .. .. . _ * .. . ...._ • • 4 'IM."..' `' v. -- ., .. ,I., ' ,1 '' . ---4 1 I I . .,... .... ,. •J. At.s..:,.. ..., 1 "....-,..,_,,,,,,,,, ' ir-•-• - . ' . 4 Ist.--' a , ......._ •- 1... "........ . .. 1 •••• ....• , , . . .• ot •1 •-• . - ... ...-... .... , ' • '• . ...„ • ..... • ,.. ..a.'. 11,1fts.... ,.. • ,. ,--- 'r \_"--s....,,, , P^ ..--, --' , / 4-. , - s - , , . 'i ' "-- =.--•,' ' P,;- __, ,. .,,- Mint;,_ iA4. .•-/ . - . . . . , • I . . ...N.- • --A ' '1 -,- _ . -,...---- _ ... \ - -- - -•-i•N,. ) i !.. I tilt - , A 411--i---:- T\. .111111 . 11447. .ht* .. ...„, ..., It, __ ,/_—•..,,,..7-----".;*Y;-.,---,-.,-,i2'--`.,i;-it:t(1''-1:-.,'-';—---,-,..•.... „.... .,-.N./:.-_,i,p.--;i,f-4 t.•,,(..,, '..•,.--,..'...•,. , , I R .,,,,-,..1,i.!-.1,-*•5'I,." . V :' .-t 2-.-4-• .•• . •, ,1 A i . E ..,i,i,.I-j•v,,.*w-:i.,f _t..z•,-a,--.,..).1..,t4,1,..-in..,i.._.t.,.,t'i...,.i.t,.s-.,,.:xi.t,.k.,.'1-_.-,4.:--4P"41:iiI.O.-i.4..7.6i°.-4 .,.,2-ir,i7..,..f7•14.;4..--;1.$v`„.,,•.6 : -- . ,- .d',...''•.,,,,,-,,„-,,,-1,,,.:w',fAY1'.0v ,.,:•...-7-'--'-_-,--'..:.r.ri-t,---'I:-:t',_-_',r..'__:,__-___41_:":.",.'".•-4._-= ..- f-•,,,•..•••.:•,. •-•',..-•._'.4.,,--_.-..,-----'-- ,7 . 14-•-• ....*.effl”"",4. , , : i a 4111 Ei T., -.. •:, ,.., ,,,, - , . . ..:44,2=Wt.ilk.2'....-:- 1 , . '''r' ' .' ! q ." i' . -tam . . ... , ,_ --, ,,,,,s-„A.,•,:-•2--7. ,A=. ! • -.•• - 1.,. . :•: ‘ :... .,,. - - .. . ...- - : ,..„.,.--'4'•.• • . \ ....4* , 4 - _ _ , .....„. , ' 4 _...7iei .fc-*A.,-.. .,,,,10:4,ts th ,,.i.i;•:, . ,„ . _ - .-. ..,.• 1",i..15," '':M,I:0'. , k'. •A„:;* / i ,' •.... ,, , .. - ' '' . . .4.1sg4 '-1:41.,"`"?;.- - .„,,,..-re•10,-,:t.).Y.:,st,.:,;,.... . .. .... .: ..,, .--, -.'.?;!,4-,,,,L,:,..,....*; ...._. 1 ...._ _ ,..„..;,, ., A. f..i,....!';:4 )..4, . _ . . " • ' • - • • . n.!':.1-",,,t VIr-,;‘,i-- _ .--- •,, =.---- - - i ,,,..A. ,,i:,;4 .; , T. 1 f • 301 . ---. ..------------ ...-. i-- '" - '• ' . •'..,4,',!*'..;47.- . , • .. • -•,. . , ---• . ... ,. , ... . . ' . -, .....,-• • - - . . ,-..,........--,.. . , _ ..• .___ - ............ --- - -- -- - , •if' , -4.,. .............— ...,. . 4- -- Art ......., . ..... __ .. -v.-„ .- . - -„,„....„.......... .r... , .. — , -;--4: .igi, - - ---' ..,- _ iroo. '%..x, •,), e. 1 �� j ,P1► J � 116. ad 1. T : . 410'-‘14t %A gia, � iA ..401eft i \ + 44 ' /1' .` Ir Itik- is '` y6; r �R ii ".`,"a v . y ltA 4 fir. `M` mar "r+. > _ .i 4 . . r' *- N • it t ` a ; 1 ,T� . ,.. _. _7_.,-- ... , ._.1 _ _ ,_...._ .......4 1 -. _ • • .2-. rr--...,,_''•-ii_t_ff--- •- -- - IP} -I)( ' (g) ' '1..1 ‘,..,4. .. c. ' -' ' N 4. , f.V1 I ,7;`,',*\ -* 'if k ire tet` etc ` l �1. alt r. 4`� /. 1 - !r 11. t� ii -; - ♦ ,. I �} ___4{{{* � .' • 199 • f ', - Z / -.' �{"',�,t, { ,',�a% '� , .rx Sad` � � 0,, ..,...-„,...4.: ,£ " yr ,' ,-- 44-.i.- `'; t,. L • ' ' I sok ! .7 r1i �1_r •x�r, il!! 1. ill W ' . - :.r. .•-- '' - . . ICI 1 I II ' ii 7nv Ilk-. - 11 t, tit ...• _ ,..0,_ i...,__ _ 6......--...-- • ,.. -i4 .., as_ .-.7":-7,i- 0H- if-- li t } e 'v � II -i _ J ti ti • [ 1 , .......",tiii,.........‘" ,, • . APP-114 , - trilip ,,_... ss% . ., ‘ ' ", , „te ,.. / . .,,/k , ,1 ...,it., iar .,•••• S P . " 41i a ."' ii j '� • V\. .//,- _ 1T•'' ,r'i- . .w ms`s. . ,'.;'-. j /� / 4. = : cis� . •;?". . , NCI:- -_ tea+f "--- f p ' l " . �'� �1 l l r +6� ��r.r.2 ,' a+ .4# !r -.1. + �r—_ a '• '' a `'{ • i. .: . M �..',,,f-,-.-4.,' 'i f - ' - . •,,1„,,,1„....4.-i.,,,,, ,,..._.. _1 • !moi$ y, { i1 T7 i Ili 1.1 i ;' 44 mow_ a3M F; = - ' _ !NM 1 _ a totadibi '.':li: .,,,J-idiell.41110 --- — ---- _ i�416. i -I , - .,111,11: .fl . ..„. .,itt.....7.4‘i ,...... .... , H Jyyy''' l a\ , • ''"�! `' -- ate. . * a $ r ( , r ► •1 _ :HP L k iy / ` 410641, _ ,y4.',� ',gr -t.a �` 9 { .�' a - ./� - 4k r !.:: ter- :, e` ' 3 ' 1 .r 9 n � ;1 ° -� _ * 1. • �4A� ./ y .: ' E ! III '••f. -, . , _,....-N--,I t" N t iF i? i1 { j � a ) ' ea 4'7 z f R e J 1. ,�_1•.-- --- a ' • ' — '", 1 1 ,1 k r�11 V a' Imo' : I -s -a Y^e. .- i • ..7 -,• "F I'I Y.S ♦ '.'�'7 'Is.... 'a +{.. r:fa �.1/� *.;-:,�t r '�. S ��. '‘‘...4w,,,•::.,,-,•-.1.,, ,,,e,,,,,,- ' ti • . • ' yam; i 7 t • '' tp 111 t. r :, 4 , ;. 'Z" - } • -'~� (- �1Ve r '� tiyr�jt + ,q£ � �l• «'t' '1�V�'73. -1:';:•3/4-1144.1•1‘",,,I, v�� �'k dr`ya\}i fi v.. �•" ! `+� \ • 1�7'•� I. , _ --- ,:-. Si .-:: h .. 34, . •, _. .,,•,,h,., ; o.:, ,i,...,, , ,.,.„,;1..., ,..[.. 1. , • „,„ ,.i, . . • : __,....... . . ,„_._ , ,..... , , 41 dif jFil " ;, i : _ 1 ' 11,"r . X11 l (--,.._..P41 -„::' l r" .• .. 11.-\''''''''' '''' __ . _ . • . , •• _ _ • ilir — _ _ filikiliar-4r*- '.. Jr . di 4 -i i :,,i i A - i -- _--. ..e - ..,__„.._ --AlPii4;;ii10004111,.. - ''''''' 1 ..! • . , 1.0111 11 iii- i _ -pec At--: _: - -t.. lir . • P 14'.*: , r . ...„..r:;10:rr.,. ± 46: �� I '►t Vii. ..��� , ra" �.'.��4 1 �i. t"....".%)••• t / 311' ....kr• I ,.4., . ilipA . . :.. . ., L ., _ j / .. • . . , .. .2 , ..._ , ...., • , . . .. ..,, „„L, .... • • , i„.. •• • , „...., ............:......, , ,., . ii,.. ‘• , .,.... A . $• l!Fad«:...T.-fi • '• 'w+i r r - wit . Iliteito 4„,,. 1. 4 }' , • '; 41E1,7. `~yam•,o ,0It'd r� }* -o • ',.... ...*. , . If, ow, ..-,...4.4y v,/if.opf .. , : _4:004, ,.., • 7 , . .... , .,,,,,Tr: ... ,/. 44$44...i ''441/ or'4”. ' ,..• ,,„," ',` .. Z !, 4*,::„.4110. 4. , 14 . . ., Aig 4t +mll .� ; 1� ¶lk I f4iii ft _ ,....... .. a ._ ,,/,.. . . a s ... . , 4,... 1 olik 1 , : — _ ,. - ,..... 1„„,_ , , E1, :--,..---.....- , , .„, ,1„.... ,__,,.. .�i liA"‘irri ma .•- +n . . '�4-11,_ � t _ i ' i • • 7 ' viienwo.....„:vate .. s . . . , , , .*. V . „,a.. .. 10, „ ,;, ,,,,,.4,' d * .'•.-: 't "l' •, 44•444 4 • T .• .*".00•Ve_ .°' ' ,„„„ •• . ••s- . . • '. • y- ... - . , .. ,,,, , . \r-1) • r i 111 ,y � . ill �+ �I. , • -r` `* ►. L .1..,,...., `,.1- •. X11. a _ _ i ate ,: , Yl ` ,,„, - iiii-'' `.- ' -".�."... - �- ill .. �..1;ice` . - - - -_, '' k -r _ � � 0wr• • . -v d•-•-,. flit.. )4' f. '„.4it 4fri .•. - '/• - • /P-.- ."411.., • r i • t '� •a i', •. a 'R'',�. r • Y , • • r- - t1. Ittil _ . 4" Mit • ._• ' Iiii ,‘ , r . 4._ , .A', ' - . 11K , . ......(0 meimonsoi , :: ;AO:: il.,:,...„.. ,,.. -. - Y !?:1'....4 .`ale?1%7- t +J� ,� ' i lit ...0005:0101400..„... _-. , '—i• • - 4•4•4 ' • • •., �+ 1- f , ^. - " toy`l f .`4?� • • • • .440:: • . \ cTi. - . wig . w _ � 3 -. � . • :' ' ..T • S....." y _ , .... . - .... -,.,. )4,- ,,. 1 .. , . . . • . $ . . , .. , ip. i 4.... _. .. .. . ., ...,... . •:'• • Al a _ , r •. , ... •• • , ... ‘ : . `1• SIM- r ''. , M .-n/` 1 ^I4, 411 it: A. ' t .`, a i '. ► 4, „ ' w� • ` / . it , ..�W1,,t • r 4, ', 'M'. • •par• � ' + +- ,,,, ,,'‘' ...r .tk .,n.,,,.a n .141.4 . ' . , ,./ ' • vel I 1 •� as '„ tr, "4 , e Nr• I lit, {y ' J ,.� , �e 4, I , A.*. 44, 40: , ' , .01 i �' Gni s i '7 ' .d bl aM ,1 JY _ 1 % •1113th ' II - •', '. .�� rt ..amb., Q , s . 1 r• N i, nom► `•m911 , • • r • • ' III --x -. �� # it 0 ,. +4111,"V 11k6aigar t 11611111.10 ' It -.... r:.,.‘ ,..„) u 4 A * . 'sr - . • € . . . I r i'l I I I I 4.1 -4 ‘ lik$ . .... • e .t. ..... 4.. .4 . . . . , . _ . , „. . ., , 214 rillt lii,...• , f • lb' iq _• I., 1 •I .M 11111 ``. X191 j r \...,00 Y ' • 6 k o- ,..11111: ,,,07,, . .rrA -i;' ' �m 911 � ' . SII°'4t, - iLir,, \ All +rte • • 'r ` II 4.i r, , _'how r ` p1 '� , S I• 'VIII' , .10 illibeie •,;01,.,41111‘.. • 4't• . .------ ---- , ---- l i - / . + / h,,,. I,11 Yl '.Y'II II11 ,y.N - - ij .._ - ____ _________ ,400 , .... LEGAL NOTICE - STATE=OF NEW YORK) NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF )SS: APPEALS MARC CO OF y�UFFO�LK) THURSDAY,MARCH 28,2002 �" i, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pur- s,3.tJ ,e1,1� a4 -of Matfityck, in said f,• suant to Section 267 of the Town Law } . and Chapter 100(Zoning),Code of the county, being duly sworn, says that he/she is Principal Town of Southold,the following appli- clerk of THE SUFFOLK TIMES,a weekly newspaper,pub- by y the SOUTHOLD be heard duringHOLD TOWN public hear- ingslished at Mattituck, in the Town of Southold, County of BOARD OF APPEALS at the Town Suffolk and State of New York,and that the Notice of which Hall,53095 Main Road,Southold,New York 11971,on THURSDAY.MARCIi the annexed is a printed copy, has been regularly pub- . 28.2002,at the time noted below(or as fished • in said Newspaper once each week soon thereafter as possible). j , 7:05 p.m. Appl. No. 4962-- 1 ,for / weeks successively, ®commencing ROGER J.and LESLIE WALZ This + on the �D day is a request for a Variance under Article , XXIV Section_100 242A,based on the of sioe6.i7 20002 Building_Inspector's May- 2, 2001 -Notice 1,of Disapproval regarding the ' proposed second-story addition to exist- ing dwelling. The reason stated in the / 'rinClpal Clerk I Notice of Disapproval states that the 1-existing structure has a nonconforming I • setback of less than 10 fee[and 15 feet -'(,� on the side yards, and as a result, the Sworn to before me this ? addition of the second-story represents day of 114-41/1-CA 20 0 of , an increase in the degree of nonconfor- mity. Location of Property: 2505 Old .a ' /)- nAckuk : Orchard Road,East Marion,NY;Parcel ` , 1000-39-6-5.(The hearing was conclud- LAU RA'E. BON DARCH U K ed on November29,2001,and reopened Notary Public, State of New York at the request of the applicants' attor- , No 01806067958 ' neys.) Qualified in Suffolk County OS- 7:45 p.m. Appl. No. 5058 — I My Commission Expires Dec.24,20.- PETER 0.,PETER & VAL LEONIAK -'-"-__ •' ' ' (Continuation from February 28,2002). This is a request for Variances under 'Zoning Code Sections 100-30A.3 and 100-31 based on the Building Inspector's November 29, 2001 Amended-Notice-of-Disapproval-The I applicant proposes Parcels 1 and 2,each} with less than 40,000 sq. ft. in size. Parcel#1-will also contain less than 125 ft.of lot width(frontage),and includes the existing accessory garage on a lot, presently vacant and without a principal use. Location of Property: 2040 Pine Tree Road, Cutchogue; 1000-98-1-15, 16 and 17(approx. 1.5 acres as-exists). The Board of Appeals will hear all persons,or their representative,desiring to be heard at the hearing,or desiring to submit written statements before the conclusion of each of the above hear- ings.The hearing(s)will not start earlier than designated.Files are available for review o :gular-T_own?-fall business .ys between 8 and 3 p.m.If you have questions,please do not hesitate to call (631)765-1809. Dated:March 19,2002 GERARD P.GOEHRINGER,CHAIR- MAN SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF -APPEALS Town Hall 53095 Main Road,P.O.Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971-0959 2266-ITM28 l:S. Po tat Y •l= -a, C R. ED MAIL RE E0.1"\ (Domestic MaillOnly;Na'Insurance CI, a•e Provided ru 'n- 0 t,44: , II (I' s g lE MI / Postage $ **[? ' 'UNIT ID: 0952 a rs- Certified Fee � h MA Return Receipt Feb •Th44.4,::# UT (Endorsement Required) t !_.CJ 1p Restricted Delivery Fee, .. AO (Endorsement Required) �yj O Total Postage&Fees' $ �+ Al J4; e Y ; 2G® rtl -CSI. o� m Sent ToDa flax— n Street,Apt N,, �_ `! ti 2,9 - L allll-- Li or PO Box No P x ' I� r/ p city,State,ZIP+I0 -F •l/ tor) iq IIP -t PS Form 3800,January.2001 11 - ' 6. IS See Reverse forinstruc Pi a • 7a iV/[K '(Domestic.Mai)Only;No Insurance d a.a 'row.e•- ru rn iy) Postage $ , g r>;� '' 'o y. Certified Fee -'i;1_ ' `1L 7� *4 Postmar /"- Return Receipt Fee �r--,�r� Here u7 (Endorsement Required) _ �V '� �� Z O aAll p Restricted Delivery Fee V :P IN; O (Endorsement Required) t.. O Total Postage&Fees $ e3Atf "i,,,,... 4,,-.:- N ti R1 Sent To --" C„ctw o0- +Vi(9)(1ia Thorp Street,Apt No, O ,12.._ � 11_J—v-V4-/� or PO Box No Nv-o orCss c p - ' O City •tate,ZIP+4 `` .►. Cu Ile ' 11 " N 116-70 PS Form 3800,January 2001 O U See Reverse for Instruc:s CERTIFIED MAIL RE. • (Domestic Mail Only;No Insurance Ce a•e Provided ►11.1 o _ � FAM t R:TI1 (? 974AflAi'ce. �' ,2 ni Postage ,$ . -411 4 ,!'"r. ID: 0952 , Certified Fee , , 0:) ,.,0. Postmark Lnn Receipt I � ( orsemeturnteceRequired)Fee I ` 7�n Here IP O Restricted Delivery Fee r c Cl- �:e KVD81,3 p (Endorsement Required) J r CI Total Postage&Fees $ ,.4-'7 ` ' 03/19/02 mO Sent To j1Of Int('S_ "�1-_C_ .S CI ftb,Inc. a Street,A/hilt No, // 11.{'� ' or PO Box No P•6,�_60x ! O Ciry,State,ZIP+4 of Mari i „ l'.3'.., '5 �. r PS Form 3800,January 2001 F --R-v-r'-f.r In truc . 1. . 'ostal - 7 - -, ® T . . (Domestic Mail Only;No Insurance C6 .ge Provided— ...0 IT' 1-r) a. il ___,,f,,-,, �f_ IT Postage Ipt',T 11l O 5 r'•U 6,0 k, Certified Fe:ie r"" t rL. Postmark Return Receipt Feet Art?4.,- Here u7 (Endorsement Required)V4 , !�' CI O Restricted Delivery Fee •/„- ° K.K.3 O (Endorsement Required) O Total Postage&Fees 19/4 rU f�1 Sent To alaril h_ �)fir' 0 Street,Apt No% Ir/-yI ^ / p p j /� '- or PO Box No 2-5556lo4_��/,� c yyy,_/E1 Po.8 {�3 l7 City,State,ZIP+4 L r Wt� Vl-Lot t I� ' 4`, 11 I I _g N I 1'i 3• PS Form 3800,January2001 --R-v-r - . . tree; .1.116111MME:i4 nisi: - ' -T A ' 4111110 • (Domestic Mail Only;No Insurance Cc:, -•e Provided a- V7 it) 1t_= i ii tE� q A i7 n ,EI �L.a t � VERB•-BEACH,i(FL u ."96 s ix 1. a L !S. c-? tr.-, P1 Postage $ /^/1 (-1. q UNIT III: 0952 t� e 'Certified Fee /2„,„ v .124, 0Q -D VVV l� {{�i` Postmark eturn Receipt Fee 'I� Here Lri ( ndorsement Required) 1 $ .dY CI v O Restricted Delivery Fee ('I C1er e K Tl8Ki p (Endorsement Required) 1 .Q Jnr O Total Postage&Fees $ -. ©�J�T/Q'ru ' rtl Sent r i" r �C,A) 0l :.*1;'''') -„.`., U Street, No,) ail CO or PO Box No.1 j Ij p00 1►at Dr. r O City,State,ZIP+¢►U� O pita G i/ ' PL ?�^b3 t,- Urir Wflni (� PS Form 3800,Janua 208 ED MA R • ' (Domestic Mail Only;No Insurance C4) a.e Provt.e. ru IJ7 -i`• r.:-=' 1:�`' f,' h '.! n Q-; ' ROCKVILLE 'i7<,,, i ►.� t 1.:_a ��'+ lc rn •ostage UNIT IUe 0952 • t�1) C+`ified ftMak l.i 1'1 Postmark Return R= eipt Fee 11�'� b Here O (Endorsement',quire. i IJ Restricted Delrve F' Clerk: KVUBK.7 p (Endorsement Requi.:,...4`'` , �1 O Total Postage&Fees Iffigra.: 03/19/02 IU Sent T • CI dwUn .P-.4-Vl Cqia1_a.7 CACP a Street,OApt Noo. I (Oy�r /�� � or PO Box No. V\VI .]� \ �� O City,State IPP+Q �,�1 J I aorta) N U 115 70 h- l/Ay" II'lOr VISIT Yc7I1Irll1- .M •� IT4 MTX&IIfiMITIT oas num owl ii7=viret till F\111X0 - Domestic Mail Only No Ins r., - ilikragimmtm Q- - - i {su +;µ- t-n VEl;MEACH z'F L S 329631 Ir 1 .i .-( �% c?; ''7: a ///ttt,,, Postage $ ^ 1;s,3f; UN ,J; ��¶ Certified Fee / , l 04� i'r ` `�Q { Postmark J2 u7 R rn Receipt Fee /i Here 173 ( rsement Required) I 1 g� 'L 0 Restricted Delivery Fee ;e KZ3 H 1� (Endorsement Required) ill: V�� CI Total Postage&Fees $ �,�� 01042,n ru 2 Nal rn / o >N al d-14't 0i 1 24.170h • fr l eA- ,, Street,Apt No; O or PO Box No 12._i flf obrl,no1 ��l 3F City State,ZIP+4` 'eM 0 ,,a ll it FL 32,6 PS Form 3800,January 200011 _ ee.•everse or nstru i.iv Mil tl•1ir• . ERTIFIED MAI RE ='' - • • (Domestic Mali Only;No Insurance :•e Provt•e. N ` rTn EAST-MARION, -Y 11919 - ' --Q . m Postage $ „}' �w"! /jt 0952 r- /He Certified Fee N '-� i3_`4: • ark Return Receipt Fee ,; a He'_ 11-11 (Endorsement Required) '� O . t_] Restricted Delivery Fee C1> z7,IN O (Endorsement Required) g. ,_!,, _ -/18/02.. '/� `�"C/ T'�� O Total Postage&Fees $ RI Om Sent To��/(}l(�i(_ Street,Ap( No,��I r- - -` -F " Ci IMl� / c_ 0 or PO Box No T "BOX O City,State,ZIP+4 ,11 ' / r V►I o_(1\1r )1q3°Iq3 PS Form 3800,January 2001 See Reverse for nsttuction- a: n Complete items 1;2,and 3;Also complete A Sigr1aiure item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. ( ❑ gS II Complete • Print your name and address on the reverse X J �� Addressee so that we can return the card to you. B Rec.iv..by(Printed Name) C pate of o livery IN Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front if space permits. Litt 3 DO 6 1 Article Addressed to D. Is delivery address different from item 1'9 0 es If YES,enter delivery address below. 0 No Ralph Martin, Jr. 2555 Old Orchard Lane , P.O. Box 203 • East Marion, New York 11939 3. Service Type • Certified Mail 0 Express Mail 0 Registered S Return Receipt for Merchandise ❑ Insured Mail 0 C.O D 4 Restricted Delivery'?(Extra Fee)_ _._— 0 Yes 2. Article Number --- (Transfer from service label) '--—7 00 1 Q3 20 0 0 0 5_ 6 ],3__5 5 6 PS Form 3811,August 2001 • :,Domestic Return Receipt 102595-01-M-250e UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE I _I I First-Class Mail Postage&"Fees Pani • USPS I II II I Permit No.G-10 • Sender: Please print your name, address, and ZIP+4 in this box • WICKHAM, WICKHAM &BRESSLER, P.C. MAIN ROAD, P.O. BOX 1424 I RE res N_ 1952 �1 e 2002 " :1 i,2�ii�„iiiti►lsi�i,=�i,iii,�►iii=�i,I i36i,�iii Eli�it�ii k(IVO' :14 I04:14M111r4111:1&%1 �31LTCOMPLETE THIS SECTION ON D I194:1' • Complete items 1,;2,and 3.AIso completir A Signature item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired ��/ 7 ❑Ag. II Print your name and address on the reverse v (Ge,u.•ti + , e— I t - �A Addressee so that we can return the card to you. B. Received by(Printed Name) C Date of Delivery ■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front if space permits. F. I+P�S S .3l 20 ID-2- D Is delivery address different from item 19 0 Yes 1 Article Addressed to: If YES,enter delivery address below: El No Gardiners Bay Estates Club, Inc; P.O. Box 4 East Marion, New York 11939 3. Service Type • Certified Mail 0 Express Mail Ik‘ rl ❑ Registered girReturn Receipt for Merchandise ❑ Insured Mail 0 C.O.D. 4 Restricted Delivery (Extra Fee) ❑Yes 2. Article Number --_--- -- (Transfer from service label) '__7 001 _0320 0005_6_7_13____S_602 PS Form 3811,August 2001 , Domestic Return Receipt 102595-01-M-2505 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE I I FirstUSPS Class Mail Postage&i Y411 T4aL • ► • • • ► COMPLETE THIS SECTION • Complete items 1,2,and 3.'Also complete i•'ature item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. ❑Agent • Print your name and address on the reverse 0.41A4.._`'� ` "t ❑Addressee so that we can return the card to you. B. Received by(Printed Name) C Date of Delivery • Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, , �, � / �T/v 2 9 or on the front if space permits. D. Is delivery address different from item 19 0 Yes 1. Article Addressed to. If YES,enter delivery address below: ❑ No Ralph Martin, Jr. 2555 Old Orchard Lane P.O. Box 203 East Marion, New York 11939 3.pS..�ervice Type • • -tit—Certified Mail ❑ Express Mail ❑ Registered '(3eturn Receipt for Merchandise ❑ Insured Mail ❑ C.O D. 4. Restricted Delivery?(Extra Fee) ❑Yes 2. Article Number (Transfer from service label), ? ,;._T7 01i 0 3 2 Q ;;H4-5 6711i3.752 _s PS Form 3811,August 2001 Domestic Return Receipt 102595-01-M-2509 _■ POSTAL SERVICE First-Class Mail 11 P6stage&Fees Paid USPS Permit No.G-10 • Sender: Please print your name, address, and ZIP+4 in this box • WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER, P.C. - -- MAIN ROAD, P.O. BOX 1424 MATTITUCK, N.Y. 11952 • • C -- ,r f RECFAirn PIAR 2 0 2002 iiSE:2+0g54 OS i ii ilii l i i lil ! -111 E»MK•/17/l:J441r41/0/AS:140ROMCOMPLETE THIS SECT!. •4 • Complete items 1,'2,and 3.•Also complete® Signature item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. - � ❑Ay,, • Print your name and address on the reverse X Ar / .0-i 1.4i2 ❑Addressee , so that we can return the card to you. B Received- (Printed Name) C Date of Delivery • Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front if space permits. 1. Article Addressed to. D Is delivery address different from item 17 0 Yes If YES,enter delivery address below 0 No Donald H. & Elizabeth H. Frazier .et 7E, 1821 Mooringline Dr' .'\\ 3F N 1.1 Vero Beach, FL 329.m'� : s Service Type ,:t%) 4R-Certified Mail 0 Express Mail `❑ Registered Return Receipt for Merchandise OP� ®IA 0 Insured Mail 0 C O D 4 Restricted Delivery'?(Extra Fee) 0 Yes 2 Article Number 7001__0320__ 0005_671.3_ 56],`9 (Transfer from service label) , PS Form 3811,August 2001 Domestic Return Receipt 102595-01-M-2509 _,sTAL SERVICE First-Class Mail Postage&Fees Paid USPS Permit No.G-10 • Sender: Please print your name, address, and ZIP+4 in this box • WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER, P.C. MAIN ROAD, P.Q. BOX 1424 '. MATTITUCK, N.Y. 11952 1- . RECEIVED MAR 2 6 2002 R!)11,;;5 II11 I1111IIII II I•M•III,!1111111111III1111111111111111111111� ' l2 14 NBA Mreeirlial*IVIIMIcj of/Lo COMPLETE TH , • Complete items 1,2,and 3.Also complete n re item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. /7 • Print your name and address on the reverse , so that we can return the card to you. Received by(Panted Name) CRat • Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front if space permits. - - 4/!/4 D. Is delivery address different from item 19 ❑Yes 1 Article Addressed to. If YES,enter delivery address below. 0 No Edward A. & Virginia Thorp 12 Norcross Street 'Rockville Centre, New York 11570 3 Service Type ® Certified Mail ❑pLr�,E_,xpress Mail ��� 0 Registered Return Receipt for Merchandise 0 Insured Mad 0 C O.D 4. Restricted Delivery?(Extra Fee) 0 Yes 2 Article Number 4 ,7 aa1 _a3 an :._a 011.5....._6-.7.1-1 s 6-2 6- (Transfer from service label) PS Form 3811,August 2001 Domestic Return Receipt 102595-01-M-2509 _r(VICE 0 11 First-Class Mail Postage&Fees Pgicl USPS — Permit No G-10 • Sender: Please print your name, address, and ZIP+4 in this box • _ ------_,„Th it WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER, P.C. 12 fi1 MAIN ROAD, P.O. BOX 1424 MATTITUCK, N.Y. 11952 I , 1- ii, 1,,1 .- k ECEWP 02-i';' ' 2-5 202 i II Ili i i 1 I III i i I 1 j• 1. 11.1 i.i. ii CIS iiiittiliiiiilnitifilwituffilililliii:iffidill:sulddi. 1/C)01 2- y4Ni . OM'L " SS el • r' THIS SECTION .1 . r IN Complete items 1,2,and 3.Also complete A. Si. - re item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. /1 / ,, ,�A��g�ent ■ Print your name and address on the reverse / Agent see so that we can return the card to you. B Received by(Printed Name) C. Date eltvery ■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, /�,, or on the front if space permits. fAg6/1 / (14-Aei/C/i//1// 3!l Oo'Z 1 Article Addressed to D. Is delivery address different from item 1? 1:1Yes Gardiners Bay Estates Club, Inc. If YES,enter delivery address to `AS o P.O. Box 44;. East Marion, New York 11939 (� 73 • 1 3. Service Type '� ' 'K Certified Mail ❑ Expr s ele }, CI .Registered Return Receipt-for erchandise 0 - ❑ Insured Mail ❑ C O D 4 Restricted Delivery (Extra Fee) ❑Yes 2. Article Number — -- ----------___- (Transfer from.•serv,ceilabel) ' : I• _–.7°PA,.0:3 a0: 0 0 0 5 6 7]13 3 7E4 5.1' _. •PS Form 3811,August 2001 • Domestic Return Receipt 102595-01-M-2509 VITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE I_I First-Class Mail I 11 Postage&Fees Paid I I USPS Permit No G-10 • Sender: Please print your name, address, and ZIP+4 in this box • WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER, P.C. ti MAIN ROAD, P.O. BOX 1424 MATTITUCK, N.Y. 11952 cc RECEIVED MAR 2 0 2007 7 '14 ,0, • ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD: NEW YORK In the Matter of the Application of ROGER WALZ and AFFIDAVIT OF - LESLIE WALZ SERVICE BY MAIL Parcel ID #1000-37-6-5 STATE OF NEW YORK) ) ss.: COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) Amy M. Beasley, being duly sworn, deposes and says: On the 18th and 19th days of March, 2002, I personally mailed at the United States Post Office in Mattituck,New York,by CERTIFIED.MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED, a true copy of the attached Legal Notice and map in prepaid envelopes addressed to current owners shown on the current assessment roll verified from the official records on file with the Southold Town Assessors Office, for every property which abuts and is across a public or private street, or vehicular right-of-way of record, surrounding the applicant's property, as follows: Edward A. &Virginia Thorp 1000-37-6-3.3 12 Norcross Street Rockville Centre,New York 11570 Donald H. &Elizabeth H. Frazier 1000-37-6-4 1821 Mooringline Drive 3F Vero Beach, Florida 32963 Ralph Martin, Jr. 1000-37-6-6.1 2555 Old Orchard Lane P.O. Box 203 East Marion,New York 11939 Gardiners Bay Estates Club, Inc. 1000-37-5-23.2 P.O. Box 4 East Marion,New York 11939 l� kveasiik(Amy M. :easl Sworn to before me this 020 d'`day of March, 202 Notary Public CHERYL CROHAN NOTARY PUBLIC,State of New York No.39-4970347 Qualified in Suffolk County Commission Expires February 4, I ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD:NEW YORK In the Matter of the Application of AFFIDAVIT OF -1e11-144112 of A licant POSTING p ) Regarding Posting of Sign upon Applicant's Land Identified as 1000- 3 - 6 - _------- COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) STATE OF NEW YORK) I, Prx47 residing at .315 2.cee,r7/— , New York, being duly sworn, depose and say that: On the /7 d ay of 2xi ,140,-;-4 personally placed the Town's official Poster, with the date of hearing and nature of my application, in a secure position upon niy property, located ten (10) feet or closer from the street or right-of- way - facing the street or facing each street or right-of-way abutting this property;* and that I hereby confirm that the Poster has remained in pla • for seven days prior to the d9.te of the subject hearing date,which hearing date a•hown to be r• / signature) Sworn to before me this 0-") day of .,19 Zo OZ • / JOYCE M. 9NSNotary Public.Stateto ofof New York )14,ajvaj,(_____4' No.4952246,Suffolk County ( otary Public) Term ExpirosJune 12, c)-_v03 *near the entrance or driveway entrance of my property, as the area most visible to passersby. MAR-22-2002 02:24P FROM: • TO:7659064 P:2'2 414116 ( ; ud ) _ • ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD:NEW YORK in the Matter of the Application of ROOFR WALZ and AFFIDAVIT OF LESLIE WALZ SERVICE DY MAIL Parcel IT)#1000-37-6-5 STATE OF NEW YORK ) ) ss.: COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) Amy M. Beasley,being duly sworn, deposes and says: On the 186 and 19th days ol'March,2002, 1 personally mailed at the United States Post Office in Mattituck, New York, by CERTIFIED MAIL,RETURN RECEIPT REQULS IED,a true copy of the attached Legal Notice and map in prepaid envelopes addressed to current owners shown on the current assessment roil verified from the official records on file with the Southold Town Assessors Office. 1.,r every property which abuts and is across a public or private street, or vehicular tight-uf-way of record,surrounding the applicant's property, as follows: Fadward A. &Vhginia Thorp 1000-37-6-3.3 12 Norcross Street Rockville Centre, New York 11570 Donald H. &Elizabeth H. Frazier 1000-37-6-4 Int Mooringline Drive 3F Vero Beach, Florida 32963 Ralph Martin, Jr. 1000-37-6-6.1 2555 Old Orchard Lane P.O. Box 203 Fast Marion,New York 11939 Gardiners Bay Estates Club, Inc. 1000-17-5-23.2 P.O, Box 4 Fast Marion,New York 11939 Jicjsz4, Amy M, :easle) Sworn to before me this /07 7A�'`day of March, 205 _ Notary Public CHERYL OROHAw f NOTARY PUBLIC,Stat®of Now Yo No 31-4970341 Ouahf od in Suffolk County C $ —, .�� c mmIsslon Gxplr�s Feoruay 4, MAR-22-2002 02:24P FROM: 70:7659064 P:1{2 • W ICKHAM, t7VICKHAM&BRESSLER, P.C. P.O. Box 1424, 10315 Main Road,Maltituek,New York 11952 Phone(631)298-8353 —Fax(631)298-8565 To: Pa..tia. Fax No.: l Lth A From: [ L.Ltc . _. . Re: 1,0a ir Includes: Gt ,.k x u I c Date:422j(Y2 - #of Pages including cover sheet 2— This transmission contains information confidential and/or legally privileged. It is intended for use only by the person to whom it is directed. If you have received this telecopy in error,please notify us by telephone immediately so that we can arrange for the return of the documents to us at no cost to you. If you do not receive all of the pages indicated,please call as soon as possible at the number referenced above. \_J .r fkti OFFICE OF )�� ► ONING BOARD OF APPE RO 53095 Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Email: Linda.Kowalski(a Town Southold.ny.us or Paula.OuintieriQTown f,Southold.ny.us (631) 765-1809 fax (631) 765-9064 March 15, 2002 :1a -?F ?5--6< Re: Chapter 58 — Public Notice for Thursday, March 28, 2002 Hearing — R. Walz Setback Variance (Appl. No. 4962)) Dear Mr sler: Please find enclosed a copy of the Legal Notice describing your recent application. The Notice will be published in the next issue of the Suffolk Times. Pursuant to Chapter 58 of the Southold Town Code (copy enclosed), formal notice of your application and hearing must be now mailed with a map or sketch showing the construction area or variance being considered. Send the enclosed Notice CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED, with a copy of a map showing your project area, to all owners of land (vacant or improved) surrounding yours, including land across any street or right-of-way that borders your property, before Wednesday, March 20th. Use the current addresses shown on the assessment rolls maintained by the Town Assessors' Office (765-1937) or the County Real Property Office in Riverhead. If you know of another address for a neighbor, you may want to send the notice to that address as well. When picking up the sign, a $15 check will be requested for each metal stand as a deposit. If you already have a sign and stand and only need the laminated printout for the face of the sign, an additional deposit is not necessary and we can mail or fax it to you. Please post the Town's official poster/sign no later than March 21St. Securely place the sign on your property facing the street, no more than 10 feet from the front property line bordering the street. (If you border more than one street or roadway, an extra sign is furnished for each front yard.) The sign(s) must remain in place for at least seven (7) days, and should remain posted through the day of the hearing. If you need a replacement sign, please contact us. By March 22"d, please submit to our office your Affidavit of Mailing (copy enclosed)with white mail receipts postmarked by the Post Office, and a list of the parcel numbers and names. (Later, when the green signature cards are returned to you by the Post Office, please mail or deliver them to us (but not later than the date of the hearing). If any signature card is not returned, please advise the Board at the hearing.) On or about March 27th, and after the signs have been in place for seven (7) days, please submit your Affidavit of Posting to our office. These will be kept in the permanent record as proof of all Notices. (Please feel free to return the metal stands to our office for a return of your deposit.) If you do not meet the deadlines stated in this letter, please contact us promptly. Thank you for your cooperation. Very truly yours, Enclosures / ZBA Board Members and Staff P.S. Please arrange for someone to pick up the posting sign, between March 19th and March 21St. Thank you. .` iii• iiii . , NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS THURSDAY, MARCH 28, 2002 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Section 267 of the Town Law and Chapter 100 (Zoning), Code of the Town of Southold, the following application will be heard at a public hearing by the SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS at the Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York 11971, on THURSDAY, MARCH 28, 2002, at the time noted below (or as soon thereafter as possible). 7:05 p.m. Appi. No. 4962 — ROGER J. and LESLIE WALZ. This is a request for a Variance under Article XXIV, Section 100-242A, based on the Building Inspector's May 2, 2001 Notice of Disapproval regarding the proposed second-story addition to existing dwelling. The Notice of Disapproval states that the existing structure has a nonconforming setback of three feet from the easterly side lot line and LE feet from the west side line, and as a result, the addition of the second-story represents an increase in the degree of nonconformity. Location of Property: 2505 Old Orchard Road, East Marion, NY; Parcel 1000-37-6-5. (The hearing was concluded on November 29, 2001, and reopened at the request of the applicants' attorneys.) The Board of Appeals will hear all persons, or their representative, desiring to be heard at the hearing, or desiring to submit written statements before the conclusion of the above hearing. This hearing will not start earlier than designated. Files are available for review on regular Town Hall business days between 8 and 3 p.m. If you have questions, please do not hesitate to call (631) 765-1809. Dated: February 28, 2002. GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN As updated 3/14. SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS Town Hall 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 6 ' RANSMISSION VERIFICATION REPO TIME : 03/19/2002 10:47 DATE,TIME 03/19 10:45 FAX NO./NAME 4770973 DURATION 00:01: 34 PAGE(S) 03 RESULT OK MODE STANDARD ECM ..411 RANSMISSION VERIFICATION REPO TIME : 03/15/2002 16:18 DATE,TIME 03/15 16: 16 FAX NO./NAME 2988565 DURATION 00:01:18 PAGE(S) 02 RESULT OK MODE STANDARD ECM 09/04/2001 14:06 6517659FJoJZONINGAPPEALSBOARL' : PAGE 6B� . I ZONING HOARD OF APPEALS SEP 2 0 2001 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD:NEW YORK ( 1„�' x In the Matter of the Application of ,.. .. ,. ___ _____ AFFIDAVIT e 4_.±§A. 441,__________ OF SIGN • (Name of Applin ,nt) PdSTING Regarding Posting of Sign upon Applicant's Land Identified as COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) STATE OF NEW YORK) • I, C2• ,-y, y MARTA/ residing at Lg/e `� � ree9 24,06,/e_T , New York, being duly sworn, depose and say that: g On the /3 day of1964,749A!200/, i personally placed the Town's official Poster, with the date of hearing and nature of my application noted thereon, securely upon my property, located ten(10) feet or closer from the street or right-of-way (driveway entrance) -facing the street or facing each street or right-of-way entrance;'and that I hereby confirm that the Poster has remained in place for seven days prior to the date of the subject hearing date, wh' hearin�, ° s own to be /..... ..! id.._.i,74--,,,, . .� $signature) Sworn to befo1e me this oz 6g) day of 4, ir, jo, 200 I . csJ' 4 Fri 1 Aae---) "111 - (Notary Public) "mai °cf,•=: . .:= ,fi ,o zoo - *near the entrance or driveway entrance of my property, as the area most visible to passersby. I�I FAIRWEATHER-BROWN DESIGN ASSOCIATES,INC. P.O.Box 521 413 Main Street 1 C ? 0 7 N r Greenport,N.Y. 11944 — \ 631-477-9752 (fax)631-477-0973 SEP 2 0 2.001 IE ,� Date 9/07/01 I Adjoining lots to: _ - —' Name Walz,Roger&Leslie SCTM# 1000-037-6-5.1 37-6-5.1 Edward A. &Virginia Thorp 12 Norcross Street Rockville Centre, New York 11570 37-6-6.1 Ralph Martin,Jr. 2555 Old Orchard Lane East Marion, New York 11939 37-6-4 Donald H. &Elizabeth Frazier 1821 Mooring Line Drive Apt 3 F Vero Beach, Florida 32963 anon-certified letter was also sent to Elizabeth Frazier at her East Marion Address • l�" NUM 074V11:17,2- e. ERTIFIED MAIL E'1'2 (Domestic Mail Only;No Insurance Coverage Provided O .r r- - . '- •1 , LE CENTRE, NY 11570 _ 0 Postage $ 0.34 �,\o'r IT ID: 0 44 Certified Fee =ETA c — Pos r Return Receipt Fee1 ■ ^ H:j ru (Endorsement Required) CM Restricted Delivery Fee ���, IaY�,: K I X p (Endorsement Required) Fee Total Postage&Fees 3.94 a I r/0 r Sen / (f ,I Street,Apt N r PO Box No 1=1 Cr/ tate,ZIP+4 i //3 7 PS Form 3800,May 2000 '.,ee'ev-s- or n t i Lp_ U.S. Postal Servic=- B MAIL RE 1144-Fa- 0 i T Domestic Mai'0a y;No Insurance overage Provided r`- EAST-MARION NY'i ii1939.1 /-,�, �I_- ,_� ma11 y' 2'? o r Postage $ 0.34401,1,1- ° 0944 ea ca Certified Fee N •.st ark Return Receipt Fee M ,,ru (Endorsement Required)p i Restricted Delivery Fee � - Ierk: K •C,;'1•1p (Endorsement Required) Total Postage&Fees $ 3°9 V�=� aSent To rn Street,Apt.No;orPO` p a�e-�` 6 elf-'Cif-LI(71"4-74e-- r=1 1"p City,S te,ZIP+4 rs- i , f r2.0-.) ? //G'3-' PS,;(=o�m 3$00,May 2000 / See Re.rse for ns ruck.iv U$. Postal Servic-_ 'CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIP . (Domestic Mail Only;Nb Insurance Covera•e Pro vi. . . r n ' _A . .. r . . ..11' . "&f.-', r•-• VERii, EAdi,[FL 132963 11 ,'''' - ..-:, Postage $ 0.34 MIT ID: 0944 .o. ..o Certified Fee _El 2.1 N.,41'6. Pos ark Return Receipt Fee H Fil (Endorsement Required) 1 c.--1 c•-s CI CL- CI Restncted Delivery Fee i-- trot: Kx ,s- • ., ir, (Endorsement Required) CI &Fees $ 3. -K>, 09/071 Total Postage ........- Se. 1=1 Street Aro-t-NO 0 Box No • 67T4=7 - (IL I=1 /•... I 49-.;91.4-ii /L-412-) - D''?4ii.:- I=1 -.O1,;ate,ZIP+4 4i Z4.4 41OCg 9 63 r- 6e--a. 1 ,, Ps-FOrm 3800;Ma 2000" ''''' . ;: '' - ' ' '6,6^.ReVerse for I• •itaif,- SENDER:COMPLETE THIS SECTION •u' •7QL•L7•]49PI4:1' • Complete items 1,2,and 3.Also complete A...Received by(Please Pont Clearly) B. Dab of D:every item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. ', 'r NI,' �10��,-P • Print your name and address on the reverse so that we can return the card to you. X C. Signal e_ • Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, s y / • Agent or on the front if space permits. II L ~ 0 Addressee D Is delve ,.dress different from item`9 0 Yes 1 Article Addressed to. If YES,e r delivery address below: 0 No ,, ,,i,,u.,,,,,,,e, 4- Y- ___74,) /� / r' 1 , • - 3 Service Type , ❑Certified Mail 0 Express Mail • If , C /� 0,,,,,,,u ❑ Registered ❑ Return Receipt for Merchandise 1 04 i �(xCJ ���/// 0 Insured Mail 0 C 0 D. /�5 _ -� 4. Giestncted Delivery (€xtra Fee) 0 Yes 2. Article.Number(Copy from ice label) -11 , , , , - :%1 :+ i i i i i, • , 1 iii : i s , ;i t ,i ; IfI , i I , i PS Form 3811,July 1999 Domestic Return Receipt 102595-99-M-1789 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE First-Class Mail 111111 Postage&Fees Paid USPS Permit No.G-10 • Sender: Please print your name, address, and ZIP+4 in this box • FAIRWEATHER 8 FROWN, DESIGN ASSOCIATES,INC. 413 Main Street P.O. Box 521 • Oreenport, N.Y. 11944 6314774752(fax)631477-0973 . I„iiI1i UIi1iiiIial11111111110111111,I lI i1i1i„IIIi,iJ • Complete items 1,2,and 3 Also complete A Received by(Please Print Clearly) B patef Delivery item_4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. . wok-no--I `416 t 0 1 • Print your name and address on the reverse 111 so that we can return the card to you! C. ignature • Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, X Agent or on the front if space permits addressee D Is delivery ddress different from item 1? 15o°��Yes 1. Article Addressed to: If YES,ente elivery address below 0 No 124664 I . Qt�));Ifje-EPL , ,do--s-i-- Oft v , I 3 Se t Type 35l Certified Mail ❑ Express Mail ❑ Registered 0 Return Receipt for Merchandise GI-.,.-J / �� ❑ Insured Mail 0 C O D 62.. >i) j 4. Restricted Delivery?(Extra Fee) 0 Yes 2 Article Number(Cop rom service label) pper.�,, rr//yp-�� #��y r ���.-,Q i HH i milli i ii VW }bro (1e5Q 096 7W' PS Form 3811,July 1999 ,, Domestic Return Receipt - ' 102595-99-M-1789 t 4 , i i i 1 i ii. ; ; . ii1 r it yii 1 it UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE First-Class Mail 11 11 Postage&Fees Paid USPS Permit No.G-10 • Sender: Please print your name, address, and ZIP+4 in this box • FALWEATHER*BROWN YkESR 1N ASSOCIATES,INC. 413 Main Street P.O. Box 521 dreenport, N.Y. 11944 631-477-9752(fax)631-477-0973 4%0L�,fiI,,,Ni,fi,,,i„1,i„Ifil,,,,fiJ,,,fi,fi►„Il„l,l,,,filll,,,l OD 41111 ' STATE OF NEW YORK) -. - _. _ )SS:- - - t`'"NOTICE OF PUBLIC—HEARING' COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) " ! SOUTHOLD TOWN I k..aO ..i CA,t5 of Mattituck, in said BOARD OF APPEALS THURSDAY, conn ing duly sworn, says that he/she is Principal SEPTEMBER 20,2001 clerk of THE SUFFOLK TIMES,a weekly newspaper,pub- ; NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN,pur- suant to Section 267 of the Town Law lished at Mattituck, in the Town of Southold, County of and Chapter 100(Zoning),Code of the Town of Southold,the following appli- Suffolk and State of New York,and that the Notice of which cation will be heard at a public hear''; '-, the annexed is a printed copy, has been regularly pub- by the SOUTHOLD TOWN.BrOAkv OF APPEALS at the Town Hail53095 lished in said Newspaper once each week- - Main Road,Southold,New York 11971, on THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 20, for I weeks successively, commencing 2001, at the time noted below (or as the 13 day soon thereafter as possible): on C n l-- 8:25 p.m. ROGER AND LESLIE Of Sp 1 . 20 WALZ. (Carryover from prior hearing 1 calendars).This is an appeal requesting CHRISTINA T.WEBER a Variance under Article XXIV,Section NotaryState oPublic, f New York 100-242A, based on the Building No 01WE6034554 Inspector's May 2, 2001 corrected I Qualified in Suffolk County P i Clpal Clerk Notice of Disapproval. The Notice of Commission Expires December 13, 6, Disapproval states that the existing structure has a nonconforming setback \ of three feet from the easterly side lot Sworn to before me this . 3 line and 6.5 feet from the west side line, 20 and as a result, the second-story addi- I day of 0 p4'• 01 tion represents an increase in the degree •" ` of nonconformity.Location of Property: 2aOld Orchard Road, East Marion; On 'std, ���A O Parcel 1000-37-6-5. lU/p� :J--�.- The Board of Appeals will hear all persons,or their representative,desiring to be heard regarding the above, or desiring to submit written statements before the conclusion of the above hear- , i ing. This hearing will not start earlier 1 than designated.Files are available for review during regular Town Hall busi- ness hours(8-4 p.m.).If you have ques- tions,please do not hesitate to call(631) 765-1809. Dated:September 10,2001 BY ORDER OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Gerard P.Goehringer,Chairman 53095 Main Road P.O.Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971-0959 2047-1T513 -� 09/04/2001 14:06 63176590640 ZONINGAPPEALSBOARD : PAGE 07 • ry F SEP 2 0 2001 II ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 1 TOWN OF SOUT'HOLD.NEW YORK —�L In the Matter of the Application of AFFIDAVIT \-_)///2 OF (Nam" of Applicants) MAILINGS CTM Parcel#1000- 7 - 6 - .5 COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) STATE OF NEW YORK) /�m �191q/i/l7 , I, c�t� y residing at Sit -5.-- _ qt4poier— , New Yorkbeing duly sworn, depose and say that On the 7 J day of e °J , 200/, I personally mailed at the United States Post Office in r'2Pn ©27— , New York, by CERTIFIED . MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT R QUE TED, a true copy of the attached Legal Notice in prepaid envelopes addressed to current owners shown,gn the current assessment roll verified from the official record, o de with the ( ,,)(Assessors, or ( ) County Real Property Office `.,,?... / i ' _, for every ,, property which abuts and is across a public or private street, or vehicular right-of- . way of record, surrounding the applicant. i perty,/ A / ' i , /Signature) Sworn to b fore me this 44 y of , 2001 CRYS �?,q g Ilan RUc,61 d W w Vak , : . a- . ori 0o e.Vied F s �� :c a a:.,�:tfN3ifpi}1 ( No.491'inn rotary Public) — Cri l Pa:ray1,2OZ PLEASE list, on the back of this Affidavit or on a sheet of paper, the lot numbers next to the owner names and addresses for which notices were mailed. Thank you. /l7 182/.. — "1— FOR BOARD AND STAFF ° �/ USE ���J� 4_6 Updated New Information Oiz/Of (e _?s ii i ? 4...e e.0.4a G•1 6 g2-4/ O/ a ,,6 i af.477-0 773 4r /v 44_____ avy7_7,,,,},,,,y, 1,41,,,-, )r- ,ctuvii,„( oft Ar{ ,i-/R9' zi.r L of J /i b -./.- , J id. f i :_2/_i ,. �..._' L; e, azo-- ) - 1 i , 1 _1_ 4 -�`,, z.x G"/,e�".e. `�""_`.`' oh 4,r, 1)3/ . / • 5-I 3°i" e a i. .Gam" � t� g �u� a .,c,;/ % C. ifouvt ax. a G,,e„ -. ,elit,t, ymzed 47) WeL., a_fd- _ QA.L(24 �m4j/ nr , 4-0 • O - IP iit1 01 1.411! J • "Ail Vk - ,e/A ' rite '. i ' -Lt./ 1--) 1)lblor ,,-/ ,g_ )/),1,01,,A, , N . i ,, xfeioi, /4,0,402,w),,,,,i _ : . &way 21til- ' l--7�l _ X/ut 7/V ) QI2 ii/i& J ,6.67f • id V r Y77OvzP NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 20, 2001 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Section 267 of the Town Law and Chapter 100 (Zoning), Code of the Town of Southold, the following application will be heard at a public hearing by the SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS at the Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York 11971, on THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 20, 2001, at the time noted below(or as soon thereafter as possible): 8:25 p.m. ROGER AND LESLIE WALZ. (Carryover from prior hearing calendars). This is an Appeal requesting a Variance under Article XXIV, Section 100- 242A, based on the Building Inspector's May 2, 2001 corrected Notice of Disapproval. The Notice of Disapproval states that the existing structure has a nonconforming setback of three feet from the easterly side lot line and 6.5 feet from the west side line, and as a result, the second-story addition represents an increase in the degree of nonconformity. Location of Property: 2505 Old Orchard Road, East Marion; Parcel1000-37-6-5. The Board of Appeals will hear all persons, or their representative, desiring to be heard regarding the above, or desiring to submit written statements before the conclusion of the above hearing. This hearing will not start earlier than designated. Files are available for review during regular Town Hall business hours (8-4 p.m.). If you have questions, please do not hesitate to call (631) 765-1809. Dated: September 10, 2001. BY ORDER OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 • Southold, NY 11971-0959 (9:01 1 Fax Transmission to 298-3287 TO: Christine, Legal Publications Suffolk Times FROM: Southold Town Board of Appeals 765-1809 DATE: September 10, 2001 SUBJ: Legal Notice (Publication for Sept. 13th) Please find attached single-page Legal Notice for publication in this week's issue of the Suffolk Times. Thank you. Received by Suffolk Times 9/10/01 Please return a fax/receipt to us at 765-9064. Thank you. ANSMISSION VERIFICATION REPORT' TIME : 09/10/2001 14:08 _----- -1 DATE,TIME 09/10 14:07 FAX NO./NAME 2983287 DURATION 00:00:50 PAGE(S) 02 RESULT OK MODE STANDARD ECM Roger & Leslie Walz VARIANCE — SECOND - STORY ADDITION NON - CONFORMING SETBACKS ` at 1000-37 -6 - 5 .► THURS , SEPT . 20T" — 8 : 25 P . M . 0,9_10/201 09:56 6314770973 FAIRWEATHER BROWN PAGE 03 1 .r1 C r� •• Cr ,.,,. :1 U-s Poslta Se-ijjC@" f! 4 1 l CERTIFIED•;I�I,FAIL RECEIPT ra {DS>nrestfr Ma++O»!y No in4r�t•)nP.e ''';,'7r fm-cfedl 1 a r►. • ,+ w q U r ., :?i it t, c r. 1$ J,..1,'{: 1 ms) ' ;''. i ' ul r EAST P tIOido flY 11939 ca cri postage $ 0.N.4011,9 a 0944 to Certdred Fee r Rafurn Ree Ipt Poo J el PI' {Eraetsoment Requ rea K. •. G ReetKctetl Deilvery Fee l Ierk g, . lEedcraemenl Required) r- Twat Poateg.&Fi.®a $ 3.•„4 •' c.. '0),. D .Street Apt N. pr/5Ojoy po• 1) S "Post I--ss*'yi6, f<.:5. { .6rC111 a r C f3TIFIED `MAILRECEIPT,,,:: , r viDram'e tIc 7a, Only NQ lnUrf3nce,CQvera7e0P PY106'd);r k y t4 r•4 r: 5 a R•t Sr .1 in 1`• A:1 :1 1,.. a 4:t cm Pontags 15 0.34 ,IT•ID: 0944 su Certified Fee I a. t ',-` P --,Possatoark Rgcurn%crept Fee y t Mt:r� ru {Eftloraament tiequi eo) 1' •pp' C.- CI © Restricted Delivery Fee ' 1... 1QP'Ec:o 11 ..'11 1� /Endorsement Requved) i Total Postage a Fees $ 3 CI e ►107!! 115:0 0 Street r.N Hex NoNo"�1�� Ci r r.- Orer-4.4- 'Lldr'll-'-gi41-7F _, ,. L' _ ° { 4.:'t$ t(4'fi, viri tri, , 't .1;•%Y Vt.' '-- ,A,.,,SKLJI #rnrin(13, Je v ' 1, , ;1 p tY P?i0 I�t$�c ���'3�41, ry p r ; l'C, niipi�ED MAII2,REGI=JPT ' ,` r,� jDcut rShG rV1 e11 Ogfy;No fn4ura;n ;Odweragc ProV+cfPdl . sr4N -, F ., ,c. 9�e,� •Lro err f �w7� , r'. 6.3 I IGC a 1[t 81710 - $ 0.34 :t j' .,,IDC 0944 t3 Postage , " co r \. co certified Fee 2.16,-"/ r�r .� Pdtl dd..na� t+. H , :w.:d ru Return Receipt Fed � 1■w el Required) 13 Retetnctcd Detvery Fee a .larkt 0 poarBVmant fRqurretdi ti En fowl Poetises&Fees r$ 3.94 `'r !0 s1i Strtwt, t N r PO 8or 47 IN lir"rate IP-.4 %/.A V ti i ' I/ • (. 0-k-/2.0/2001 09:56 6314973 FAIRWEATHER PAGE 02 AIRA Etsn - ► LI-12(_1N ADESIGN ASSOCIATES,INC. 1 0.Bon 521 413 Maio Sart Greenport,N.Y. 11944 631-477-9752 (fax)631-4774973 Date 9/07/0 l Adjoining los to: Name Walz„Roger& Leslie SCTM# 1000-037-6-5.1 37-6-5.1 Edward A.&Virginia Thorp 12 Norcross Street ' oekville Centre, New York 11570 37-6-6.1 ''.alph Martin,Jr. 2555 Old Orchard Lane East Marion, New York 11939 37-6-4 Donald EL& Elizabeth Frazier 1821 Mooring Line Drive Apt 3 iF Vero Beach, Florida 32963 • a non-certified letter was also sent to Elizabeth Frazier at her east Marion Address • I{le NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 20, 2001 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Section 267 of the Town Law and Chapter 100 (Zoning), Code of the Town of Southold, the following application will be heard at a public hearing by the SOUTHOLD-TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS at the Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York 11971, on THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 20, 2001,at the time noted below(or as soon thereafter as possible): 8:25 p.m. ROGER AND LESLIE WALZ. (Carryover from prior hearing calendars). This is an Appeal requesting a Variance under Article XXIV, Section 100- 242A, based on the Building Inspector's May 2, 2001 Notice of Disapproval. The Notice of Disapproval states that the existing structure has a nonconforming setback of three feet from the easterly side lot line and eet from the west side line, and as a result, the second-story addition represents an increase in the degree of nonconformity. Location of Property: 2505 Old Orchard Road, East Marion; Parcel 1000-37-6-5. The Board of Appeals will hear all persons, or their representative, desiring to be heard regarding the above, or desiring to submit written statements before the conclusion of the above hearing. This hearing will not start earlier than designated. Files are available for review during regular Town Hall business hours (8-4 p.m.). If you have questions, please do not hesitate to call (631) 765-1809. Dated: August 31, 2001. BY ORDER OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 * 1. i I `4h _ OFFICE OF ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS" eA a � 53095 Main Road Southold, NY 11971 (631) 765-1809 fax (631) 765-9064 September 4, 2001 Re: Chapter 58— Public Notice for Thursday, September 20, 2001 Hearing (7, 43...) Dear Sir or Madam: Please find enclosed a copy of the Legal Notice describing the recent application. The Notice will be published in the next issue of the Suffolk Times. Pursuant to Chapter 58 of the Southold Town Code (copy enclosed), formal notice of your application and hearing must be now mailed with a map or sketch showing the construction area or, variance being considered. Send the enclosed Notice CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED, on Monday, September 10th, or sooner, including a copy of a map showing your project area, to all owners of land (vacant or improved) surrounding yours, including land across any street or right-of-way that borders your property. Use the current addresses shown on the assessment rolls maintained by the Town Assessors' Office (765-1937) or the County Real Property Office in Riverhead. If you know of another address for a neighbor, you may want to send the notice to that address as well. When picking up the sign, a $15 check will be requested for each metal stand as a deposit. If you already have a sign and stand and only need the laminated printout for the face of the sign, an additional deposit is not necessary and we can mail or fax a print out to you. Please post the Town's official poster/sign no later than September 13th, 2001. Securely place the sign on your property facing the street, no more than 10 feet from the front property line bordering the street. (If you border more than one street or roadway, an extra sign is furnished for each front yard.) The sign(s) must remain in place for at least seven (7) days, and should remain posted through the day of the hearing. If you need a replacement sign, please contact us. By September 13th, please submit to our office your Affidavit of Mailing (copy enclosed) with parcel numbers noted for each, and return it with the white receipts postmarked by the Post Office. Later, when the green signature cards are returned to you by the Post Office, please mail or deliver them to us (but not later than the date of the hearing). If any signature card is not returned, please advise the Board at the hearing. On or about September 19th, 2001, and after the signs have been in place for seven (7) days, please submit your Affidavit of Posting to our office. These will kept in the permanent record as proof of all Notices. (Please feel free to return the metal stands to our office for a return of your deposit.) If you do not meet the deadlines stated in this letter, please contact us promptly. Thank you for your cooperation. Very truly yours, ZBA Board Members and Staff Enclosures /, ') NTNG BOARD OF APPI TOWN OF SOUTHOLD - ( 631 ) OUTHOLD( 631 ) 765 - 1809 • FAX ( 631 ) 765 - 9064 FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL SHEET TO: FROM: ZBA Office Staff 765-1809 COMPANY: DATE: 91 421440?-a -14111/1nAj FAX NUMBER: TOTAL NO.OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER: 1./77- ,0?73 9 PHONE NUMBER: SENDER'S REFERENCE NUMBER: RE: YOUR REFERENCE NUMBER: 1.7K ❑ URGENT 0 FOR REVIEW 0 PLEASE COMMENT 0 PLEASE REPLY❑ PLEASE RECYCLE NOTES/COMMENTS: jarj6a j76 48)-Itt' C fi C, Jit.41,..tr (9, attzrag_d #- 61) ,,l 'r2a:t-&-c--/6.61, - • Z, d-1/1--41 � 53095 MAIN ROAD �. P.O. BOX 1179 SOUTHOLD, NY 11971-0959 (0).3 J� OjA 1 GARDINER'S BAY ESTATES HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION INC. P.O. BOX 4, EAST MARION, NY 11C rf--,, July 2 2001 11.11\\ JU` 5200 ' -Board-Of'-Appeals Town of Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Re: Application• No: 4962-Roger J. and Leslie Walz Honorable Board: Gardiner ' s Bay Estates Homeowners Association Inc . does not have a Building Code and refers homeowners to conform to the Town of Southold Zoning Code and the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building COde. However the GBEHOA Inc . has a real estate committee which requires a person to submit plans for any new construction, alterations , additions as a courtesy for suggestions . There is no convenant in deeds or excerpts of the deed that a two story residence cannot be built in the Estates , so long as it conforms to the Zoning Code of the Town of Southold . The GBEHOA Club which proceeded the GBEHOAInc. allowed two story residences to be constructed in the ' 30s to ' 60s . Statements have been made with reference to the above application that a second story to the existing residence will interfer with air, light, view. The applicants residence is located on a higher elevation than 'the adjoining residence and will not interfer with air, light and view as it will not be added horizontally. Back in the ' 20s a sub-division of various odd shape lots was approved and no thought was given to side yard set backs , front and rear yard set backs and percent of occupancy of property. Small summer cottages were builton odd lot shapes and sizes and now home owners are retiring to their ,ideal location and would like to have larger homes for family and friends . The Real Estate Committee neither approves or objects to the application for expansion. Sincerely, katetiA Harold challer Warren A. Sambach Sr. / f ' ^ ^ '-- �N �m�� �����0 ____ � �� < ri:-/x.) � , .'- / 1 / / - / airK� : l ' / ' \ / 180 SOUTH LANE P.O . BOX 5 i;T: 7,-G-,-,--________ EAST MARION , l) ..f, k!.---T7L71 u ii7;=? 11939- JULY 26 ,2001 GERARD P . GOEHRINGER , CHAIRMAN /U \ SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS ' Ls SOUTHOLD TOWN HALL ' ^= � ' P.O. BOX 1179 { SOUTHOLD , NY 11971 �- �/ . RE: APPEAL OF ROGER AND LESLIE WALZ . DEAR MR . GOEHRlNGER , IAMWRITING IN SUPPORT OF THE BUILDING APPLICATION APPEAL OFR .AOL "�^ Anu LESLIE WALZ FOR THEIR RESIDENCE AT 2505 OLD ORD"u ,,mE , EAST MARION. MY HOUSE TO THE EAST IS LOCATED FIVE FEET FROM MY PROPERTY L^NE ,TME Wiln MY GARAGE ONLY TWO FEET FROM THE LINE THE HOUSE � NEXT " IS ONLYu THREE FEET FROM MY PROPERTY ^ JUST EAST OF THE WALZ HOUSE IS FIVE FEETFROMTHEIR ^ THE HOUSE Is THE HOUSE TO THE WEST. IT IS THEREFOREumuuL/NOT ALINE' AS THIS PARTICULAR AREA TO HAVE HOUSES CLOSE TOGETHER . L IN THE HOUSE TO THE WEST OF THE WALZ HOUSE IS A TWO STORY STRUCTURE H�� WELLAS ^ ALMOST ALL THE HOUSES TO THE EAST THE AREA .PLAN' �^ WOULD CONFORM hWITH THE OTHER STRUCTURES IN THE MANYAND AOTHERHOUSESINTHE AREA HAVE BEEN ALLOWED ADDITIONS FOOTPRINT . IBELIEVE THAT ROGER AND LESLIE WALZ SHOULD BE .. � Eu THE SAME PRIVILEGE . SINCEREL ji ot dr,", FRANK b . Ye , ~` . . 4) . . . F�� \ • r July 31,2001 1 I l,C , dV7 LE Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman ,I,. Board of Appeals ;; o JUL 3 2001 11 Town of Southold 344 1 6 'Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road �� i - ` ' ')` P.O. Box 1179 Southold,New York 11971 Re: Walz Residence 2520 Old Orchard Lane Gardiner Bay Estates East Marion Dear Chairman Goehringer, I am writing to you in reference to the application before the Board of Appeals concerning the renovation/expansion of the residence immediately adjacent to me on the south. I have reviewed the plans prepared by Fairweather-Brown Design Associates,Inc., on behalf of Roger and Leslie Walz;'I also attended the Board of Appeals meeting in Southold Town Hall on Thursday,June 7,2001. The plans do not enlarge the footprint of the existing house and appear sensitive to neighbors on all sides. The second floor addition has been added in such a way as to minimize its impact on the neighbors and any limitation on our views. I find it attractive and a plus for the neighborhood. • As one of the neighbors most affected, I want you to be aware that I am supportive of their application. If you have questions regarding my thoughts,please feel free to contact me directly. Sincerely, N. Eliza th H. Frazier 2415 Old Orchard Lane East Marion,NY Cc Gardiner Bay Estates Architectural Committee Roger and Leslie Walz .. _ NSMISSION VERIFICATION REPOR TIME : 09/04/2001 14:10 DATE,TIME 09/04 14:06 FAX NO./NAME 4770973 DURATION 00:04:16 PAGE(S) 09 RESULT OK MODE STANDARD ECM SENDER: COMPLETE THIS SECTION .1Vii lal:►1:141x011:101 101 I'1 I1!I • Complete items 1,2,and 3.Also complete A Received by(Please Print Clearly) B.patof Delivery item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. Ek1/Men FO,Rz 1 Eg- &1 4 Q/ • Print your name and address on the reverse so that we can return the card to you. C. Signature • Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, ��o//� �7 a llu�'l® � 0 Agent �`�` or on the front if space permits. X (.64_,.. ❑Addressee D Is deliver address different fr m i, t• ^• 1 Article Addressed to: If YES,enter delivery address,a w; •m6•.r ,;,i340,9 , 974- 6 (0 •, 'Nt.70, • /iP i ii1111 41- 3. Service Type .�r �� ❑Certified Mail ❑ Express Ma rt 16.//ek —'e L 0 Registered 0 Return Receipt for Merchandise �//���F �J ,9,4/9 ❑ Insured Mail 0 C.O.D. �/Y (�� 4. Restricted Delivery?(Extra Fee) 0 Yes 2. Article Number(Copy from service label) i ilii ! ('! ! lith. hitt r, i i• iiiiitt i i is i : iii ii i i it ! ti ! i4tii PS Form X38111 July11999 i i 1 1 'Domestic Return Receipt 102595.00-M-0952 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE First-Class Mad 111111 Postage&Fees Paid USPS Permit No G-10 • Sender: Please print your name, address, and ZIP+4 in this box • , FAMRWEATRER•BROWN DESIGN ASSOCIATES,INC. y 413 Main Street P.O. Box 521 Greenport, N.Y. 11944 631-477-9752(fax)631-477-0973 r --:r.-r, huh ,,,iil,l,I II1111„111,,,,1,1,„1,1,,,11„IJ,,,I111,,,1 "44h.F•1 A.L , 1141P S ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD:NEW YORK In the Matter of the Application of AFFIDAVIT OF (Name (Name Applicant) POSTING Regarding Posting of Sign upon Applicant's Land Identified as 1000- 37 - 6 - 5- x COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) STATE OF NEW YORK) I, residing at L /er , 2rx--7 "it• ' New York, being duly sworn, depose and say that: On the o day of ,I900/ , I personally placed the Town's official Poster,with the date of hearint and nature of my application, in a secure position upon my property, located ten (10) feet or closer from the street or right-of- way - facing the street or facing each street or right-of-way abutting this property;* and that I hereby confirm that the Poster has remained in place for seven days prior to the date of the subject hearing date,which hearing date as shown to be • /_ 1_ / (Signature) Sworn to before me thisz� f 7 day of tzT-i4 ELIZABETH A STATHIS i NOTARY PUBLIC,State of New York j 4,1-€P--4 No.01 ST6008173,Suffolk County (Notary ublic) Term Expires June 8,20Q2,----- *near the entrance or driveway entrance of my property, as the area most visible to r passersby. FAIRWEATHER-BROWN • DESIGN ASSOCIATES,INC. P.O.Box 521 413 Main Street Greenport,N.Y. 11944 631-477-9752 (fax)631-477-0973 Date 4/12/01 Adjoining lots to: Name Walz,Roger&Leslie SCTM# 1000-037-6-5.1 47-6-5.1 Edward A. &Virginia Thorp '..7-17-6-5.1 / 12 Norcross Street Rockville Centre, New York 11570 V37-6-6.1 Ralph Martin,Jr. 2555 Old Orchard Lane East Marion, New York 11939 37-6-4 Donald H. &Elizabeth Frazier � � 1821 Mooring Line Drive Apt 3 F Z_____ Vero Beach, Florida 32963 --b 4/-1-` lute--0 b i J ‘<sr .. t SENDER: COMPLETE THIS SECTION tK•Ih»I*IMIN1414AelrfliVrr.7a111riaa7 • CompleteItems 1,2,•and 3.Also complete A Received by(Please Print Clearly) B. nate.f Delivery item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired . AN bi R X( 'i aR 0 • Print your name and address on the reverse C. Signa re so that we can return the card to you. / • Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, jA Agent or on the front if space permits. X '' ❑Addressee D. Is delivery address different from item 1? ❑Yes 1. Article Addressed to: If YES,enter delivery address below. lei No (Ili i ' 45-5-6--- tOi-L gi64-i' ,����CL / 3. Service Type r: LAC& Mail 0 Express Mail ❑ Registered 0 Return Receipt for Merchandise 717///37 0 Insured Mail 0 C.O.D. 4 Restricted Delivery?(Extra Fee) 0 Yes 2. Article Number(Copy from service label) 1/ I H : : ' i I I ri.9"0 A/1° i On D' Giik ;1 c13. SPS Form;38111,July.1999 1` : : : >1 + Domestic Return Receipt 102595-00-M-0952 iii ii1 tit E E; iltili Hill UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE First-Class Mail 111111 Postage&Fees Paid USPS Permit No.G-10 • Sender: Please print your name, address, and ZIP+4 in this box • FAIRWEATNER•BROWN • DESIGN ASSOCIATES,INC. 413 Main Street P.O. Box 521 Greenport, N.Y. 11944 631-477-9752(fax)631-477-0973 k, 44%i 427. 1,,,11,,,11,1,,,1, 11„1,,,11,1„1„1,11,,,1,,,11„11,„11,1 SENDER: COMPLETE THIS SECTION WeiliiJ4414rlLy�Yx frrtnrcW•0411►ia:1' • Complete items 1,2,and 3.Also complete A Received by(Please Print Clearly) '/e of r,el ery item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. f.jecca—(L1O PJ z IN Print your name and address on the reverse so that we can return the card to you. C. Signature II Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, X �/��VN q4A� 0 Agent or on the front if space permits. 0 Addressee D Is delivery address different from item 1? 0 Yes 1. Article Addressed to: If YES,enter delivery address below: 0 No "41-40aAl, 1 -/a-:,-47.-ft'cli za 46 ( p. -4--izte,_,-2,- >4-7 . /A 3. Service Type &t,,, 3. Certified Mail 0 Express Mail ,,_ Ae,6,/,,a, 0 Registered ❑ Return Receipt for Merchandise (e(111-(' 0 Insured Mail 0 C.0 D �' �' 4. Restricted Delivery9(Extra Fee) 0 Yes 2. Article Number(Copy from service label) 111's Form 381;1;,July 1999 t i 11 It 1Dori-iestic Return Receipt 102595.00-M-0952 • UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE 1 11 11 1 First-Class Mail Postage&Fees Paid USPS Permit No G-10 • Sender: Please print your name, address, and ZIP+4 in this box • FAIRWEATHER•BROWN DESIGN ASSOCIATES,INC. 413 Main Street P.O. Box 521 , Ctreen p o r t, N.Y. 11944 631-477-9752(fax)631-477-0973 lifilillillliiUI111111111111111 111111111111111/11>II11III1 I. . "osta CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPT (Domestic Mail Only;No Insurance Covera•e •ro -• U- r Postage $ 0.34 NIT II+o 0944 Certified Fee MEM Postmark Return Receipt Fee •5' Here (Endorsement Required) L7 Restricted Delivery Fee ries E'; KiTRO SY CI (Endorsement Required) Total Postage&Fees $ f`- 3.74 05/25 001 "'1 Sent To _ r-1 O Street,AptNo r PO Box No !/ (/ State, [ O City,Sg, A+ 3 PS Form 3800,Ma 20$ - U.S. Postal Servic:- _ CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPT W. (Domesti8 Mail Only;No Insurance Coverage • . Ill MI -, ,-1 FAcIt-i4ARTilisi;' bY"-} ii-r17,ch Postage $ 0.34 JNIT it 0944 43 cri Certified Fee _a 1.90_ Postmark Return Receipt Fee Here MI (Endorsement Required) 1.50 Em I=1 Restncted Delivery Fee :ler.: KTRO3Y 1:3 (Endorsement Required) . _ I= Total Postage&Fees $ 3.74 )5/25/01 r- "izLiq Ser2L-Ty4tai Z.-.• Strece:AAW PetNI: 474„.,ig,Loe 4,...._1 in E, City,St ,ZIP+4 lel I"- PS Form 3800,Ma 2000 G, (4— ;. - • • 41•111= U.S. Postal a Ti CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPT (Domestic4Mail 0 ;No Insurance Covera•e Pro • in rn ROCKVILLE CBJTRE, Nf 11570 Postage $ °34 UNIT ID: 0944 Certified Fee L.90 Postmark I1J Return Receipt Fee 1.50 Here (Endorsement Required) oClerk' KTRO3Y RrO3Y Restricted Delivery Fee O (Endorsement Required) 1=1 Total Postage&Fees $ °t� 05/25.01 r-1 Sent To p Street,Apt or PO Box No I=3 / CA4-c 0 City, i' ZIP 4 .4...14_, c. //3,0 P$Form 3800,Ma 2000 6�,x FAIRWEATHER-BROWN DESIGN ASSOCIATES,INC. P.O.Box 521 413 Main Street Greenport,N.Y. 11944 631-477-9752 (fax)631-477-0973 Date 4/12/01 Adjoining lots to: Name Walz,Roger&Leslie SCTM# 1000-037-6-5.1 37-6-5.1 Edward A. &Virginia Thorp 12 Norcross Street Rockville Centre, New York 11570 6-6.1 Ralph Martin,Jr. 2555 Old Orchard Lane East Marion, New York 11939 37-6-4 Donald H. &Elizabeth Frazier 1821 Mooring Line Drive Apt 3 F Vero Beach, Florida 32963 -/c7?S )/ A-MjA1 -, r o41p � r �' `� r 7 GP rGE 03 60#12;2@81 11:13 6317659 ONINGAPPEALSBO L�1 El EP l • ` i MAY 2 42001 iii LIQ_ ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD:NEW YORK - - _ -------------------- x In the Matter of the Application of },t1,//j � AFFIDAVIT OF f (Na+Al) plicants) MAILINGS CTM Parcel#1000- - - COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) STATE OF NEW YORK) I, anv )(1 I, residing at ,... /F , 4 ,,,, , , , New York, being duly sworn, depose and say that: 1 . / On the 60 day of j , 2001, I personally mailed at the United States Post Office in / .:' , , New York, by CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT RIUE r.ED, a true copy of the attached Legal Notice in prepaid envelopes a•dressed to current owners shown a he current • assessment roll verified from the official -cord_s on file with the ( Assessors, or ( ) County Reel Property Office �f, /a , for every property which abuts and is across a pu tic or private street, or vehicular right-of- way of record, surrounding the applica. . prope ;,. 0 / (Signature) S orn to before me this Z day of 0,/// y , 200 r • ELIZABETH A STATHIS i / I /�i NOTARY PUBLIC,State of New York • _ / _ ,_ ! 'U.S. Postal , rvit- E-rIFIE II. MAIL RE • • (Domestic Mail Only;No Insurance Covera•e Provided _a 113 [71 11370 ,,L- ' ' ..- " ,• .-I Postage $ 0.34 UNIT ID: 0944 EI:1 143 _II Certified Fee 1.90 Postmark ru 1. Return Receipt Fee 1.50 Here (Endorsement Required) CI 1::1 Restricted Delivery Fee Clerk: KWXM7S CI (Endorsement Required) 1=1 • 3.74 05/23/01 Total Postage&Fees $ r,- _a Sent To giLeic, r-q . im Street,4tot No"11;4_,Box No _..2fr. (1. 7 4-Th En _ ig, Cif S te,ZIP+4- r%- % ak &/11 -I2- 7/ 0 PSLhDrm 3800.Ma 2000 See Reverse for In t it U.S. Postal ervice ` CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPT Domestic Mail Onl:•No Insurance Covera•e Provi•e. [T" 4. - m 11939) 1; , :; I] `-qPostage $ 034 UNIT Ir(, 0944 .13_ a Certified Fee �. 1.90 Postmark il.l Return Receipt Fee 1.50 SnHere (Endorsement Required)CI a 1=1RestRestricted4cted Delivery Fee � Q�', �7'S p � O (Endorsement Required) SX Wim 3/01 Z. Total Postage&Fees 3�f4 Oo rq SetTo ® A 6� a l J,� 4_��c72iv ` - - 1=1 Stre`� y(y4 y[PO,B�9,8`plo/, d�✓/Z4� -� " f 0 City,Sta-, IP+4 ' /l P F.rm :ii c .y iii ''. U.S. Postal -rvi - CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPT • ' 'omestrc 'at "any;r 10 nsuranceoverage' •row.e. ru ru Postage $ 12- ,--910.34NIT IB 0944 co Certified Fee 1n0 Postmark RJ Return Receipt Fee 1=1 (Endorsement Required) 1.J4 � l� Restricted Delivery Fee ler /A�.d r�f J G'Q • (Endorsement Required) Q, �O�t ` tm im Total Postage&Fees 3.74 �c-�y�O=�l'rs- -�'�1 a rl Se \ O p Street, pt No, Box No 101) f C y t -ZfP+ PS Form 3800,May 4 I s ee Reverse for Instruc io - ▪ ► Kcimomivinig 9xotoil-KKeel»*I'x1:11:.44e11010K01#10»1►via:e' ■ Complete items 1,2,and 3.Also complete A. -eceived b, (PI-ase Print Clearly) B. ate o�Delivery item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. 1 at()r �! � • Print your name and address on the reverse so that we can return the card to you. C. Sig` Irl I • Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, X ! �❑Agent or on the front if space permits. Addressee D I •.. - addre event from item 1 ❑Yes 1. Article Addressed to: If YES,enter delivery address below 'No ? .9 . a.5-.5-5- ea- Iii-ele,e1 6V4u- $7 ) 3.,S9rGiceType 4A-41-7q/ Certified Mail 0 Express Mail 0 Registered 0 Return Receipt for Merchandise .1; , ��f 0 Insured Mad ❑ C.O.D. 0 I( / 4. Restricted Delivery?(Extra Fee) 0 Yes 2 Article Number(Copy from service label) t ,{•�-�►/� •(•� 'n/� ? i E i if i i i ' i ITi r� :l0 10 V ViS t ? 1 ISE I �i iiE 1 PS Firm 38 fill, ly i 9991 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Domestic Return Receipt 102595-00-M-0952 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE First-Class Mail 111111 Postage&Fees Paid USPS Permit No.G-10 J • Sender: Please print your name, address, and ZIP+4 in this box • FAIRWEATHER•BROWN DESIGN ASSOCIATES,INC. 413 Main Street P.O. Box 521 Greenport, N.Y. 11944 631-477-9752(fax)631-477-0973 4 3.3 :i lit€ilii!111t1itibllilttlilitttltltttltltttllttltltttl(iltttl SENDER:COMPLETE THIS SECTION r" oND111,741Pl4a ■ Complete items 1,2,and 3 Also complete A. R ceived by(Please Print Clearly) B D.te of lelivery item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired �( Q cc- to KO Z(p 0/ • Print your name and address on the reverse so that we can return the card to you. C Signature �/ • Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, X /C�� 4� ir/y" 0 Agent or on the front if space permits. I 0 Addressee D Is delivery address different from item 1? 0 Yes 1. Article Addressed to If YES,enter delivery address below 0 No L-61e6r-i.A...." Yirk"t"-- 41.**) 0". /A• 3 Service Type 117(.11-0 ____ 0 Certified Mail 0 Express Mail ❑ Registered 0 Return Receipt for Merchandise ❑ Insured Mail ❑C O.D 71't /�-7e 4. Restricted Delivery?(Extra Fee) ❑Yes 2 Article Number(Copy from service label) PS Form 3811,July 1999 Domestic Return Receipt 102595-99-M-1789 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE First-lass Mail 11 Posta «Fee YPaid USPS Permit No G-10 • Sender: Please print your name, address, and ZIP+4 in this box • FAIRWEATHER•BROWN DESIGN ASSOCIATES,INC. 413 Ma(n Street P.O. Box 521 Greenport, N.Y. 11944 631477-9752(fax)631-477-0973 1,,,11,,,I 11,1,,,111 I,I„I 11,,,,I,I,,,i,I,,,I I„I,1,111111,,,I J r 41110 FAIRWEATHER-BROWN DESIGN ASSOCIATES,INC. P.O.Box 521 413 Main Street Greenport,N.Y. 11944 631-477-9752 (fax)631-477-0973 Date 4/12/01 Adjoining lots to: Name Walz,Roger&Leslie SCTM# 1000-037-6-5.1 Edward A. &Virginia Thorp 12 Norcross Street Rockville Centre, New York 11570 -66.1 Ralph Martin,Jr. 2555 Old Orchard Lane East Marion, New York 11939 37-6-4 Donald H. &Elizabeth Frazier 1821 Mooring Line Drive Apt 3 F Vero Beach, Florida 32963 .2a6 ' \05- 14 , ,._. OU �^ /___._ STi4TE ®F N�1i11 Y®RK) (I LvEGAL NOTICEl )SS. NOTICE�OF PUBLICHEARINGS I =JNTY®F UFF®L ) SOUTHOLD BOARD OF • APPEALS i YiptriMt) of Mattituck, in said THURSDAY,JUNE 7,2001 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, county, being duly sworn, says that he/she is Principal pursuant to Section 267 of the Town clerk of THE SUFFOLK TIMES,a weekly newspaper,pub- ! Law and Chapter 100 (Zoning); lished at Mattituck, in the Town of Southold, County of Code of the Town of Southold, the following application will be heard at +a public hearing by the SOUTHOLD Suffolk and State of New York,and that the Notice of which TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS at i the annexed is a printed copy, has been regularly pub- , the Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, lished in said Newspaper once each week Southold, New York 11971, on ,THURSDAY,JUNE 7,2001, at the for 1 weeks successively, commencing time noted below(or as soon there- the 3( day after as possible):" - • - on 7:05 p.m. Appl. No. '4962 — of 4 20 OM ROGER J. and LESLIE WALZ. This is a request for a Variance under CHRISTINA T. EBER I ' �, Article XXIV, Section 100-242A, Notary Public,State of Ne4i York. _,4 J based on the Building Inspector's No.01WE6034554 _ifgA_ May 2, 2001 Notice of Disapproval Qua6iied in Suffolk County ` Prince,al Clerk (as corrected) regarding applicants' proposed second-story addition to ' 31 Commission Expires december i3, existing dwelling. The Notice of ; Sworn to before me this Disapproval states that the existing 20 0 1 structure has a nonconforming set- day of back of three feet from the easterly side lotj line and 6.5 feet from the west side ,we, and as a result, the . C:16 er `.`A\C --addition of the second-story repre- V sents an increase in the degree of nonconformity.Location of Property: i , 2505 Old Orchard Road, East ' Marion,NY;Parcel 1000-37-6-5. i G The Board of Appeals will hear all persons, or their representative, desiring to be heard at the hearing,or desiring to submit written statements before the conclusion of the above hearing. This hearing will not start earlier than designated. Files are- available for review during regular Town Hall business hours(8-4 p.m.). If you have questions,please do not hesitate to call(631)765-1809. Dated:May 25,2001 GERARD P.GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS Town Hall 53095 Main Road P.O.Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971-0959 1898-1TMy31 and lot um 19,534+-so.ft.to (Continued from previc ,tmg 1 f, <1 14,512 t f J('J (� ((�� 14,512 s lite-increase t ad ' This is a request for A owing dog — frontage au�.�t size for the in- Variances based on 1 ing lot. Both lots are improved. Department's April 12,proposed eon- STATE OF NEW YORK) Location of Property: 1380 Village of Disapproval: (1) p p Lane, Orient;Parcel No. 1000-25-1- ti n tof 20%clot a the overage,eArticle )SS: 27. • NE XXIV, Section 100-244B; (2) the OUNTY OF SUFFOLK) 6:40ER. Appis a requ— _ pool is proposed partlyin O U � � W LER. This a request for a a ide-arrd instead of entirely in the of l\/Iattituck, In said Variance under Article XXIV, y Section 100-244B, based on the rear yard,Article III,Section 100-33; Building Inspector's•April 4, 2001 (3)proposed addition is requested in County, being duly sworn, says that he/she is Principal Notice of Disapproval which states this amendment at less than 35 ft. Clerk O$THF SUFFOLK TIDES,a weekly newspaper,pub- that the proposed deck addition will from the rear line, under Article be less than 35 feet from the rear XXIV, Section 100-244B. Location: Iished at Mattituck, in the Town of Southold, County Of property line and will exceed the 2705 Gillette Drive, East Marion; Suffolk and State of New York,and that the Notice of which the annexed is a printed copy, has been-regularly pub- maximum-permitted lot coverage of 1000-38-3-18. 20%. Location of Property: 2530 Gillette Drive, East Marion; Parcel lished in said Newspaper once each week 1000-38-2-26.The lot size is approxi- for weeks successively, commencing mately 10,500 sq.ft. t ' 6:45 p.m. Appl.No.4959—DE`�1- Dn the "I day TIS AND DESIREE O'CLAIR. )f 20 Q This is a request for a Variance, based on the Building InspectoY's CHRISTINAT.WEBER April 30,2001 Notice of Disapproval - T e_- ra1ud Notary Public,State of Naw York `7 CLQ /37 regarding applicant's wnew dwelling No 01WE6t)34554 '~ construction,and a request to amend Coatlied in Suffolk County Principal Clerk Building Permit #26098 issued r Gc..-.cc.c:•Expiras December 13, Rescheduled for July 12,2001 October 28, 1999 for a two-story, 34-}-4' - one-family dwelling, full cellar, 2nd by applicant's attorney. �, a l.` floor mezzanine,screened porch with 7:40 p.m..Appl.No.4906 for 'worn to before me this trellis, attached three-car garage as R LYN a request .ay of 0iti20 t� applied for. The Notice of Variances under Article III, Section /� III, Sect on states at under cle 100-33 100-244B, based ie on theV, Section Building 'I ' . ^ /�. I . �%� III, Section 100-32, Bulk Schedule, (,L I IINN the height of one-family dwellings is Department's May 10,2001 Notice of restricted to 2 1/2 stories and pro- Disapproval for a swimming pool in a posed construction shows 3rd story side yard location and February 12, habitable space. Location of 2001 Aitiended • Notice of Property: 1492 Skunk Lane, Disapproval for a deck addition and Cutchogue;Parcel 1000-97-3-11.8. step area at s th n 20 feet frton om the side 6:50 p.m. Appl No. 4866 — property f NORMA MILLER. Applicant- Property: Crescent Avenue and Owner is requesting a Special Avenue B,Fishers Island;1000-6-2-9 Exception under Article III,Section and 6-1-15,combined as lot. o. — 100-30A.2B and 100-31B, sub-sec- 8:10 p.m. App l.tions 14A-d of the Southold Town MICHAEL REDICLI'ON•This is Zoning Code for approval of an a request for a Variance,based on the Accessory Use as a Bed and Building Inspector's March 26,2001 Breakfast for transient use of two Notice of Disapproval under Article ' bedrooms for lodging and serving of III,Section 100-33,for permission to breakfast to not more than four (4) locate a tennis court structure in a - casual,transient roomers,in conjunc- front yard area at 5700 Nassau Point tion with owner-applicant's resi- Road (and Wunneweta Road), dente. Location of Property: 12920 Cutchogue;Parcel 1000-ppl. 11111 49611— 'Main Road, East Marion; Parcel 8:15 ROBERTmand PATRICIA WI 1L- 1000-31-14-14. HE This is a request for a 7:05 p.m. -Appl. No 4962 — RO ER *_ ' NDD LESLIE WALZ. Variance, based on the Building This is a request for a Variance under Inspector's May 14, 2001 Notice of Article XXIV, Section 100-242A, Disapproval under Article-XXIV, based on the Building Inspector's Section 100-242A, which states that May 2, 2001 Notice of Disapproval the existingre has a e the lot oncon- regarding applicant's proposed sec-• forming setback from e on and story addition to existing East Club Road, and second story dwelling.The Notice of Disapproval addition shown at 36 feet,outside of states that the existing structure has a the building footprint,from front lot _nonconforming setback of three feet line,an increase in the degree of non- LEGAL NOTICE from the easterly side lot line and 9.9 conformance.Applicant proposes to NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS resultt,,o thehaddit onof the west de line,and as a add a second-story addition at.less second than 50 feet from e front property $O RD OF OADPPEALS TOWN BOARDAPPEALS story represents an increase in the line. Location: 6675 Nassau Point Location of Road, Cutchogue; Parcel 1000-111- TIiUItSDAY,JUNE 7,2001 degree of nonconformity,505 Old Orchard Road, 15-7. — NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, Property: pursuant to Section 267 of the Town East Marion,NY;Pa 1 er1�-37-4955— �'8D00S ANDERSON owner 21 - Law and Chapter 100(Zoning)Code 7:10 p.m. PP Applicants of the Town of Southold,the follow- HENRY L•ThERG)Js is request for request Hvarian variances Articlean ing hearing obwill heard at a pub- LD VM• I lit hearing by the SOUTHOLD Variances, based on the Building XXIII, Section 100-239.4A.1, based TOWN BOARD5OF APPEALS at 3095 ain Road,' Disapproval which pril 11, lthaNotice per- December on the 20, ng 2000 Notice enof the Town Hall, THURSDAY.New JNNE 7 200171, on mit for an at the museum buildings denied for the Disapproval, e backsoat'less than 100 feetdwelling gwith from Builreasons: (a) an 30 feet after noted below(or as soon there- Section following00-32 equires a Article III, the top of the for combined side yard seless tbacks,and aft 6possible): feet;and 6:30rop- BERT AN AKA 4956 — Articont learXXIV, Section0100-243A(b) ertythan line.4Location from of Property:un T�- LAWRENCE. This is a request for the reason that the proposed Lighthouse Road,Southold;1000-5 - underArticle II,Section 100-26 for a addition will increase the size of this 2-2.Thed- Board of-Appeals will hear all Lot Waiver been unmerge two merged as as ing,nonconforming an increase indential n the personsrer their representative,desiring which have + deemed os a ing, g single 40,500+-sq.ft.lot due to corn- overall buildingfootprintt Location more of submite statements ntsrdesiring to , the mon ownership as confirmed by the than 15 percent. writtenof the above sbeforethe Building'Inspector's March 13,2001 Property: Equestrian Avenue, conclusionng will not start earlier ehearing.han Thisig Notice of Disapproval under Article Fishers Island,NY;Parcel 1000-9-4- heheard Fileswiare start review sig- II, Section 100-25A. Location of ' 11.1. n regular Town Hallbforsrevie dur- Property: 465 and 605 Eastwood 7:15 AIEMONY Appl. No. 4955 —CAROL (8-4 p.m.).If you have questions,please Drive, 0-3-2 ogee, NY; Parcel No. MITAROTONDO.This is a request • do not hesitate to call(631)765-1809. 1000-110 3-20 and 21. basedBuilding Dated:May21,2001., -- — 6:35 p.m. Appl.No.4957—DON- for a Variance, on the GEARD P GOEHRINGER, _®LD McNEI •This is a request for Inspector's March 23,2001 Notice of CHAIRMAN a Variance under Article IIIA, Disapproval.Applicant is requesting SOUTHOLD TOWN Section 100-30A.3,Bulk Schedule of a side yard location of an accessory BOARD OF APPEALS the Zoning Code, based on the structure instead of the required rear Building Inspector's April 30, 2001 yard.Location of Property:950 Little Town Hall 53095 MainRoad Notice of Disapproval concerning a , Peconic •Bay Road, Cutchogue; P.O.Box 1179d proposed lot line change. Applicant., Parcel 1000-111-14-15. (Amen- Southold,NY 11971-0959 proposes to reduce-the road frontage"-, 7:20 p.m.DONALDo B.No. U3KARD. '°"" 'T"``n4 of one lot from 122 feet to 102+-feet ded) t U6 • SO ',X\V NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING • SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS THURSDAY, JUNE 7, 2001 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Section 267 of the Town Law and Chapter 100 (Zoning), Code of the Town of Southold, the following application will be heard at a public hearing by the SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS at the Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York 11971, on THURSDAY, JUNE 7, 2001, at the time noted below (or as soon thereafter as possible): 7:05 p.m. Appl. No. 4962 — ROGER J. and LESLIE WALZ. This is a request for a Variance under Article XXIV, Section 100-242A, based on the Building Inspector's May 2, 2001 Notice of Disapproval regarding application's proposed second story addition to existing dwelling. The Notice of Disapproval states that the existing structure has a nonconforming setback of three feet from the easterly side lot line and 9.9 feet from the west side line, and as a result, the addition of the second-story&represents an increase in the degreeof nonconformity. Location , of Property: 2505 Old Orchard Road, East Marion, NY; Parcel 1000-37-6-5. The Board of Appeals will hear all persons, or their representative, desiring to be heard at the hearing, or desiring to submit written statements before the conclusion of the above hearing. This hearing will not start earlier than designated. Files are available for review during regular Town Hall business hours (8-4 p.m.). If you have questions, please do not hesitate to call (631) 765-1809. Dated: May 18, 2001. GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS Town Hall 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 S OFFICE OF 410 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 53095 Main Road Southold, NY 11971 (631) 765-1809 fax (631) 765-9064 May 18, 2001 Re: Chapter 58— Public Notice for Thursday, June 7, 2001 Hearing-(aJa ) Dear Sir or Madam: �` Please find enclosed a copy of the Legal Notice describing the recent application. The Notice will be published in the next issue of the Suffolk Times. Pursuant to Chapter 58 of the Southold Town Code (copy enclosed), formal notice of your application and hearing must be now mailed with a map or sketch showing the construction area or variance being considered. Send the enclosed Notice CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED, on Tuesday, May 29th, or sooner, including a copy of a map showing your project area, to all owners of land (vacant or improved) surrounding yours, including land across any street or right-of-way that borders your property. Use the current addresses shown on the assessment rolls maintained by the Town Assessors' Office (765-1937) or the County Real Property Office in Riverhead. If you know of another address for a neighbor, you may want to send the notice to that address as well. When picking up the sign, a $15 check will be requested for each metal stand as a deposit. If you already have a sign and stand and only need the laminated printout for the face of the sign, an additional deposit is not necessary and we can mail or fax it to you. Please post the Town's official poster/sign no later than May 31, 2001. Securely place the sign on your property facing the street, no more than 10 feet from the front property line bordering the street. (If you border more than one street or roadway, an extra sign is furnished for each front yard.) The sign(s) must remain in place for at least seven (7) days, and should remain posted through the day of the hearing. If you need a replacement sign, please contact us. By June 4th, please submit to our office your Affidavit of Mailing (copy enclosed) with parcel numbers noted for each, and return it with the white receipts postmarked by the Post Office. Later, when the green signature cards are returned to you by the Post Office, please mail or deliver them to us (but not later than the date of the hearing). If any signature card is not returned, please advise the Board at the hearing. At or before the hearing on June 7th, 2001, after the signs have been in place for seven (7) days, please submit your Affidavit of Posting to our office. These will kept in the permanent record. (If the metal stands are returned to our office, your deposit will be returned.) If you do not meet the deadlines stated in this letter, please contact us promptly. Thank you for your cooperation. Very truly yours, ZBA Board Members and Staff Enclosures gig - - , ,,,,. „ ,.-::=; : :, . INFT • ittiort I wi;:„,9! -_ _ A ., -,, , , A: ' 1 . , . - • r Ed - -Li-, -4 _rn ,.. . „ „,.., ., ,,., . ,,. .. , , 7„....:, ,, ,. .,--;-„:_:,:. , , .. ,, ,_. ,_ „, ._ , , , „.• ,, 1 I ;,'. '2 - 11111 - - ,,„., '':; ..s7-I.,. ',, n.. , • • . ,._ . -. .‘ _ .‘• .,,..., • ,' , . . _ .... ____ --, •4 --.-i , 1--. -A, _ . .; ,. .. T. •I Pi inim. . WA LZ ...,„ • . .., , N D STORY . % ,4.i ,,, z .• •,',',.'. pIANcE FOR 2 „. . . • ,_. DATION N 0 N ..... 431: :•,';,',,:.1r • ',k _A ItiFoRMI NG SETBACK ..„ ) tif '. W I g 7 Air , . . wai 1 , ,,, ......_,.. , CM490 .. , •,. !i. ,., :- t V,100 r ; f t. ...- RIAMIMMENEMEMMe .7.H 4 i i v 1.- .. , !' ... m , _._., . N . - a a 0 a - 111 0,,s, , ,.. • -; 1 ., - - . . _ • . ,1 you are invited .,to view the , , i ' . • i I • H, ii il 1 Llitalt fling aka hi tills! . iltitirilTh . • R. R qY ;% • 'Z' d//+6. dby/� A./a'R .ISP A O9 h Gam, 42, ,, .. 4,4,. # #., . O a /R /• R ;• c/ l4 '/ ti�i . e \s / R`X ,.s \ + d .. •t>/'e; G,;, \` 1, h i y ry .� ''a 4�C Ai a r++'•„,.` \`\ ♦ • pp° a ppm; ,�3$•\ v+\ /V1 •\\ ° o�. ��$'+oO i d .� °• BpYV1 is p{i. •• y' © `\ T ——, — 111100444, - 1 I ems`\'' ._ 6 e i y d I n^ 1N \`+ `� ` 3,3 w\�,/1 III r \\ \`\ 22.1/% r '• m / I BAYVIEW ” d " er ew Z,-..„.... 11 '� 1 \3 •`+\3 / r M 1 I 4 • '--,-.:,--.-ra d• II_ 1.7AIc1 1 Am M°ua 1 w ry I 4I I.$ e/ vw�E„"E 4 * e a la rar a .) //"" ” ,a rsu.D M 7 a ,a+ •°A. 9�/ Pam zsarc urn V® O 11 W p ' , / seams e ORIENT h i ---".......SARBOR \" _, w ' � W°w SEE 3EC N0.ll7 \ww \\'' .. 6 / 1 . \ 1 '.(30 \ ` r` �� /° 1 �19� 11ry 16 \`�\ - ,� / •L.. 11 fJOp - i e m ` \4,\ ..‘ , / i, , g ., 41(1/t(*7,as 1 ..'2, `+d e%r`u`y ♦ / .g M.900v Nppe.p L Rm.„N r Ai IA,. fr. .. mr.DeD — -- ,,so,lk. --sa— n..N 01.,rs',ti--N-- UMLESS DRAM O7,ER`UE, ALL PpATATF3 SECTION NC E ,,,„„m,,,pm„ P..,,4., �.D„, — m,N,�„N LIR R 4RE WITHIN t NOTICE COUNTY OF SUFFOLK K on max pf —0.— .N�,A,d .. c41, °°„”` 0 �a ldPm —f-- -- -- 5Pe0 'a.MD ^�°DISTRICT. ©LE OR Re Property Tax Service Agency v souTHolo E MP*l,f lti M_ - .n Nr d.eei lM --P-- W,.faOR1M t-- PRE M RYWR pg7PoNU710N,ALTERATION,POR7SA OF INE , O 3'7 N A® WO..... „. AA..l°• --- CRP MOW u. --l-- rmn..UR•/ -- 1°' m County Center Riverhead,N Y 11901 wp velJg a I D wars 23�^ Nebra 1212,21 or 12.131a.A1A. ----� er*S„mt Wo --P-- af..,fr a„'.\ A-- PA�uRae •OSI3Afd SUFFOLK WRITTEN PE W GE NE p ii, (22 N Irv] 121 Mc) imp.11. ----- Tar peck,W. --N-- \ REAL PROPERTY IAN SFAV6E AGENCY SCLLE NM: 1C— 'N A 212301 b 1000 //�N PROPERTY h \ ajal.,/ \\ b • , _ . , _ . f I 2 3 A -` 50 I I l 17 10 II I2 I � - C--- ! \ C _ N". . I LOCO J J . '. :1- __ ((j\) ....._ _ _______._. _ _... __ ___ ._. ____________.__ _ , , _, . _.____ __ . ...,____ _ , _ , „, , _ __ .__ __ _____ _ __ __ . _ .___ _ ____. ____ , ..__ _ __ _ ______ _ ___ ___ ... __ . ._, =__ . . . ,_. __ _ _ _ ____ __ , , . . ,4) , . . ___ . . , • , . ,. .. _._ _ . . . 1 . , , . , . , . ___ , 1 , _ . , , . . . . ,, . _ _ _ . ____ . . _ , _ _ _ .." _ _ _ _ __ _ __. „ . . _. __ __ - -) FIN.FLK. ' 0 if. (bh-J/0-419 ' . _ : _ 1' ' LL G , . _ ___. ... _ . __ 1----. . _ _ L3 FIrd.FLK. t' ' __ _ _ r OZ _ c 200 I (V J f1 ALL KiG1-hT3 KELAF:VED EAST TF'ESE PLANS AFLL AN ItJSTPUN FtiT OL SEKViCE AND AKE 7F'E PKOF'EKTY OF SCALE.: I/.:-.'= 10" TIDE AKCI-11TEM CT. INFF;INGEEtNTD WILL • [ E PKOScCUTFD. I !_ I _ ri I_I - ■ -- - 1 ■ r ' ›< , si 1 , ___ .___ _ ., . o ---1 - in , , m -1 r______ ___ _ ...) _ _ . . . , • . (....) __ _ - ;-- 4_, f t___ 12 - (s) V'✓ALZ RESIDENCE 2505 OLD ORCHARD LN. 10 ._ '} TY F'. ALL. SPED F;00F5. Q EAST MARION, N.Y. n , , ,_ , , . n _. - :. _ _ r ?- i <C 7' C ADDITION - __ i . -F.. CD ' FCAF' - , -- -- ' � F' � ! I (TY 'F'). I, '� ELLVATION5 0 . .. . . . , oz ,_________ _,_, _ . . . = _ ---, ,r;..LK. CO MAY ��]Q� 1/4". 1 = I1-01 n MAY 0I, 2001 1 '/ WEST z IT IS A VIOLATION OF THE IEAED qA SCALE: 1/4 = o" LAUNLESS SS AC NG UNDEFOR ANY R THE re' Ov � , "TO <• A DIRECTION OFA LICENSED .A, W ARCHITECT,TO ALTER ANY * r <. - ITEM ON THIS DRAWING IN ANY WAY.ANY AUTHORIZED ' j "''' ALTERATION MUST BES '� NOTED,SEALED,AND i+�"-�+u p� _ DESCRIBED IN ACCORDANCE , ,w 0026 WITH THE LAW. AC' . .. _ „ , (4g:!) , I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 I I 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 I G I 7 cv in N. a> 1 K N..N-.1- 1 ___ o ' 1- J 0--) \ `)-6. , . >— 7 / 64— - \ . e OHi 1-1 OQ O� G \ D \ PROPOSED 2ND FFC' ' . Z 0 � • 0 ADDITION TO EXISTI"'IL W �O �% / ' PA \ 1 STORY FRAME. HO'.. E. N Ili N 0, No ✓ ,3�vq G Z\ A ! IV -9 of \ \ c o ,.s, 2. , G H 70, 0 \ _ : ,r, ! Ill O .< 1 ,...,_ ..\ • 1 ! lil ,-, \ ' H C2001 \ 0 OG ( (1 All. f IGt-ITS F'ESEFVED ( i � \ v JJ 7, Th'CSE FiAN`-'i AFC AN It!5TF'LlMENT OF \ $ • 5EF',VICE AND AF'F Th-',F F'F',OF'ERTY O" ?; ' Th'E AF'Ch-'ITFCT. iN`F'INGE^GUTS Will ! \ \ \ 1 < E !llF'F F'F'0 EC!JTf U. \CS;\ ed \ \ V ____ _1 ______T- \ \ . c\.] i \ ‘• Pa.( in1 oU x E Y6, \ ,,:e„ 0 \ ey, ,. BASED ON • \ / \ MAP SURVEYED FOR / \ 0 ROGERJ. F LESLIE WALZ \ Z AT / • — EAST MARION TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, N.Y. \ / \ Ns5 WALZ RESIDENCE SUFFOLK COUNTY TAX MAP INFO: / �A.��� D 1000-037-6-5 \ Q�,� W 2505 OLD ORCHARD LN. LOT NO.'S REFER TOMAP OF GARDINERS / Q0.•-, .L., E- EAST MARION, N.Y. BAY ESTATES SECT. 2, FLED IN THE \ • O- -,. < SUFF.CO.CLERIcS OPFFICE AS MAP 275. I ; 2 -2,, .......; 4 i r--,- ......../ G 7 E.) (...7.::. ‘,...,,, 10 1 1 12 13 14 15 1 C-*) 17 .... ....... , C\.1 N.- (5) I..... 1\ N--- 71- .0„ 1 12 0 .. \ (..o sc, 12 10 ,/ ; •,'-) Z .,,. . .:. _ 1- J \ 1- li G.) Z ' \:\ : I C,' TYDCAL. ---. 1 1 , • 'N\ >-..- 6 . 12 -- CE_DAP ECAPD -- -'---. \ , 6 Ar\r.) fiATTP1 ..._.:‘: .., ; LY EIL FLMOYE FY STI'lr,; sflirJG 0 r4r,v SIDING 51-',A1.1. Fr_ 0-- -- )'"FON /1123300 (4-1/21-1-1.) YE1LOW CEDAP, FLF,EECTIOrIc) z • 5-1/2 ± EXFOSUr-,.. , ------+ , - EYCFF'T AS NOTED. 111 a -_= -- - : ------ ------ \ - ,- - t7 , -- _ _ __ ---- - --- ._ _ UI -- - - - - /-I/4 CA n/. , , , , 1 , , u5._ . -- 3-12 CFF , CD - - - - ,-- - 1 : ---- COF'fIEF'.. OC C) 1 , I c., , I . , . . LU , FIN FEF',.— 1 : . , , . IA 1 , __ _ : , ___ _ -_- _-_-------- : __. _ 1-- c 2n()I n...... ,Tr:-:::-,7\,F:Fir:LiTr;:r,:i.i::,'CAn;fri:c1,1:1rFF-r-oFrliTr,,,,1^;_,,,y-roc:- ; <--- 7-1-![. APC1--ITECT. NH'!IN,-,E.t,/,'NTS WILL / SCALE: 1/4H= 10' i SE F'F'091'C-UTED. .4.'7*. . _ r - (N.1 ---- In _:. >< - o I . Ca -E) 1 I I \-3- ----------- - \ - \\ 1p • ,------ -----,„, (n E3 : --- - -- -t- -\ - \ C', - F_:\OA P,11) 4 bATTEN N71.11rz __) ___ _ __ _ __,____,:;, NNN , \ (I) VVAI 7 FTSIDENCE _.... _ _ „... , _ __ \\NN \\„_____- \\ LU 2505 OLD OKCHARD LN. . ,, . , ' --1 H 1--- ...\:"\\---______ EAST MARION, N.Y. ; --------- -s, .1,----,-- - r' -- . -------:----- - - - ' -\-- (.......) r U D 5 0 n P,IVEF'. MILLS NF,T,05 SOLID DACN.CP,0',".1.1 — 1 0 . , (TY1'). : I , \ (.1-) 1"xG'' FASCIA - # : ----. ,------- I- --- 1 \ j (TYF'). 1l , ;'xG FLAT TPIM -- # 11 (TYF')........„.. .ir,4./: , 7. FASCIA F3D. F IN LF ..-- :! ADDITION C , H '. C...D • : : : 'r .. 7 -.-- -, _ (f)-- ---------- - -- ----------- ------- , - --, , , „._ _ LU , • , , ,„ . „ 1 . , : „ , - - •---- : I ;>-I FLAT IF IM ----- , _4. . , , - -______, _ . . . , I . . . . 6 __ ___ , . _ . _ _ . 1 [ . u_ < 11-1 I I „ Q 1- : 1 . , 6 * u:. L) u - N - 0- a ELEVATIONS . .. . , cm 1 : : : _.. , , ' 7-- 0 ._ _'__ 1 F ... .,,,..--.., 0/ I --,.---F II.F-1 P.1 ( co MAY 2 4 2001 , _________ . _________ _ ________:„__„__ i,/,1 - I _GI _ ____ i . MAY 0 1 . 2001 SOUTH .. FOR ANY PERSON, . ",..,,,A VIOLATION OF THE .. ,4 -cED Art,/y/i, LU r _ I. ESS ACTING UNDER THE (4Z-1/ CP .N, SCALE: I/<1,"= I'0 2CTION OF A LICENSED ,,...rA.,,„..,.:Li h- 1--- ' d : MITECT,TO ALTER ANY -, ', ON THIS DRAINING IN < • , I ' i WAY.ANY AUT:,..ORIZED OF : .;.. 9 LU . „ SEALEDAND'RATION MUST BE '' -1414'634A—J ',....,, ......\ N , ,....---- \ .. I, . 1`:.:11IBED IN ACCORDANCE .: • NE.std"'&23 -----, .---- ,- .” I THE LAW. —\ / ....' -- . ..---- _.„.,.........„,... ..„.. . , 1 2 3 4 5 G 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 I G I 7 ...,, ___.:.:. . .:: _::: .,:• :_•., • „ c\i is)�4 in N... 10-) , N- N 1- m <0 • 1- J O) ,AN. ` s ,„ , • .o / • °� z ./-- \ . / a��� \ 0530 d�G-� 3 0 D \ - PROPOSED 2ND FLOCK CLz 0 2 z, I ADDITION TO EXISTING W O % / GPa_PG \ I STORY FRAME HOUSE. N W 1OZ 0,,,\ '\14 \ A ' i � � � � \ \ G o � \, • ., • W <", � • W�� \ opo \ "1` .y \ 2001 QG ((1 ALL RIGhTS f'.ESFRVED • 6\0\ \ z TL'ESE FLANS ARE AN INSTRUMENT OF \ $ . ., : — SERVICE AND ARE THE F'ROF'ERTY OF TF E ARCF'ITECT. INFRINGEMENTS 'A'IL. 15E PROSECUTED. \ . : \ . ‘. 1 f \e- . co I1 . , ,c,,(--. , \, ..... c _ , \ \ 1- 1 \ \ N - \ \ ` p7t1 `— 1, x F� \ '`43-.- 0F\ y, A Co Y7� / \ 4' BASED ON \ / • _• MAP SURVEYED FOR , / \ U ROGER J. Y LESLIE WALZZ AT \ /EAST MARION TOWN OF SOUTh1OLD, N.Y. cS SUFFOLK COUNTY TAX MAP INFO: / W WALZ RESIDENCE D 1 000-037-6-5 / � � 2505 OLD ORCHARD LN. LOT NO.'S REFER TO MAP OF GARDINERS EAST MARION, N.Y. \ BAY ESTATES SECT. 2, FILED IN THE O� • SUFF.CO.CLERKS OPFFICE AS MAP 275. i U \ /0 V J\ / Qs'� cn = - _ <C • / �� z C ADDITION . ,s-, ,c0 CD a \ /e ,,,<•- c,..../ SITE PLAN \/ � tiW � o SCALE: I "=20'0" Z SITE PLAN O 3 co MAR-'1 6 2001 - co 1 200 MAR. 15, 2001 OZ W rT Is A VIOLATION OF THE �EPED ARc,�,LAW FOR ANY PERSON, - UNLE S ACTING UNDER THE ��� ,..,?,...t I eq. �• 1--- DIRECTION OF A LICENSED Q� O� 0A < ,,,____ __,. , ARCHITECT TO ALTER ANY . . ' ITEM ON THIS DRAWING IN * W ANY WAY.ANY AUTHORIZED ' 1 t,,:, ,; ALTERATION MUST BE ;74 _ _ , NOTED,SEALED,AND ` -- DESCRIBED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAW. �' 16341 yOQ� '$,..,., _0,_N,. oz <C 0026 W >o O t.0q. \ PROPOSED 2ND FLOOR ADDITION TO EXISTING GONG 1 STORY FRAME HOUSE. COQ O \ ora i / �i �Gt N O Gp \ cp 6 \ �o 6, - ,<\ \ 0 \ 0 OG <\ \ \ $ \ \ ° y 2� \ ,, t. . \ \ • \ \ • . \ \ ,Z-- Q CTh C) \ �` (, Q �� / \ � / \ BASED ON MAP SURVEYED FOR / \ ROGER J. LESLIE WALZ \ AT - EAST MARION TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, N.Y. \ / \ -S� SUFFOLK COUNTY TAX MAP INFO: / ,P.:, ���� 1000-037-6-5 / \ .4 LOT NO.'S REFER TO MAP OF GARDINERS BAY ESTATES SECT. 2, PILED IN THE \ O� SUFF.CO.CLERKS OPFFICE AS MAP 275. p/ \ NOTE: EVERThING SHOWN IS EXISTING EXCEPT AS NOTED. \ / c9 \ / T 6Th s \ /0 U 0 ��j . ,-40 ,..„ SITE ELAN \/ (oil/e „ _.) SCALE: 1"=20'0”