Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5068 / itvka) •/ C abg-- /H '/r/Dz - y • - /0/3/02r - G,gir u d ca/eo-ndns APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS of %%FFO(,� ' Southold Town Hall \J ���+��®• ® 53095 Main Road Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman • Lydia A. Tortora a .' P.O. Box 1179 George Horning ' r�$ Southold, New York 11971-0959 pZ Ruth D. Oliva -' ®��� ZBA Fax (631) 765-9064 �o DV. Vincent Orlando ®� ��,do Telephone (631)765-1809 );3D9" ., .-•'� http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF OCTOBER 3, 2002 Appl. No. 5068 — CHRISTINE and GLENN DAWSON Property Location: 150 Broadwaters Road, Cutchogue; Parcel No. 104-10-8 SEQRA DETERMINATION: The Zoning Board of Appeals has visited the property under consideration in this application and determines that this review falls under the Type II category of the State's List of Actions, without an adverse effect on the environment if the project is implemented as planned. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Building Department's November 14, 2001 Notice of Disapproval denying use of a preexisting accessory building as an accessory, nonconforming cottage. The Notice of Disapproval states that a denial is issued regarding applicants' request dated April 6, 2000 for a Certificate of Occupancy of a preexisting accessory nonconforming cottage, for the reason that it is non-habitable, based upon the Building Inspector's Housing Code Inspection Report of 4/13/00, and Section 100-241-G of the Zoning Code which states that `whenever a nonconforming use of a building or premises has been discontinued for a period of more than two (2) years or has been changed to a higher classification or to a conforming use, anything in this Article to the contrary notwithstanding, the nonconforming use of such building or premises shall no longer be permitted unless a variance therefor shall have been granted by the Board of Appeals.' PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: Applicants' property contains approximately 51,000 sq. ft. in size and is located on the north side of Broadwaters Road with 126 ft. of road frontage and average depth of 511.83 feet, and a frontage of 72.99 feet along the ordinary high-water mark. The property is improved with a one-family, one-story principal dwelling, and a second building (referred to herein as accessory building or cottage), as more particularly shown on the survey prepared by ELS Associates dated 3-24-00 for the applicants. The property is shown as Lot #181 on the Map of Nassau Point Club Properties, Inc. APPLICANTS' REQUEST: Applicants: (1) request an Interpretation of Section 100-241G and 100-242A of the Zoning Code; and (2) Appeal for a Variance or other relief under Sections 100-241G and 100-242A, regarding the Building Department's Notice of Disapproval dated December 14, 2001. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on April 18, 2002; June 6, 2002; June 20, 2002; July 11, 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: .!! 1110 Page 2—October 3, 2002 ZBA Appl No 5068—C and G Dawson Parcel 1000-104-10-8 at Cutchogue Applicants' property is located in the R-40 residential zone district and contains a single- family dwelling and a small waterfront cottage. Applicants wish to maintain the cottage building as an accessory to the principal residential dwelling. Applicant has testified that that there is no intent to subdivide the property or to use the cottage as an independent single-family dwelling. REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: On the basis of testimony presented, materials submitted, and personal inspections, the Board makes the following findings: 1. Grant of the variance will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. Applicants wish to use the cottage for guests and family members, primarily during the summer months. Such accessory use is not uncommon in this waterfront neighborhood. 2. The benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than a variance because the building inspector has determined that the cottage is a discontinued non-conforming use, and appellants have no recourse except to apply for a variance. 3. The variance granted herein is not substantial and will allow the applicant to maintain the cottage as an accessory use. 4. The alleged difficulty has not been self-created. 5. Although neighbors have expressed concern that the cottage will be used for "group rentals" which could create excessive noise and become a nuisance for the neighborhood, the applicants modified their request of June 30, 2002, and conditions attached to this variance will protect physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood. 6. Grant of the requested variance is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable the applicant to enjoy the benefit of an accessory cottage while preserving and protecting the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community. RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD: In considering all of the above factors and applying the balancing test under New York Town Law 267-B, motion was offered by Member Tortora, seconded by Member Oliva, and duly carried to GRANT, a Variance authorizing an accessory (cottage) building with the following CONDITIONS: 1. The cottage/building shall only be used as an accessory structure to the single-family residence. 2. Temporary occupancy is permitted; 3. Sleeping quarters shall be permitted; Page 3—October 3, 2002 0 lb c ZBA Appl. No 5068—C and G Dawson Parcel 1000-104-10-8 at Cutchogue 4. No cooking or kitchen facilities. This action does not authorize or condone any current or future use, setback or other feature of the subject property that may violate the Zoning Code, other than such uses, setbacks and other features as are expressly addressed in this action. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Goehringer (Chairman), Tortora, and Oliva. (Members Horning and Orlando were absent.) This Resolution , - - . . , ad d --i GG:LT - Gerard P. Goeh ger- A pproved for Filing RECEIVED AND FILED BY TIE SOUTHOLD TOWN CLERK DAT ie') '6rZ- ;& o?,3.° 61// z Town C r k, Town o ::carte,cid n4f n../Lbn[ 1!:bb bd1 lbbybb4 ZONINGAPPEALSBOARD : PAGE 02 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS THURSDAY, APRIL 18, 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 by the SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS at the Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York 11971, on THURSDAY, APRIL 18, 2002, at the time noted below (or as soon thereafter as possible): 8:05 p.m. Appl. No. 5068 — CHRISTINE AND GLENN DAWSON, regarding a request for a Certificate of Occupancy for two single-family residential structures located at 150 Broadwaters Road, Cutchogue; Parcel 1000-104-10-8. Applicants: (1) request an Interpretation of Section 100-241 G and 100-242A of the Zoning Code; and (2) Appeal for a Variance or other relief, regarding the Building Department's Notice of Disapproval dated December 14, 2001, which states that an Accessory, nonconforming cottage is non-habitable based upon the Building Inspector's Housing Code Inspection Report of 4/13/00 and pursuant to Article XXIV, Section 100-241G, which states: Whenever a nonconforming use of a building or premises has been discontinued for a period of more than two (2) years or has been changed to a higher classification or to a conforming use, anything in this Article to the contrary notwithstanding, the nonconforming use of such building or premises shall no longer be permitted unless a variance therefor shall have been granted by the Board of Appeals. 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 this hearing. This hearing will not start earlier than designated. Files are available for review during regular Town Hall business days (8-3 p.m.). If you have questions, please do not hesitate to call (631) 765- 1809. Dated: April 3, 2002. GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS Town Hall 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 131111) 0 ORGNAL FORM NO. 3 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT jJ f. _- _ ' r SOUTHOLD,N.Y. f t JAN 1 4 20 , NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL 1� DATE: December 14, 2001 TO: Stephen R. Angel A/C G. & C. Dawson 150 Broadwaters Road Cutchogue,NY 11935 Please take notice that your application dated April 6, 2000 For a Certificate of Occupancy of a Pre-existing accessory non-conforming cottage at Location of property 150 Broadwaters Road, Cutchogue County Tax Map No. 1000 Section 104 Block 10 Lot 8 Is returned herewith and disapproved on the following grounds Accessory, non-conforming cottage is non-habitable based upon the Building Inspector's housing code inspection report of 4/13/00 and pursuant to Article XXIV 100-241- G which states: "Whenever a nonconforming use of building or premises has been discontinued for a period of more than two years or has been changed to a higher classification or to a conforming use, anything in this Article to the contrary notwithstanding, the nonconforming use of such building or premises shall no longer be permitted unless a variance therefore shall have been granted by the Board of Appeals." Authorized Signature I .-, o ... »r,• �✓./��yy� ;�+}Mnk'Fr+'j»ho...... _.. f ',I.-..,;,,', r;, `. ,. '.,:,/':), ,µl' ; '`.)1.'.+'t;;,:'F1►r�.T*,Mk * _ 'y4e,r.l i',',.,, , ;(,, .A.kz.. .:,.:. i;., ylOWN',,9!L x$`71•117,19109'1, 4 r • Y ' i. t.';'.1 �,N.,,'a t.. ,!;'.; ,;,,;,441ii,BUILDING DEPARTM T �.7'; :',.::a;*. .f��,K<,, :'b�.fL'1;'• ;t:y,^ '>:a:•� F .�.raJ,z �1N f n'4, �t',5✓';;"'s1,r$;,wij",,,(7:$ h,,�,f fY:,'t:3"..4";''y, "9,I�''"" ti- •j, 4 QAC r , s{ ys„r s$l#S,,Fr{"} �,�,,y .;sZ�},7,f;..� ' ,,, t, R�� ,'''1.t ,t a,., ,., r 5,i'y "i:;"''4F.r ,,PQ/P l Vit= ,if;� }:fft.0.l t:�di9:. '.,'kt.4.14 ,34 ,i'• y l -• •e,,,f, , ;l,;t. db i�� ,e`�;?>•i�;1JrdYf9}^ �;, I-r, A�j_,lv:,� �•r�"' �+n, ,.';'..t., .` l ,, ki''r ',,: !•.•. '' „^„ i, `2f,..�` ��I',pq.,,M"r .r<, ,��'�7C^"1 'i� , G�;`r5:Y;:p,�, �•, s t� ra ._, r (,� ,'''' '''''';';‘1,V, ii, , A §w/ I N': �c;-,: f Y {;1 �a.`:;. �ir �;R',,'.'1 fir;; 'k,,,,, ;";s1�,,, ' ,r 't ;'(Vtf,',' '`�"�%"`,:Ct'�i,j ;;(,»''�•e;l",�`` ; Cri.-=r_ ',.s'�'y < - Application No, „4,Tt ,,,,••,,,,,,r,,,•1,,,,,t, iIroned " �' �d i Qf� fe b • f„4;;t"V, ,?..;ed, In.,j.4'{,ir r.aril• t tt !r� �tle}ttfpr�yell ! i3? yw:: ;;;'t rs,: f f} t'bJ' Nt,v `A l;�3je %,),/,p41;c ti4x+� lji' ' e ��t V-•7, - -. ? ' '" / �, ' �5�::=;: � ;� Poririlt°'Na' V^!! t�°tlhfFr lr�}iR -' ,,,,, r -laved: ,,. •etre 4Jt ulratt,lr.'. � f ' ,.l . ', j ; r, '„i''• %; ,J•• P `Tt', ' •--1'... ',..:•- i;`{,;'''• l.,.;1,;,,AY; `"t�.: -'-, `,., T ,'C* 7 s f iq ": 'ir .•'-"� ;e?:`p,i;, ty s^4- yy••��,;,'.».n„ '•. • / ii•iity.l!��, ,•,',s,f a`?. l;":.,': 4,0;,,A; :;W,.,:r.'`,,I;X;,1 'C,k37i`-;,;a,:'I ,',,:, V' a!",A,Y;1''-..,,,.t:,,, �- •11 . , ? 'pprove'. Q,c4 tf ,t,tf1}r! t,iditieirailer}t ltfrttJ}f+t�+,tt IPI ,tet,1111!1,,fireft,„rt+it,ft�;d�r�,tt, }1,1 .ad .,ti,', „:., h' j`,14,.L -;,.,'' '✓,",Ir'"A i ,t t v'' -1 6'''•f'i1n." a,4,^IIii ( ar9,., . ., ,, {,.1 i. • n 1 L ,11'. ,,l- .'fi-J.'f -.."t4ar•,,, rt t.it'• , r,,, ._;,'.'r ,,`• ,x` A 13,4"x' t , r4'4.;.'',it ti',j, r.f"41 „ ,1 , '.^V"' .14',"t"',.'YJ';: .i • moi" 1 � • ``?' 00/ Assigned Nod`® F1' `•'�: (.For.Office Use Only: Fee, 11110 .41-f09, (cie 1" TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK APPEAL FROM DECISION OF BUILDING INSPECTOR i),//q/0/ DATE OF BUILDING INSPECTOR'S DECISION APPEALED: Undated decision received -25/01), cop attached Al. . - TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS: T(We) .gbev .P. , ..131s :qPv.. 0..GWw..P?4Y0ep. of 37 10th Street, Carle Place, NY 11514 (Appellant) (Tel # 516 333-7815 ) HEREBY APPEAL THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DATED 10/25/01 fry'' k p WHEREBY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENIED AN APPLICATION DATED4/6 f 00 and FOR: S -�`" ( ) Permit to Build 10/14/00 ( ) Permit for Occupancy ( ) Permit to Use ( ) Permit for As-Built • ()() Other: Certificate of occupancy for two single family residential structures 1. Location of Property 150 Broadwaters Road, Cutchogue, NY 11935 Zone R40 District 1000 Section.1 Q4 Block 10 Lot(s)..A Current Owner Christine Dawson and Glenn Dawson 2. Provision of the Zoning Ordinance Appealed. (Indicate Article, Section, Subsection and paragraph of Zoning Ordnance by numbers. Do not quote the law.) Article mil Section 100-241 Sub-Section G • 3. Type of Appeal. Appeal is made herewith for: (x) A Variance to the Zoning Ordinance or Zoning Map ( ) A Variance due to lack of access as required by New York Town Law Chap. 62, Cons. Laws Art. 16, Section 280-A. / (X) Interpretation of Article XXIV Section 100-�41G and 2 Section 100- 42A l)4/ (X) Reversal or Other: Reversal of Building Inspector's'undated decision received 1-e2�70�-` copy..aAAgxed- 4. Previous Appeal. A previous appeal XI h 9x (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): I AREA VARIANCE REASONS: (1) An undesirable ..hange will not be produced in the CHARACTER of the neighborhood or a detriment to n. 'rby properties, if granted, because: The structure in question is existing. By granting the relief requested in this application, there will be no change in the character of the neighborhood. — (2) The benefit sougstt by the applicant CANNOT be achieved by some method feasible • for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance, because: The only way in which relief can be granted other than a variance is by interpretation of Article XXIV Sections 100241G and 242A and reversal of the Building Inspector's decision in this case. . (3) The amount of relief req., sfed is not substantial because: There will be no change to the property or neighborhood. (4) The variance will NOT have an adverse effect or Impact on the physical or ' environmental conditions in : neighborhood or district because: There will be no impact as a result of granting this application because there will be no change to the property. (5) Has the alleged difficulty been self-created? ( ) Yes, or (X) No. This is the MINIMUM that is necessary and adequate, and at the same time preserve and protect the character of tie neighborhood and the health, safety, and welfare of the community. SEE ANNEXED SHEET AND RELEVANT DOCUMENTS. ( ) Check this box if USE VAtr'LANCE STANDARDS a complet nd attached. Swo_ rri to be •r- e thy. (Signature of Appellant or Authorized Agent d- o, . ,�% ��e ) , (Agent must submit Authorization from Owher) ,,/ I/ r ./ 'S/10/04rChristine Dawson 'Notary Publi V �' ZBA App 08/00 D NiCc D'AMARO RATHJE NOTARY PUBLIC,STATE OF NEW YORK No.01DA5076619 Suffolk County,Expires April 21, (/ i Y! w c xC F �r . Ut1HLld ` }t i OF PLANSiiii GLENN T WS4ONSON 3612 •.. . 37 10TH ST 66 CABLE PLACE, NY 11514 I6 N1-108/210 FORM r--` DATE 'AY TO THEa [;S DRDER OF ' /q Q ..r IFY: . F..,ur.. DOLLARS ! �oku... • HSB • m - § tLT . - . HSBC Bank USA Melville,NY II747 5 ,\ / A . , L . 0 'DR Kai ff CONS'Icucl a \ + l:b 2 i00 i088i:9 700 58 Ioeck. OCT 3 Q 2000 i52n' -3612 (Building InspectorT "---- - --- APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT Date 1��1� , P0. INSTRUCTIONS a. This application must be completely filled in by typewriter or in ink and submitted to the Building Inspector 4 ! sets of plans, accurate plot plan to scale. Fee according to schedule. b: Plot plan showing location of lot and of buildings on premises, relationship to adjoining premises or public streets or areas, and giving a detailed description of layout of property must be drawn on the diagram which is part of .his application. 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 mnit 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 whatever until a Certificate of kcupancy shall have been granted by the Building Inspector. APPLICATION IS HEREBY MADE to the Building Department for the issuance of a Building Permit pursuant to the luilding Zone Ordinance of the Tann of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, and other applicable Laws, Ordinances or tegulations, for the construction of buildings, additions or alterations, or for removal or demolition, as herein lescribed. The applicant agrees to comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, building code, housing code, and -egulations, and to admit authorized inspectors on premises and in buildi or race • tions. .(Signature of applicant, or name, if a corporation) 3`1 Te ikrlti► sf. Cele I'I&icP pi /ivy (Mailingaddress of applicant) 1 ;tate whether applicant is owner, lessee, agent, architect, engineer, general contractor, electrician, plumber or build( Qwiuf K. . lame of owner of premises C11j'te. 6- au A 6-frAbu / • DAvisdAj (as on the tax roll or latest deed) • :f 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. . Location of land on which proposed work will be done 1.56 6W/91)WAr-6s XC) . ( ue Ikiuse Number -Street Aamaet County Tax Map No. 1000 Section 1 CN Block 10 Lot Subdivision Filed Map No. Lot (Name) :. State existing use and occupancy off/ premises and intended use and occupancy of proposed construction: a. Existing use and occupancy Qi!c( • • b. Intended use and occupancy /o eCh �, - SOUTHOLD- PROPERTY - RECORD CARD /dOo - /ems. /a - � TOWN OFM _ e OWNER STREET ?) • _ G- lQnn * C,hn.6-hv,� / ` VILLAGE DIST. SUB. LOT *Al/ Lq r,�sn� /J i-o d w a e -.• I C v 74c aJ v - 7 /V a sf d 41 )1'6.'., 74.C'/vi /4-ap,Itie_, FORMER OWNER N E ACR. I /1 iv ea A , W TYPE OF BUILDING / f ��SG�',Oc+r.7 - RES. /j SEAS. - VL. - FARM COMM. CB. MISC. Mkt. Value , ; - t5 LAND IMP. TOTAL DATE REMARKS (� - /� •p /.2A7 .�y dee', L/ +Mi'g„(1 ���n k„f, 7,n A'A-4,f rv6cfioure 0 D Q 3 2 0 0 �/6 6 6 ��2/47 4y ” a.r)-,'a e, A c`ld G-e al k i Go o o� �i `/t. /i CI Vel.-, I / �4V:"e �� 174-ea/ill' 1 0 0 3 So v 50 6 o V ,/:�. ',-;../--- `,9/1�'fa /o', ,:%v0 J}d m�o,r, V a/e VC r 7Q �n�a 4 o, .SQ b �• --,2 6/6 o 2f2d7O 9X7 ,�/ ,A�, y�9<z. u,r/aha. 84. / J� 5-(, = ,C, '4d _ /S c. o dPO0 S'S CO ,/ V) 07 944/71-06 / 2/76 / z D. f'c",P 2. ;:e.87 , RUiL4 Deck" tC ,t° �U1.` 2 -71 3 - 4'/71-0 6/1 4./ 6 o � / /SL 8.fo 7 - �S'ac�„ a �o Cr-'E'�,D�v2K `��•� f' 7f AGE BUILDING CONDITION 3/3//00 Lia ott3- G� Beaks I-0 / 1U aP b 7" Laws �c,0-�--�1/l7 5-toN — NEW NORMAL BELOW ABOVE - FARM Acre Value Per •Value - - r _,: s _ , Tillable 1 - - ,,, Tillable 2 Tillable 3 Woodland - Swampland FRONTAGE ot.0 WATER Brushland FRONTAGE ON ROAD /,2�'_43z, a„ AO a d W a�`er�t? IC//��v a ,c/ House Plot 'DEPTH - LJ' - /2li2f-~a.(7� v +r BULKHEAD ` Total ' _ _ DOCK October 17, 2002 Mr. Gerald G. Newman, Chief Planner Suffolk County Department of Planning P. O. 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. — 5068 — Christine and Glenn Dawson Action Requested: Request an Interpretation of Section 100-241G and 100-242A of Zoning Code; and Appeal for Variance under Sections 100-241 G and 100-242A of Building Department's Notice of Disapproval. 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 r � APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS ,r ,/I',O�OSVFf0(�COG_ Southold Town Hall Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman ���= 91: 53095 Main Road Lydia A. Tortora y Z P.O. Box 1179 George Horning ^, �t Southold,New York 11971-0959 Ruth D. Oliva y,� 0� / ZBA Fax(631)765-9064 Vincent Orlando 111 * +, Telephone(631)765-1809 ... s'' http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD October 16, 2002 Stephen R. Angel, Esq. Esseks Hefter & Angel 108 East Main Street P.O. Box 279 Riverhead, NY 11901 Re: Appl. No. 5068 —Appeal (Dawson) Dear Mr. Angel: Enclosed please find a copy of the Board's determination regarding the above appeal request Please be sure to follow-up with the Building Department for the next step in the zoning review and application process. Before commencing construction activities, a building permit and possibly other agency approvals would apply. An extra copy of this determination should be made available to the Building Department at the time of submitting your maps and any other required documentation to assist their office in the next step. Thank you. Very truly yours, GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN Enclosure Copy of Decision to: Building Department Robert J. Cippitelli, Esq. 04J403/2002 ' 17:56 ,,6317659064 2ONINGAPPEALSBOARD : PAGE 04 . , —�=.; --�. ..—• ORIGINAL ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS • TOWN OF SOUTHOLD.NEW YORK ----------------------------------------- ------------x In the Matter of the Application of AFFIDAVIT Christine and Glenn Dawson OF (Name of Applicants) MAILINGS • CTM Parcel #1000- 104 - 10 -8 COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) STATE OF NEW YORK) ' 1, Margaret Bizzoco, residing at Ronkonkoma, , New York, being duly sworn, depose and say that: On the 9th day of April 2002 I personally mailed , _• -d :, _ 5 In Riverhead , New York, by CERTIFIED • • MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED, a true copy of the attached Legal • • Notice in prepaid envelopes addressed to current owners shown on the current • assessment roll verified from the official records on file with the (X) Assessors, or • ( ') County Real Property 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, in an official depository under the exclusive care and Gusto of the United 11. 13 tes Postal Service • within the State of New York. ((Si nature) • Margaret i4cz�co Sworn to before me this 10th • • • day of April , 200 2. • ezuL,LeNo1ay ,State ( otary Pu• bl ) Nio.4742873 Quaid InSuit* Caftan FphNu Z0 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. ) . , Bruno Cippitelli 17 Kings Lane New Hyde Park, NY 11040 1000-104-10-7 Return Receipt No. 7099 3220 0003 7563 4851 Robert and Barbara Ringewald 2150 Nassau Point Road Cutchogue, NY 11935 1000-104-10-9 Return Receipt No. 7099 3220 0003 7563 4868 Kenneth and Deborah Seiferth 140 Whitehall Boulevard Garden City,'NY 11530 1000-104-10-10 Return Receipt No. 7099 3220 0003 7563 4875 Roberti. and Linda L. Gallagher 137 Meadowbrook Road Garden City, NY 11530 1000-104-12-8.2 Return Receipt No. 7099 3220 0003 7563 4882 Charles F. Maguire and Wife P. 0. Box 1027 Cutchogue, NY 11935 1000-104-12-14.1 Return Receipt No. 7099 3220 0003 7563 4899 U.S. Postal Service ' c'FRTIFIED;MAIL;RECEIPT stic Mail Only;No Insurance Coverage Provided) - NDER: COMPLETE THIS SECTION COMPLETE THIS SECTION ON DELIVERY , Sent To: '^ • Complete items 1,2,and 3.Also complete A. R= -ived.y(Please Print Clearly) B. '-t of De very - i item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. 0 t - I e I i ■ Print your name and address on the reverse C - /�/ so that we can return the card to you. C. Si nature / • Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, X v �/ 'f './// Agent Postage $ I ei bra or on the front if space permits. 0 Addressee D. Is delivery address different from item 1? 0 Yes Certified Fee 1. Article Addressed to: • Postmark i o o If YES,enter delivery address below: 0 No Receipt Fee Here 1 • ' hent Required) / Yl' /I 'o ^ - DeliveryFee7(1 n 0 '` I-C� nent Required) stage&Fees -dfltw ._e, Pel 14-� '7�110 _ 3. Service Type • f a]Certified Mail 0 Express Mail . ostal Service •. 0 Registered 1Return Receipt for Merchandise 'TIFIED:MAIL RECEIPT ❑ Insured,Mail - ❑ C.O.D. iesticMail only; No Insurance Covera.e Provide.- • . 4. Restricted Delivery?(Extra Fee) 0 Yes o 2. Arti le Number(Cop from service label) p • 0 9 5�ao' ooh_� �i";79.0-1 -���s/., .. • i, , ,I i [ 1 +i 't + t•i•i i i i i! i i t l it PS Form 3811;:luly 1999 Domestic Return Receipt ' , 102595-00-M-0952 Pos age $ ________, / I g /, , �Certified Fee �/ `/V a 15 0 �� Postmark (/'/F�.�icr----r:i3:-.6rj/(J_ a _ m Receipt Fee Here 3. Service Type mens Required) /// ��0 """' L5]I Certified Mad Express Mail 'd Delivery Fee OLX-01-05A-4-Z-) )Le II ��- Registered Return Receipt for�'_-`' ' /, n in urptLMail c:_OJJ •- •a al or 9 TIFIED MAIL RECEIPT l ire, ►IArArrar COMPLETE THIS SECTION ON DELIVERY - I%F/L(srrinivA . - ,.- • . .[m ■ Complete items 1,2,and 3.Also complete A Received by(Please Print Clearly) B. Date of Delivery ent •- item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. —(Q—p • Print your name and address on the reverse so that we can return the card to you C. i n lure I i • Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, ❑Agent or n the front if space permits. ❑Addressee Postage $ /ISO D. Is delivery address different from item 1? 0 Yes ��7l�� 1 A icle Addressed to:- n ! g o, If YES,enter delivery address below ❑ No Certified Fee �/l e-cn�- R�Lt � ux„' am-iii �ri Receipt Fee HPostmark ent Required) - I ��✓e� R'• 0in Delivery Fee (IO LJ� — ent Required) T /�l_ �� (�/7 pj //'3v hstage&Fees � 3. Spice Type C Certified Mail 0 Express Mail ease Print Ci art)y (To be corn toted by mailer 0 Registered 90 Return Receipt for Merchandise pt.N .-or O ox . MA-AO � �� n o . 0 Insured Mail ❑ C.O.D. e,3i( 4. Restricted Delivery?(Extra Fee) 0 Yes e,ZI-+4 I/��� Lit i 2. Arta le Number(Coy,from•service label) 3800,July 1999 '1z' SI%Reverse for,-l3struc . - rtOq of r i • k[ �'' tit{i , t •, +19i,`•t i' j01,61 i DOD i.i�. :p t' i ( x1r/ ' t;, : i , t i stal Service PS Form 3811,July 1999 Domestic Return Receipt 102595-oo-M-0952 I FIED MAIL RECEIPT ' .tic Mail Only; No Insurance Coverage Provided) Article Sent To: l'UcO / . _r'_,--1�_;A1 , m Postage `° 41 q U "I Certified Fee 1'- Postmark Return Receipt Fee Here m (Endorsement Required) CI Restricted Delivery Fee CI (Endorsement Required) Total Postage&Fees CI 1 Iliti m A-uu rn N. a(Please Print Clearly)(To b�co?+ -'- bY�rral r m ;• + + AUL(/�fii treet,Apt. .; r PO Box No. /� A Er Er )3 1 �(QCJLr City,;ate,ZIP+4 /6 5D City, , _. Sae Reverse forInstruc io - 1 PS Form 3800,July 1999.,::_ _ _v_,- — i U.S.Postal Service t CERTIFIED MAIL RE — (Domestic Mail.Only No Insurance overage -rovi.e. Er Article;Sent To: w i / ',41-110) / SENDER: COMPLETE THIS SECTION COMPLETE THIS SECTION ON DELIVERY _Elm Postage $ /1 ■ Complete items 1,2,and 3.Also complete A Received by(Please Print Clearly) B Da N ��v( �() item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. ` Certified Fee '■ Print our name and address on the reverse ��a^' �CVI�' ` �, Postmark Tf ` Return Receipt Fee He so th t we can return the card to you. C. Signature (Endorsement Required) $ '■ Atta/ this card to the back of the mailpiece, Restricted Dell very Fee or the front if space permits. X D+ (Endorsement Required) 1 Article Addressed to. D Is delivery address differe om item 1? Ell:ti TORI Postage&Fees •' If YES,enter delivery address below: 'Xu N (Please Print learly (To be completed by maller)�Lie rSl o p r7 /�, ,/ /0(),-/' 7• Er Str et Apt N�o.;or PO Box No. j(JI V kJG`�li LU POI • ciq/�rar:z►P+a i 19 25 ��.c.t—e), r-c�.71x9 35 at 3- Service Type PS Form 3800 )iii 1999w.;' ee Beyer fiTafie�is o 8 101;iu, ,_.,,..�...,.:�, al Certified Mail ❑Express Mail 0 Registered `ailr Return Receipt for Merchandise 0 Insured Mail- -❑C.O.D. (� 4. Restricted Delivery?(Extra Fee) 0 Yes Article Number(Copy from service label) 709913aav, 0063 i 1.544 : zit16 iiii Fi; H ., ii II °S Form 3811,July 1999 Domestic Return Receipt 102595-00-M-0952 I 1 , Y t4 T( ESSEKS, HEFTER & ANGEL COUNSELORS AT LAW 108 EAST MAIN STREET P. O. Box 279 RIVERHEAD, N.Y. 11901-0279 WILLIAM W. ESSEKS (631) 369-1700 WATER MILL OFFICE MARCIA Z. HEFTER TELECOPIER NUMBER (631) 369-2065 MONTAUK HIGHWAY STEPHEN R.ANGEL _ P. 0. Box 570 JANE ANN R. KRATZ WATER MILL, N.Y. 11976 JOHN M.WAGNER (631) 726-6633 WILLIAM POWER MALONEY I CARMELA M. DI TALIA January C. PASCA 11, 2002 NICA B. STRUNK Zoning Board of Appeals, Town of Southold 53095 Main Road P. 0. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Re: Application of Glenn and Christine Dawson - SCTM No. 1000-104-10-08 Dear Members of the Zoning Board of Appeals: We filed the above-captioned application on 12/5/01 . We were advised by your staff that you wanted official action from the Building Department before you would act on the application. I enclose an original Notice of Disapproval dated 12/14/01 from the Town of Southold Building Department, together with six additional copies. Would you please add this Notice of Disapproval to the previously filed papers and advise me when you expect the application to appear on the Board's agenda. Respectfully yours, SRA:mb r STEPHEN R. ANGEL Enc. cc : Mr. & Mrs. Glen Dawson it .0 , i a FORM NO. 3 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT SOUTHOLD,N.Y. NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL DATE: December 14, 2001 • TO: Stephen R. Angel A/C G. &C. Dawson 150 Broadwaters Road Cutchogue,NY 11935 Please take notice that your application dated April 6, 2000 For a Certificate of Occupancy of a Pre-existing accessory non-conforming cottage at Location of property 150 Broadwaters Road, Cutchogue County Tax Map No. 1000 Section 104 Block 10 Lot 8 Is returned herewith and disapproved on the following grounds Accessory, non-conforming cottage is non-habitable based upon the Building Inspector's housing code inspection report of 4/13/00 and pursuant to Article XXIV 100-241- G which states: "Whenever a nonconforming use of building or premises has been discontinued for a period of more than two years or has been changed to a higher classification or to a conforming use, anything in this Article to the contrary notwithstanding, the nonconforming use of such building or premises shall no longer be permitted unless a variance therefore shall have been granted by the Board of Appeals." 4../.--e.-e-6-,. . Cit_e_. _, Authorized Signature • OFFoLk Town Hall, 53095 Main Road • = i Fax(516)765-1823 P.O. Box 1179 ; ' III Telephone (51.6) 765-1802 Southold, New York 11971 0 • �':.41 4, • ie. OFFICE OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR TOWN OF SOUTHOLD NOTICE TO APPLICANT A decision rendered by the Building Department may be appealed to the Zoning Board of Appeals. Should you require information on how to apply, please contact the ZBA via telephone at 765-1809 or you may go to the ZBA office at Town Hall during • normal working hours. • • • • • • ESSEKS, HEFTER & ANGEL �r I r� ��nr COUNSELORS AT LAWL 108,EAST MAIN STREET P. O. Box 279 I1 • BLDG DC ' • RIVERHEAD, N.Y. 11901-0279 WILLIAM TT. TOWN • '0 Now (631)369-1700 WATER MILL OFFICE MARCIA Z. HEFTER MONTAUK HIGHWAY STEPHEN R.ANGEL TELECOPIER NUMBER (631)369-2065 P. O. BOX 570 JANE ANN R. KRATZ WATER MILL, N.Y. 11976 JOHN M.WAGNER (631) 726-6633 WILLIAM POWER MALONEY CARMELA M. DI TALIA December 11, 2001 ANTHONY C. PASCA NICA B. STRUNK John M. Boufis, Building Inspector Town of Southold 53095 Main Road P. 0. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Re: Application of Glenn and Christine Dawson for certificate of occupancy SCTM No. 1000-104-10-08 Dear Mr. Boufis: Enclosed please find a copy of your undated letter which we received on 10/25/01, which states "You have the option to appeal this decision through the Zoning Board of Appeals." We filed an application to the Zoning Board of Appeals on 12/5/01. Today, we received a reply from the Board of Appeals. This reply seeks official action, a C.O., or a notice of disapproval in order to entertain the appeal. Pursuant to Section 100-271a of Southold's Zoning Code, the Zoning Board hears and decides appeals from "any order. requirement. decision or determination made by the Building Inspector." Kindly issue appropriate official action as contemplated by the Zoning Code as soon as possible so that we may submit it to the Board of Appeals. ESSEKS, HEFTER & ANGEL COUNSELORS AT LAW December 11, 2001 Page 2 On behalf of applicants, we reserve all rights, including the right to bring an appropriate proceeding to compel the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Building Department to process this application as required by law. Lys\ Rf ectfully your �,_ - / SRA:mb E R. ANGEL Enc. cc : Zoning Board of Appeals, Town of Southold Via Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested Mr. & Mrs. Glenn Dawson CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED • "1'2' f For Office Use Only: Fee$ Assigned No. TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK APPEAL FROM-DECISION OF BUILDING INSPECTOR DATE OF BUILDING INSPECTOR'S DECISION APPEALED: Undated decision received 10/25/01, cop attaihec TO THE ZONING'BOARD OF APPEALS: 44We) ....... (Appellant) of 37 10th Street, Carle Place, NY 11514 (Tel # 516 333-7815 ) HEREBY APPEAL THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DATED 10/25/01 WHEREBY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENIED AN APPLICATION DATED4/6(00 and FOR: ( ) Permit to Build 10/14/00 ( ) Permit for Occupancy ( ) Permit to Use • ( ) Permit for As-Built (x) Other: Certificate of occupancy for two single -family residential structures 1. Location of Property..150 Broadwaters Road, Cutchogue, NY 11935 Zone R40 District 1000 Section 1Q4 Block10 Lof(s)..>) Current Owner Christine Dawson and Glenn Dawson 2. Provision of the Zoning Ordinance Appealed, (indicate Article, Section, Subsection and paragraph of Zoning Ordnance by numbers. Do hot quote the law.) Article XXIV Section 100-241 Sub-Section G • • • 3. Type of Appeal. Appeal is made herewith for: (x) A Variance fo the Zoning Ordinance or Zoning Map ( ) A Variance due to lack of access as required by New York Town Law Chap. 62, Cons. Laws Art. 16, Section 280-A. (x) interpretation of Article xXIV Section 100-Z41G and Section 100-242A (g) Reversal or Other' Reversal of Building Inspector's undated decision received 10/25/01 , cop.y..aA-A.xed • 4. Previous Appeal. A previous appeal VY (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 ..$range will not be produced in the CHARACTER of the neighborhood or a detriment to n.. ,{by properties, if granted, because: The structure in .question is exist ng. By granting the relief requested in this application, there will be no change in the character of the neighborhood. (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: The only way in which rel of can be granted other than a variance is- by interpretation of Article XXIV Sections 1007241G and 242A and reversal of the Building Inspector's decision in this case. (3) The amount of relief recrJested is not substantial because: There will be no change to the property or neighborhood. • (4) The variance will NOT have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions inF' e neighborhood or district because: There will be no impact as a result of granting this application because there will be no change to the property. (5) Has the alleged difficulty been self-creafed? ( ) Yes, or (X) No. This is the MINIMUM thqf 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. - SEE ANNEXED SHEET AND RELEVANT DOCUMENTS. ( ) Check this box if USE VARIANCE STANDARDS e complet rid attached. Swpr,p to betonem�e ihj I (Signature of Appellant or` Authorized Agent 1:6-7dao . Ct I , , e o (Agent must submit Authoritdfion from Owner) '_,9-��4• IO 1f •°' Christine Dawson • 'Notary Public V ZBA App 08/00 D'AMARO RATHJE IOTA I RELIC,STATE OF NEW YORK , No.01 GA6076619 Suffolk County,Expires April 21,L� �' . _ ,,,,, - - io//'f/' /� �SUFFO(, co; IZ d Town Hall,53095 Main Road %. Rt Fax(631)765-1823 P.O.Box-1179 St 4i I Telephone(631)765-1802 Southold,New York 11971-0959 �_ ,( �►`aO* Sot • �� BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN OF SOUTHOLD .Stephen R. Angel, Atty C/o Esseks, Hefter & Angel, Attys P.O. Box 279 Riverhead, N.Y. 11901 Re: Premises @ 150 Broadwaters Rd., Cutchogue; N.Y. Owners: Glenn & Christine Dawson Suff. Co. Tax Map #1000-104-10-8 ., • • Dear Mr. Angel: In reference to your letter dated October 1, 2001, please be advised that in accordance with the Building Inspectors review on April 13, 2000, a Pre- Existing Certificate of Occupancy will be issued for the principal dwelling and a non-habitable accessory building. • You have the option to appeal this decision through the Zoning Board of Appeals. • Very truly yours, SOUTHOLD TOWN BUILDING DEPT. olid M: Boufis, Building Inspector JMB:gar In support of the application, copies of the following are annexed: 1. application filed 4/6/00; 2. application filed 10/30/00; 3. letter of SRA dated 5/18/01 with attachment; 4. letter of SRA dated 10/1/0lwith copies of certified mail receipts; 5. the following papers from the Town of Southold Building Department files showing that the cottage was treated as a separate one-family dwelling and was issued a certificate of occupancy for that use: (a) application for building permit dated 7/8/76 made by A. Anthony Pisacano; (b) copy of map submitted with application showing that the application was for the cottage; (c) building permit dated 7/12/76 issued to A. Anthony Pisacano to construct a deck "to existing one-family dwelling," "cottage;" (d) certificate of occupancy issued to A. Anthony Pisacano dated 8/18/76. • CliFilS.TiNEEIFMON _ 1-77L-71.-----___ DTH STr_ - `.a.� _ - - - -•';':-• ;-• --,-_,,7,s - - I ... n, • ;G/�' ur'4'1 106/210 , RLE-PLACE;"N x•iii:f4 Ut_J T.,;$ nom , , Hui qq AA7p��7 - - - - - " - � - - - � _ �'ibmitted to the building" ��• Flikri • EN,' •- 11743 _ ,..,•1_ / - - �R ;y •ldings, property lines, ' S:C1'2,bdO Lo gi =q;7 tl`5� tir -- age-disposal(S-9 form) . m 5 41;.3- , - Ha :'-' _ • -- _,2......._.., _-_-. __ ' � -- _ - ' ' j.erwriters. 4. Sworn statement trom piufdbe� ,_z1_-���.,--__6 _ _ - )ed in system contains less than 2/10 of 1% lead. 5. Commercial building, industrial building; multiple residences and similar buildings and installations§ a certificate of Code Compliance from architect or engineer responsible for the building. t•• 6. Submit Planning Board Approval of completed site plan requirements. B. For existing buildings (prior to April 9, 1957) non-conforming uses, or buildings and 'pre-existing" land uses: 1. Accurate survey of property showing all property lines, streets, building and unusual natural or topographic features. 2. A properly completed application and a consent to inspect signed by the applicant. If a Certificate of Occupancy is denied, the Building Inspector shall state the _ therefor in writing to the applicant. C. Fees 1. Certificate of Occupancy - New dwelling $25.00, Additions to dwelling $25.00, Alterations to dwelling $25.00, Swimming pool $25.00, Accessory building $25.00, Additions to accessory building $25.00. Businesses $50.00. 2. Certificate of Occupancy on Pre-existing Building - $100.00 3. Copy of Certificate of Occupancy - :25g. 4. Updated Certificate of Occupancy - $50.00 5. Temporary Certificate of Occupancy - Residential $15:00, Commercial $15.00 Date jk-0 5 / ZOOC) New Construction Old Or Pre-existing BuildingBu Location of Property fSO tan.pw -e.2:n A//155A) edl,IT House No. Street Hamlet 1 Onwer or Owners of Property L6�N �`ST Me NO s &j County Tax Map No 1000, Section Block /() Lot O IWI Subdivision Filed Map : . .Lot Permit No Date Of Permit Applicant -11th Dept. Approval Underwriters Approval 'ng Board Approval :or: Temporary Certificate Final Certicate Jubmitted: $ 1(X) ° - 4.1/if -/ I t . . , - n �.r ,_ .. ,Ur LIU 1d — =z -11 OF PLANS )1 TON 3612 7 10TH ST CARLE PLACE,NY 11514 (e P{/ct1 1-108/210 1 FORM r--` DATE 4Y TO THEgS Ai RDER OF 1 - Q/a $r7S7IFY: --��-��VV ICC rr33 `eU ' ICtee. T `- DOLLARS 9emr 1IAIL TO. BBC Bank USA Melville,NY II747 / S . ' 1 R /''1'u d �f CUNS UCS c£ RAMI Oec N A! - -OCT 3 0 2000 :12100 10881:970058 & 5211, �G �ro - 3 6 i 2 I�.,.� E (Bulildim InspectorJ- ----- - ------- --— . APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT , Date , 20.00 INSTRUCTIONS a. This application must be completely filled in by typewriter or in ink and submitted to the Building Inspector u 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 :reefs or areas, and giving a detailed description of layout of property mast be drawn on the diagram which is part of lis,application. .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. issuie a BOilding Permit to the applicant. Such mmit shall be,kept on the promises available for inspection throughout the taork. ' e. No building shall be occupied or used in whole or in part for any purpose whatever until a Certificate of :cupancy shall have been granted by the Building Inspector. AFELICATION IS HEREBY MAIC to the Building Department for the issuance of a Building Permit pursuant to the lilding Zone Ordinance of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, and other applicable Laws, Ordinances or Tulations, for the construction of buildings, additions or alterations, or for removal or demolition, as herein ?scribed. The applicant agrees to comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, building code, housing code, and ?gulations, and to admit authorized inspectors on premises and in buildi or nate • tions. . . (Signature of applicant, or name, if a corporation) 37 T'&i#i s±. C,e.le Ploce isi y Wailingaddress of applicant) :ate whether applicant is owner, lessee, agent, architect, engineer,.general contractor, electrician, plumber or builde QVUMfK. , - ■ of owner of premises ( J1 6. ()AA &r Ai OeNAJ 7 L/ so kl (as on the tax roll or latest deed) - 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. Location of land on which proposed work twill be done r50 A--ems Ac - (utc hd ue_ . House Number Street Haslet County Tax Map No. 1000 Section I C) -Block 1 0 , Lot -.. - Subdivision Filed Map No. - .....:: Lot (Name) - , State existing use and occupancy of premises and intended use and occupancy of proposed construction: , . a. Existing use and occupancy ' ec - •.it..iii .Liiii ..i'4 " '11. .i. b. Intended use and occupancy pen` . i �• i..L i..... ' ' t Fool,?As cF- l?Cly 3. Nature of //(diedc tabid' applicable): New Building Addition . Alteration pair 4t 4.... Removal Demolition Other Work e - - (Description) ,' gi a. Estimated Cost 10.A/314141)0i.. CC}� e �c2 fee C`• mac/ i/ (to.be paid on filing this application) 5. IE dwelling, number of dwelling units Wither of dwelling units on each floor • If garage, minter of cars 5. If business, mmercial or mixed occupancy, specify nature and extent of each type of use 7. Dimensions of existing structures, if any: Front Rear Depth Height Number of Stories Dimensions of sari structure with alterations or additions: Front Rear Depth Height Number of Storiesc"N 8;VD Stories - 3. Diuensions of entire new construction: Front Rear • Depth 11.1‘c., E\�64' bight Umber of Stories `, ® � ci \.dr- ) 6 W r . Size of lot: Front Rear Depthi vQ:-7i .. Date of Purchase Z�1o0 Name of Former Owner ...( fbw' ck � `5 I. Zone or use district in which prannses are situated - AA 2. Does proposed construction violate any zoning law, ordinance or regulation:�IfP ex) STA / e. 16066- f„0 y 4 s 3. Will lot be regraded ilie' Will excess fill be removed from premises: YES Flo 4. Hames of Owner of premises .C4✓t-5 1 rt 2 12/4"(1L) Address 3:N0154% t-`e /l SJ Li mow No 3 /W S Nurse of Architect s - Address Phone Nb Name of Contractor Address Phone No. 5. Is this property within 300 feet of a tidal wetland? A YES • NO .. ‘.1 *IF YES, SO[1s11XD TON MIMES PERTLY MAY BE REQUIRED. PLOT DIAGRAM Irate clearly and distinctly all buildings, whether existing or proposed, and indicate all set-baric dimensions run property lines. Give street and block number or description according to deeds and shrxw street naves and indicate hether interior or corner lot. • WEE OF-Mil 7 SS 1UNEY OP Cl/T-1 Sii 0A-vaYko being duly sworn, deposes and says that he is the applicant lane of individual signing contract) rove named, is the ®U 1\ `. said owner or owners, and is duly authorized to perform or have performed the said work and to make and file this hplication; that all statements contained in this application are true to the best of his knowledge and belief; and hat the work will be performed in the manner set forth in the application filed thererai.th. ” Torn Lo7f. ile me,this �,,/ day , � (�I _21 Notary Public .. j .... AIi4waaNOTARY PUBLIC, a.o New York •• No.01K-, --: (Signature of Applicant) Qualified in Nassau County , Commission Expires,07/18/2002 - ESSEKS, HEFTER & ANGEL COUNSELORS AT LAW 108 EAST MAIN STREET P. O. Box 279 RI VERHEAD, N.Y. 1 1901-0279 WILLIAM W. ESSEKS (631) 369-1700 WATER MILL OFFICE, MARCIA Z. HEFTER �} MONTAUK HIGHWAY STEPHEN R. ANGEL TELECOPIER NUMBER(631)369-2065 P. O. Box 570 JANE ANN R. KRATZ WATER MILL, N Y. 11976 JOHN M.WAGNER (631) 726-6633 WILLIAM POWER MALONEY CARMELA M D1,TALIA May 18, 2001 ANTHONY C. PASCA NICA B. STRUNK • Building Inspector, Town of Southold . 53095 Main Road P. O. Box 1179 - Southold, NY 11971 Re: Application of Glenn and Christine Dawson for certificate of occupancy Dear Sir: We are the attorneys for Glenn and Christine.Dawsoii, who are the owners of „ property located on Broadwaters Road, Nassau Point (SCTM No. 1000-107-10-8). On April 3, 2000 (filed April 6, 2000), the Dawsons applied for a pre-existing certificate of occupancy for the property to include the cottage located thereon, as well as the house. On that clay, Mr. and Mrs. Dawson submitted a check in the sum of $100.00 as required by Southold Town Code. I enclose, ,for your assistance, a copy of a survey of the property, prepared by ELS Associates and dated 3/24/00, showing the cottage, as well as the single-family home., From my review of the file, as well as discussions with Mrs. Dawson, I understand that you have declined to issue a certificate of occupancy for the cottage,' except as an "accessory non-habitable building" In this connection, I refer you to the housing code inspection report dated 4/13/00, and your inspection sheet dated 10/12/00, which was sent to our clients. This inspection sheet purports to ask them to remove the stove in,the cottage. I would also note that it appears -- from my review of the documents referred to previously -- that your justification for not issuing a certificate of occupancy for the cottage as a habitable dwelling -- is based on Section 100-241.G of the Southold Town Code, i.e., that somehow the nonconforming "use" of the cottage has been lost. • ESSEKS,, HEFTER & ANGEL COUNSELORS AT LAW May 18, 2001 Page 2 ! respectfully disagree with your position, and, on behalf of the Dawsons, demand that you issue a certificate of occupancy which reflects that the cottage, can be • utilized as a habitable one-family dwelling,"along with the other one-family dwelling on the property. I enclose, with this letter, two checks, both dated 4/19/01, to replace the checks previously submitted to you, because I understand that the previously submitted checks are "stale." The reasons for our demand include the following: 1. The cottage was constructed prior"to zoning. 2. The cottage is an actual one-family home with all improvements necessary for it to be used as such, including, for example, kitchen, bath, plumbing, electricity, etc. 3. It is my understanding that the Cottage bas been in continuous use; that the use of the cottage was not discontinued for the two-year period set forth in Section 100-242G. 4. The applicable provision for determining whether the cottage can continue to be used as a single-family residence is not Section 100-241G, but rather, Section 100- 242 ("nonconforming buildings with conforming uses"). Here, the cottage is located in a residential zone, and has always been used in conformity with the uses provided for in such a zone. The structure is nonconforming. YoU will note that nothing in Section 100-242 refers to a loss of rights under zoning as a result of non-use. Reserving all rights, and based upon the reasons set Forth above among others, we respectfully demand that you issue a certificate of occupancy for the Dawsons' property, which certificate of occupancy should indicate that both the single-family residence and cottage are lawfully existing. Respectfully yours, SRA:mb STEPHEN R. ANGEL Enc. cc : Mr. & Mrs. Glenn Dawson ESSEKS, HEFTER & ANGEL COUNSELORS AT LAW 108 EAST MAIN STREET P 0 Box 279 RIVERHEAD, N.Y. 11901-0279 WILLIAM W. ESSEKS (631)369-1700 WATER MILL OFFICE MARCIA Z. HEFTER MONTAUK HIGHWAY TELECOPIER NUMBER (631) 369-2065 P 0 Box 570 STEPHEN R ANGEL JANE ANN R. KRATZ WATER MILL, N Y 11976 ( JOHN M.WAGNER 631) 726-6633 WILLIAM POWER MALONEY (�(�y CARMELA M. DI TALIA October 1 , 200 t ANTHONY C. PASCA NICA B. STRUNK Building inspector, Town of Southold 53095 Main Road P. O. Box 1 179 •Southold, NY 11971 Re: Application of Glenn and Christine Dawson for certificate of occupancy SCTM No. 1000-104-10-08 Dear Sir: We represent Glenn and Christine Dawson, who are the owners of the above- captioned property, which is located on Broadwaters Road, Nassau Point. We wrote you on May 18, 2001 , on behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Dawson, and demanded a certificate of occupancy for the above-captioned property, which reflects that there are two single-family residences located thereon. Mr. and Mrs. Dawson had previously made application for such a C.O. Neither the Dawsons nor us have heard anything in connection with their outstanding applications and my letter of May 18i1' Please issue a certificate of occupancy for Mr. and Mrs. Dawson's property as demanded in my prior letter. , iResp c frilly y jrs /.1 VI 1 rSRA:mb ST:PHR. ANGEL cc : Mr. & Mrs. Glenn Dawson CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED • U S,postal'Sekvibe bEilltiEb MAIL li ttipt (l7oif estibJ1)Oiily;No Iiistira►ice Coverage Peril/ded) Article SehtTo: �Q�lir, J . 1 Postage $ /Oil I 01 1s7 Certified Fee Postmark fin Receipt Fee Here � (EleforsementRequired) CI Restricted Delivery Fee O (Endorsement Required) Q Total Postage&Fees fIJ f I N. a(Please P Inf Clearly)(lb be c p ted by matter) Street,AR.No.,o Box No. Er 5-5,05 ° t- � Po! (Prig Q Cif State,X12+• r` I Er t , c '7 PS I t5trtt 3800, sei_I eGbFse for Ihstt(]ctrbhs sENDtA EOMPLETE THIS SECTION COMPLETE THIS SECTION o)V bEfilt ti' Complete items 1,2,and 3.Also complete A. Received by(Please Print Clearly) B. Date of Delivery item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. N Print your name and address on the reverse C. signature so that we can return the card to you. a �, f//�� N Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, x t,c Add Agent seeor on the front if space permits.1. Article Addressed to;�� D. s delivery address different from item 17 0 Yes If YES,enter delivery address below: 0 No 6-5o9 S T 1 a,LA- GS 3. 31T ie4 Ao 6/1. ! �I (� Certified Mai(EJ Expr ss Mail "yJ ( Qr tleg�stered Re rn Receipt for Merchandise bitiLL+-ke-0--L Akt Aurpd10151 raiz, O.D. 4. RestttetedJ rye?(Extra Fee) ❑Yes 2. Article Number(Copy from service label) 'l(yq .3dAo, :COO 5'15p3 L.L55: ,; r . :r ; : r PS Foim 3811,July 1899, { i locimestic Return Receipt ' ` 1 r 102595-99-M-1789 - a . • - ., i . 1 . I '''s *" —1- ' \-4, -, . --;. -1, • -- •• -I •.•-1-. a .. 4 I ,._J. 0 i . . . - . •'', "':4- I • ! •- -, 1 . • . — •,....(..., .':-1.' ,,.•1• ,.1. .,_4. '-. • ' - • . . 1 . . . i ! . u '. -.Xtliiiqn0 -- .-N--- i . •••;...: --L e .....% ' to-Pli ; •- , , . . .., .... - ,... _ •, . 1' . _..., ' . 71:2g ).."..,,%, . ,. r--`'---':--'-'... ..- .-'37 1'7 17.4 ri . , A.,r.•... .T i ..1 I I ..... -... -.... 1 i :• - 1 r i i •..., , . . --.Z- _._ . _._. .• - ;.• 1 .• •, J -.- rc." ,-;•,.2";-- . . -• ti . - ' - '..-2 r- z.i -- 1 . . .—• :;1 ...' ... - . . .s• • ..-- i - • _..r. LI \ — , ..., .• c •- . . . , i t ,-; ... .. r.. • , I L .•- • , 1 . --,1 . ..„ i - • , I. • ._... . : _...' • , \ • 1 ' -- . . • / ' - - ' , _ IZ7•1 _ , r • _ ..... I-- . --• 1•:.'.11-....*-- r: ....^ _______, ....1 • .L. '•.......-..1 -• i•- i• • ......._.--i -....:-.- ,....-, -- . 1 i ----4 •a•------ • - .. ...--- . •<.-_,.... 1-. , I • _ .1:7, ___ ___ .,. -',.\\„•/......: ,1-__,, s---:Z ------ :• 7.1 • __-- . v,... , •"-f .- .7'" - . " : • : (1 - - 1' • "I 1 /j .. , t„,.4 •;,-, . •, t f ' . . . . . - . • , . , , ... ' ..".."..- --....- . . _ .......REM,Stg.4M4••••••-••..... ........-..---..-- .. : . , . • FORM NO. 2 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE SOUTHOLDi N. Y. BUILDING PERMIT (THIS PERMIT MUST BE KEPT ON THE PREMISES UNTIL FULL COMPLETION OF THE WORK AUTHORIZED) N? 8721 Z Date ,-14.67 / X l'e Permission is hereby granted to:x-1 ,-4062 ce (2:'--::::(7.7:::::ZAy...- ., 'f__,%dd.,644,6* tr-.--, ......-.....- - ., - . , , ,e'r, dr ir:1 Air 41 _t. , ,.±.1- to (4`—ati.2?..C.i...C.1:- c e.e:6-e-z-c.-tX.--61-2 . - .5.--4/.. e_f 6.— _ 49-744.,24e4,4 C6-- . at premises located at ...- ,.., ,OLA e(.0;P:e eafAdtieee4. 044.4Z- r-10?/ 094/ -`--e4/Z4 4r/ "rika.441A%-7 es-- frev pursuant to application dated , 19X.1a..., and approved by the Building Inspector. Fee s.t/...:-/ .A ' 7 a1 / ' de4141(4UX Building Inspector , • . ' . • • , • FORM NO. 4 . TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT Town Clerk's Office Southold, N, Certificate Of Occupancy • No. n1JO3. . . . . . Date • .. O. . 1976. . THIS CERTIFIES that the building located at . „ -PrciattiateTS• . . . . . Street' Map NO.Nft S.f. . Block No. Lot No. 181 Outehogue conforms substantially to the Application fpr Building Permit heretofore bled in this office dated • .4:., .1916. pursuant to which Building.Permit No. . .0721Z. dated .12. . .; was issued, and conforms to all of the require- ments of the applicable provisions of the law. The occupancy for which this certificate is issued is . .Priv.4te. .Q40. f.a03.7. .41714.3411g.v.1;t1). 104i4.cpt. (P.ogig.) The certificate is issued to A 0..Anthony:m.satt alto Omer (owner, lessee or tenant) of the aforesaid building. „ Suffolk Counti, Department of Health Approval UNDERWRITERS dERTIFICATE No.N 011,• - 4 HOUSE NUMBER . . . . . . . . . . . Street . .$rets.dvaters. Boad,•. . .N6.11.5* . Pt* .Cutokomie . • /(fL(..L. et • '/ • • Building!Inspector • • • • • APPLICANT TRANSACTIONAL DISCLOSURE FORK • 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 NAHE: Christine Dawson (Last name , first name , middle 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 - g Change of zone • Approval of plat Exemption from plat or official map Other X - (If "Other, " name the activity . ) Interpretation and reversal of Building inspector's decision 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 X • If you answered "TES, ". complete the balance of this form and date and sign' where indicated: - • i Name of person employed by the Town of Southold Title ar position of that person Describe the relationship between yourself and the town officer or employee. Eithercheck the licant ) 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) ; B) the legal or beneficial owner of any interest in a • noncorporate entity (when the applicant is not a corporation) ; e) an officer, director_ , partner, or employee of the applicantx or D) the actual applicant . - • DESCRIPTION OF RELATIONSUIP • • :::::: _20o1 Print name Christine Dawson • • I _ 1 . F • : 1 (4.16-4(21871—.Text 12 PROJECT ID.NUMBER 617.21 iSSEEM! I Appendix C • Stele Environmental Quality Review SHORT ENV1RONI ?ENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM For UNLISTED ACTIONS Only _ • • PART I—PROJECT INFORMATION (To be completed by_Applicant or Project sponsor) — I 1. APPLICANT(SPONSOR 2. PROJECT NAME • Christine Dawson and Glenn Dawson Certificate of occupancy for cottage J. PROJECT LOCATION: . Municipality Southold • . , county Suffolk • A. PRECISE LOCATION(Street address and road Intersections,prominent IlndmIrk3,etc..or provide maps 150 Broadwaters- Raod, Cutchogue, New York 11935 5. IS PROPOSED ACTION: • i ❑New 0 Ezoansion .0 Modigeationlatteration I 6. DESCRIBE PROJECT BRIEFLY: To obtain certificate of occupancy recognizing that existing cottage can be used as a single family residence. Project does not entail any alteration of the propert. • T. AMOUNT OF LAND AFFECTED: N/A Initially acres Ultimately acres e. WILL PROPOSED ACTION COMPLY WITH EXISTING ZONING OR OTHER EXISTING LAND USE RESTRICTIONS? ESI Yes ❑uo It No.describe briefly . It is tion e structurelthat tcan pbeloccupied tasha single nfamilyarresidenceeunderothe oapplicable zoning provisions. S. WHAT IS PRESENT LAND USE IN VICINITY OF PROJECT? ®Residential •• 0 Industrial 0 Commercial ❑Agriculture 0 Park/Forest/Open space CI Other - Describe: 10. DOES ACTION INVOLVE A PERMIT APPROVAL OR FUNDING.NOW OR ULTIMATELY FROM ANY OTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY(FEDERA- • STATE OR OR LOCAL)? u Yea L=%No 11 yes,list agency(st and permlVapprovals • • 11. COES ANY ASPECT OF THE ACTf.;y HAVE A CURRENTLY VALID PERMIT OR APPROVAL? ®Yss 0 N` It yec,list agency name and permit/201 oval Upon information and belief, the Town of •Southold Building Department will issue a certificate of occupancy for the other single family residence on the property and fol the cottage, but wishes to limit the cottage certificate of occupancy to a "non-habit- I2. AS A RESULT OF PROPOSED ACTION WILL EXISTING PERMITrAPPROVAL REQUIRE MODIFICATION? ®Yes 0N able StruCtllre. I CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE i Applicanttsponaora: Chhrist' a Dawson • Date: 11 l 11•Ic��j .I � i Signature: er\ II the action is In the Coastal Area, and you are a stale agency, complete (ne Coastal Assessment Form belore pr000eding With this assessment - • OVER 1 ' - r -L.. r . 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: (Separate sheet may be attached. ) None • B. Is the subject premises listed on the real estate market for sale or being shown to prospective buyers? { } Yes ( x } No. (If Yes, please attach copy of "conditions" of sale. ) C. Are there any proposals to change of alter-" land contours? ( 1 Yes- (x} No _ D. 1. Are there any areas which contain wetland grasses? N/A 2. Are the wetland areas shown on the Map submitted with this application? W.A. 3 . Is the property bulkheaded- between the wetlands area and the upland building area? N/A 4. If your property contains wetlands or pond areas, have you contacted the Office of the Town. Trustees for its deter i nation of jurisdiction? N/A E. Is there a depression or slaving elevation near the area of -proposed construction at or below five feet above mean sea . level? N/A - (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? Nosv E If none exist, please state "none." G. Do you have any construction taking place. at this time concerning your premises? No If yest please submit a cagy 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 i-his parcel? No If yes, please explain where or submit copies • of deeds. I. Please list present use or operations conducted at this parcel single family residential use and proposed use same . _ • • Authorized Signature and Date Christine Dawson 3/87, 10/90Ik a.' _ a �-- P • 5 e 04.0M . /T TER s . L (E' ..(2dCR- .. \\ . _______ ,3 24-�2O ci 1t 72 9 9 ' , • T/E z/itAd ' Fc.2.0+6' x- I N Iwe. oexti \I 2w I iii 03 .. ` / STy — I - l; 8L X_ k Ni\.I ai r„ O a 32 iN Viao • In v L /ie� \ Z! L //8-7/260 'v F i SC.e. ,..2a€441 3 - /- I D,,,000 I 37.E t I. ( oc-c'tI i sr,- ., Z9.3 • C F.e. NJ \i ill°41 Y 37/ t 24'.2' , F FG. A S tZ c• I o t 0 L. //‘611/4/3 Zeny.9 "` , . ') 'ti - , ') a ..6,.../2..4 `�'!t,' NO TE- \ v N 8 - 3.ri SU €UEYE'O Al S 3 } A &4// D "./.O ti J i 0 ,i I� /// �O S ES'S/OA/. 3 tf e Ii N V NJ Ns O 0\ Tim z-/A1C kr) flow. /2 i r.. i /3 /00/qt) f" Imo" 5i'-'���t�Mr G-1-,• . .., , p Vin, ,��';. / - %c rvey isUnauthorizedviion of Sectoron' addto true wYork F .. {• -i Is a violation of Searo t 7209 of the New York YE "' S State Edtxatlort law E '� w �'��'� rt. Q� Copies of this survey �� Associates map not tearing the land surveyor's inked seal or embossed seal shall not Engineering - Land Surveying ‹.:::,AAbe considered to be a vald true copy r 730 Park Avenue Guarantees or certifications indicated hereon A shall run only to the person for whom the survey Huntington, 1 tl Y 11743 NO RESPONSIBILITY IS ASSUMED BY THE UNDERSIGNED FOR Is prepared and on his Behan to the tale corrrpa ANY SURFACE, SUB-SURFACE,AERIAL EASEMENTS, SUB-SURFAC ny,governmental agency and lending institution (516) 427-5133 listed hereon,and to the assignees of the lending UTILITIES AND/OR STRUCTURES IN OR OUT OF EASEMENTS II institution Guarantees or certifications are not SO PROVIDED. transferable to additional instttuticns or subse - LOT /8/ `�O 9 ��L f7G �2 '�� quint owners ON MAP OF 4A9. '/r2 LEO "41,0 ' ' d'F iV41S,s• e/ ,�YJ` The offsets for dimensions)shown hereon Iron SITUATE C.:-.4471:-.W°6 SUFFOLK COUNTY, N Y the structures to the property lines are for a spy G - -.---v ,f---1-1• 45-7-7"-- --� ���✓ citic purpose and use and therefore are not in GUARANTEED ONLY FOR 7 /y� / Y7r'G-- 4 t- A it tended to guide the erection of Fences Retaining UNDER TITLE/W-/4S"�f'�`s'`S�6?OF f��' •• <,5_5:7-47,-,4i-- "�-�'�����i "y"' ' Walls Pools Patios Planting areas addition to ,/.e'J T ,4?Av<_kv/r_-4!// 7-/-r- ,/3/5 / 'f4/y`.c f `0. az-/14 5! buildings and any other Construction - - , //S C /VOW, ;.Qc 1 -eT/41./, (U.5"9) 0 , CTI� 000f�� p � �/0 -O SCALE 1' >•5-�' FILE JOB 00:32 ,. 7'•, , r+.'!. , . , ',',{i,,, =ice NO,:#!, ` (�{�/f= 1A �( L r r ',lt( i:'- 4'. +t,• •-� '.• .j,:l7t TOWIl 9!,-,;('� ti9IRD'i.' i ' 4 l , - ' • , ! „1,, I +- •j•. 1.,4 ,eA. uI1.DING:;�DQii�P•AQRIpTIOENT • � • i;,iyi,yi•t 't.:r ,1 `:Xi.•" {i!']f'kI �CI-ERI(1S OFFICE ',�''�`'•ri:}•_:fi!"Y,i9',; '( `91,1.1'• , • t';.., r'" R t, �'<.,,.,..:. yr, '*t_A7:i, nCdr Sii4JTiiini n, • • ;k;1f� �,. ,,.It1.,_='k,vA',ft , •'f'!`.y�lif'••'%,Ff..47' i:NRj Y1. ! ;I rt;! ,,hy";r�7;�`,",.,. �clr.""; 3 :�_ t I., y i f';F; • .7; �p`11'},4i,�itt''R. ;' . :iaq it'_f,,•1f+- 1 ;•sr" 0}� +• ',' ,t• ,,, ,s,1 .s ..,. , . . m'. 1, Ir." ��'r `S} ;i1,y r iFM ki" ',t t.Air:A e'.,=•'' 7-i+( t r,,.y o r. 1 ., r, ::`t s-,..'.. 1.•`- '•',,, •,4•}' ZE-1,1/ ii yt,-tt:y '' ,v,.- 1 ',3t„;1, " �trpi, i,rrrt"4,� 'F 4ti�- 1'5`x^• A' ,. .e7 9i ,8F -:i",S' 11.9' ,E4 ^,�'�., 'i.• �-Y_i( k'h, ; w:if..'?.�'r�47..!•;"c i F� -t, G i�'i t ' 't' FFi__ .� i;t��.,- j;r•i:k;� 1;"ar-••F'='':', g, - r,ysy..x,-,3•!: A n 4„‘a,/,',//x17 ,rf,. i" :- u, ,�:c;ur�`.-it:!; ' ti*"•_,r-,L 'r:t; T PPIICOIOn N4, r r 7erlr,eirrtt ned i s�;t• tt'<' tT`trT(�ilttref, ,, Tt c i •., /;+ tiro d' j8, ,ht Gs'!~,," „i 1,�a11f','(,1,` , ,. } r 4,; sf 'f5&r tote '� $PrtriiteN4ll, -TTI} !- t f •tr T1ti7.1 1 1 t ! 1Tl �' .{ fr. l 1�!t }tt 1 ..4 t•, :'''-,.,w^,¢ t;i ` •e•'a•!,--• 4. f..,.' -1'.,��bi-,,-r i } + 1 t t (, r ti ' i4.:l.si;,i-4,' ,f.itjJ,#,r+ ,y ' ' ' i,t �„,+fv1,�r`�",;i;'-rs ,4;74 i !,1 tr •r„..L,.,,y , , I1� {1,i•,'Ir. � : tn 'ti'`,rl,,. r• Fii7 -::3..;'h'.rfi L^t>i,.e ;,!,;.,.1.,.-4-..,,-.5::•,1,1!....,.;.;. .,.'.�" .,`•-, •,,r,-;t..wft.. - y <F i.1-• °'!t 4%-i' t TTlI } T t ,In1. 1 .`f;;. w,t."7 'a/ }1 ,ItitIllittlfuln ltliltlTt�,tei111T�um a ur T}T ! ► tttpu iturimit t e!e •• ' - 1,z.! 7;r,. L^., "„m- , ,-.•+'j9x�lli+'1 ,1 „tl'.r5li,li''J{xr;':-„ •1i�.;';4•••'': I.1 .1• 1'H :I 1 _ ;,'• " 911 , .,j.. •1•:,;•11;,19 ty;•-it,,yt';,11•,M,ii•i:,-c-l..:,r',:' 1,;; ! ''jG7: i(f;, ,+ ..1 d' '•' I'^'s.",.ri'aiY+•%'a ,'-, }fir ;Y•f�lliitirtitlitftrli! IP1rmttlitmettilimttilly V t,•pli111tilur11!Il 11T ItOPIII!"111�rlt,T111117T .'1'' i.: .: 1 ''R1 1 -Ii.,•+ iT P,'411!,'::r-5141, &'ia-!,`l-.>-tY'.;',o, 01`.,::. •' 1,-;7•'':'a!'%i'' , . 1 'f` ., 1 r 8"i' ' Fr+ !:'` ti tal' 4%-= s 1' •1 y:-1 r! f y'y91':v. 4.'"••,4.:`.1.:'-; r-1'.' .•••ae�i+' b,I ,1 't 14,-�'it'<.ilii'" ',• ♦ • r +I+, 4 ;,,,;„4y,•1•••.,^, {!=`t'•• I s. ,,.,,v1'(',,:.1^'.i” ,,,l ,,i11, ,1"1SF-r"'• ate tP -! rT t9. 4,1,. ! I • r , 9.11,7••• 1 , ;} ` t. " (.uiidinq lirlspector) ` ,' ' ::�P�41 �'1' QN�FSR �UIt;D�tG 'PRMIT • , ' ( . .. * igte it41.14t7a •+o• lit$1.1I:11,1•itttrtt•7, 19,,7r6,t!i•, ` pd., ' '.s INSTRUCTIONS • ilii r . I • 'completely, , T 'bytypeWriter ar in ink and submitted n triplicate to the Building , , I. Th4s1 gppli�atien must be filled,in typ w i' I :tort,with 3,Fete pf phn§,:+�ccgrOlta1'ptmt"pian t4 scale; Feeoccording to schedule... 11 , .I Plot pigh,`iha ilhg If:1644.0i offiiot•p d't�f iNlldipg§ sin-preens s, relationship to adjoining premises or public streets 01 and givinsi.0,detgiled-description at layout pf property must lle drgWn on the diagram which is part of this application. , Tho wotk;s pyeredthy thi ,applipatlbn1 may not 13e•commerl ed before issuance of Building Permit, tipon,APpfoygl:Af.thit eiffilfrttipfir Mei U4iidin9 1pspector,Myill issue q Building Permit to the applicgnt, Such permit '. he Kept;anufhe-Oreini§e§1,eysilable,foLinspectionxthreughb9't the work, e . certificate Occt a c ' NR i?uildlri ' hgii he ecu ie oi•_iisi=d In w!i le or in part for any purpose whatever until aof �p n y 'neve begtt a anted by the 1NiIding Inspector, '+,-;. ;•, .. , , j€fi' ,. - - :5,. '4IF._.•,,4';','�•„ .,i' 'I',i '• i'ar' 'y! i%�' "+•,.'s!�"'s • t'•,',Yy,1„ , , - , }l iiu,� ;'"ry ,,?.,g7 !'• i ,- idse.",..'tt.,, s g ' _ •:.1 'tiff, t '�:,,e a o the issuance of a Building Permit pursuant to the P�I�ATIiaN,`I�•N�R��Y.MAP�:ta the �Uil�iris.P'p rrii�gnt for ss ce e a So 'S CQurit New York, and other applicgtlsi lows, Ordinances or I •n�,�ane;QfdinQn�a,pf•;th syT.wig.ofs• .uth�ld,j,,-pffpll4,•, , t'r Ations,fnr.the cgnstructiort`Af.l?ulidings,additions nr,alterotions,;or for removal or demolition,'as herein described• ' 1 ipplicont;Pgr8es,to,cornpiyyith all ppplicahJQ Iwo(prdinpnces, Wilding code, housing cadet•9nd regulations, and to I' authorized Inspectors•on premises and in hulldings far,necessary inspections, ' tt 1Ti • ,,t •, , • ••• •99••••1.99•!, • _ •• •• •. , , • I.71•!t• ;i, - ;i;,;• ,: i (Signature of appli' t, or name, if,a corporation) ~'�' " 1,• '' Thgmpson St ShorehamA••11.Y ' 11786 ' < i `� "' 44144•.:S,.S r..1....1..,,e77.•�•!f •, 1:Jt...T.�..,1,/....,..1...,.9;1 ,.t i (Address of appiiiant)• f <',, 1.1 4 :�' `•, :.�" .: ., 1 whether'cippltcgnt Is°weer, lessee,,agent, Architect, engineer,, general contractor, electrician, plumber or builder, ' 1, a, j :s, 't;t w' i 4l,` tl,,,!.]p.e., ' }-/I'``I •'7.14;j1q_ j - ti.;.Fv,,} - - -, ,, ,••• , t •-41RTteltti,tirt•1tl119•t,•1117ttlT,IIt�I'IV1ttltri!•• •• ,t'tittl+IT,I4I,tttttlttllttt''III'!t1't4 IIfti141ir11.7•!!1111T1tt4It•/1•4tT't••7•444t11414•44•41.1.444911.1•tt9itit1t1101•• :•I a. . , ' •, ii, -•• Pisacano : - ' i rr r , . , 1 r: „ • e of oW,,,, of premises titttt44I9 :Tt11?T1s,.4414»9971'Tit111l1.:9•!t••1!•rll?tIert,!I1714441t1441!•Ir•41.41.1'4 r t'•• 1t11If1,tt,I•••I},t ! t,•••IIl444•1•i 1•• 1 ?licant is .o corporate, signature of duly nut r . , orized off icer,• ' ..:. ' 1,•,-1,9,,,,,, ,,,itr141!!!-tit!r!•,174,•1S7t,41,lIT!,1,1,11•I1pr,•• t111t!ttt' - ' (Name• and title of corporate officer- ' ' ` _ (+rj „ • II ']gilder}s i—icteriSe No, ,•,,,r,t, ,,,,,H1IrlittttH1117,•„1•l•1ft••tte;lT 1 ' Plumbers i-ieense No, r*et7•t„tlr,t,•e'r'” 'rr.ltt,r!t,t ,4••1,11 • i•• ; • Electrician's l-icense No, ItrrfIr•!,!nr,t•t•.•t!ferlt„tltIt,r4'lrti„ - ! • Other Trade's license No;`„414111,`11,ette,•t•,e�it;llltttf;tIrt!Rtttitt,' ... . Antel'>clecl I • r,• , , -•c cgtion-af land on whic. Br d w tirk ���p :-R944,-----,-;n ;' A , � j rit ti. , 181 n Ill �done;' Mgr).Na,i 1�>ap, .�,.t• I.,.,G;• tl,t,p,.,;! Lot No. , ,1441 pg.d it s .NaSsati Point ' Street and,Numher toe • tilt41454t)1littltl,4tr,,,•tttifti,7,1, tliftt17Fr• tri,tl!itiittlij•tt••1„i,•1se1,1•t•••4•,,t,rt7Tttt1'Municipality. li ttttrlt• , , £t "t., e pa ty State'existing use• 'and occupancy'of premises"and intended use and occupancy of proposed constrtictlons . • ' q, 'XI$itirg `IS•O• grid•`pccupgrilcy ITttt• pt,VeerT I t4')f ,linrf, Cr • ,�• s ` �� r t , tt •y c n•;crc,t•r.t �,�,•tt1••t+t••}•1t Trt•!itrtitr•tttt !t4,•9:!L r,:•rI,!• 4' bt'• `<°lntendea `use`'gtld'occilpal�cy 9:• .sir•I_ t� rr',,,` .••. •,•, • 1t1179r4Ii•trt•Tt••,t41•rt• .k,,„tic^,tr,s;.a‘: • .—.— - . ---- . ---..—.—_.----- . ' 1 . , I . . 1 , ,. , , ••..... •1 7, , 1„..j,),,,,. •I •••• ....; f if. 1 ....1 VI ri . . i . . . "', --,4 1 • .: - - 1 . _ , .. - I , . . . .. . , ... . , . . - I\ i . 1 ' 1 li ; 1 . I I I.' 1 --\I m 1 q 0 •- 7k,. - Li, --1 i- ' .,.I"1 t: 1- . ... .. • - .-,.•-,--I. .•".‘ ; ,' 11 1 ' '- _ I • . ;1,',...j ...•''' L•' ‘. _.- ,..,--:-•+-'''''''''- _ _,.•.--:.--•-•"- . • •,-..1 I ......1 t . .-,-., _ __ ( G - ..... ,.. , ,i .- ._._, , ...... • 3, I-I- I:e 1 ._.. . r1 -,-; I ' 4. • . it 1 1 . ..-• . . . .- t---" 1 . I _ .-3- • 5 1 _ I ....1 •- i )----7;-. •-- < \ , ,, - L 1 _ -- ._.. , _ _ .- - I 1 .•,..i.*1 - •• - 1, • r . . I . .1 s _ 1 _ . • • - ' — 1. • '.. \ \ • • - . t - i I;-..- . I ---- - / - 1"- .. ...•• '" , . ..-- -.------- , -- - '4.• ,_. --- ;;;:i...... \ t,_ •1_ i -.; . F , .. ...., .----, , 1 ..----' _ --4 .. .•' ..---- .K._,..,..... • —.A.- 1 'r\‘, •/ .:. <"•1 ` ' ' - *------- - , i., _,— -- . •,-a____----- ; • 7.1 . -..... --ti• - , "--1- . • .• •• , ."''. ' . ' ./ . 11 t. 1 '," 7.4 • , < ,:‘, -: ,,,. 3 • . • I ,, •-., , 1 f i ' , . , . . . . . ( , . ____ FORM NO. 2 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT • • TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE SOUTHOLD, N. Y. BUILDING PERMIT (THIS PERMIT MUST BE KEPT ON THE PREMISES UNTIL FULL COMPLETION OF THE WORK AUTHORIZED) N9 8721 Z Doti-44E7 ,` 19 Permission is hereby granted to (e,;7274/ 4 • CIC _A-�-tt to L t,�,r ..LL.{_..4- t. _ a-L -- t= r1 / ! j• E�ll.f. �f`� , at premises located at �'�' 'h-.f"�� ••: fi . r r r ;1. 11..!1 4C t ' pursuant to application dated c , 19a..., and approved by the Building Inspector. 41/40 Fee $.fr , .11//// Ace,e44604441.‘ Building Inspector FORM NO. 4 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT • Town Clerk's Office Southold, N. Certificate Of Occupancy • No. Z.7.1103. . . . . . Date Aug: •11). • •2 1916. THIS CERTIFIES that the building located t • • -Broach/ate-lib lit'd Street Map Block No. Lot No, 181 Outekague conforms substantially to the Application fOr Building Permit heretofore Med in this office dated • July 19.76. pursuant to which Building Permit No. . 43721Z. dated 107.6, .; was issued, and conforms to all of the require- ments of the applicable provisions of the law. The occupancy for which this certificate is issued is . 1'4V:tit 0. MO. f.1140-:141: .4X40,114rig.V.011. 0..til1.p.i.cm„ (P.00) The certificate is issued to A* •Iiittlactw'.P1.0eoatto Owner (owner, lessee or tenant) of the aforesaid building. Suffolk County Department of Health Approval fl. R• UNDERWRITERS CERTIFICATE No. 011 f :I HOUSE NUMBER . . . . . . . 8.0 . . . . Street . .giroadwaters. .Outohogue 04.)6./.• et • / ' Building!Inspector • i • ,k.... ,67 (-.,. r G ;,td .. ,, , f , ,� _ , TOWN OF SO TH L® PROPERTY RECORD CARD A? Y e OWNER STREET /50 VILLAGE DIST. SUB. LOT g G (ems n * 0-11 r i k),-- --4 L FORMER OWNER N E ACR. f I , e...� iu'�/t� , 4-OF S W TYPE OF ,� BUILDING �, < , V%erc1. Eye r A 107,5a(7.042o RES. ;:j ) SEAS. VL. FARM COMM. CB. MISC. Mkt. Value 1 ,D IMP. TOTAL DATE REMARKS//2/4/ / c/eei Li At kire r a00/4,,, ,, in i41,-; 1 r )10_a X0 6 3 d 0 96 66 d/ t •',,. ,? ..2J 7 6 , - a 74 ecl44, r6o01Al6 1'o A4 tc7d',e" , Wea.ve l.. f ,a'�-: C, ; ' 3 0 0 5-c) ,0 . ////,/,,/,,,-,, V/O0 ✓a /c/, i%1/6 cfrd m/),r, j2d ve I-- fQ 4'!0-aca fy d, /s 6 6 , 3 Tao 1/4-(',Z o6 I( 2/2s/7a 9.2A? leAi,A f-i*.5029�.Z/ IL//Id 4,01 a, ala 4, Z.,C , l-d+ /S 6 o .3Pa O 5.3 Civ / V/7/7 7 W/2/Z aLDe'Z, (97z' z 8t,,,Lz p/c ic, zC .?9/t/7 r /d 4lo eid o ?/'.S cc C C�rr G o , /L r AGE BUILDING CONDITION /3i/oo_ L!a 01i33_ 6 ,b&a 1.11)-P . ) AiW$Oi w -- -2//7 S NEW NORMAL BELOW ABOVE FARM Acre Value Per Value Acre 1 Till( ' ' 1 Tillable 2 >;� Tillable 3 Woodland �/ Yv ' rs` 0 Swampland FRONTAGE ON WATERbC 454 A-6—i..• 9'r t/d ��ik t"fir, 6 %'v , Brushland FRONTAGE ON ROAD f,f gam ' 6 4 /32// y(it Iv _ytd d House Plot DEPTH J y 4 &(,e _d, . mss BULKHEAD Tota — — DOCK 5, ._,.......... 4./..,......, .----_,/- .f.--..-4 -- ,--,...7.-_,-,,--: -- • r / , „ ,410 ,.e.i. • ' "---- --, . P /-• ,a., V... ' "-- • '''''' ke, lik,...,:- . -- -..--- 1 :,p,/,:,-„..„ , ,... • - ..„,-.7*- si- 1 ••••••• . 111111111E11111•111011111E1111111111111E i. 'iv' • ------_-_-_-_- - ,Aorsoio..:-•,,ft..1,; .„;.?:, :› --.1.,.. ,_• -• 1 COLOR rmr, - -„4'-- • ---"-,-7.,%: cia:; Faill,t;,C.:4-k.V;g: ll 111111 11111111111111111111 r, 'r , ...... .,u,:_,„4.,., :0.1.1RoW,70:16. - igt1 1:: 1! 44-" f‘• - - '-'-:'7" *. .--- "•,. 1r l'' li --5_,') 1 1 .`,Id .I,4'9°'::.,It•' A. t 1 - !'4 :.'!'7,;---..t.,".. ,•:44.), - .. ::: 1 i o ‘"1:114:.-'''''''./11 1111 II 1 111111111111111111 n ii---\:. " TRIM 4 ?;Vi., ,ki, .. : IF 0 . 1 ri , . 8_ : . ; ..:..A 1:":.'"'',‘ El L17:-:. !:, 11111 11- 111111110,11111.1101111 11, I . , , t.t .,.:: VIA " ' II: t/YLfrt<1 MENNE El Illitra111111111111111V_ .z..-...--- .- ------ . i MOMMENNI Marin .. -_ ._ • _ ,. , IiI 1Y1 Ell ---1'. • :. IIIIIFl : I I I. .- • - 414 i - , .. - i 111111. IN1111111111111111111111 _ —-- -- - — ----- / Dinette Bath Foundation M. Bldg. . :- t J., ( ef ''' _ P--/ '714; ;, Extension .22 v "--Z,./tn =640 / 9?4; z *:?...-.-:1 1 a 9 ) asernent - Floors K. ' Extensi ./ Ext. Walls ,i .,• , Interior Finish tt,Ilis ,..:.„./ _LR. 3h . ; /„. ,,,. ..,„,,,,/, 3,,i-•,-.4.-.) z,,,..-ee .f -.-k.,,,, -- - )• • , 7..5'.'" ' DR. .ii-t, Extension x / g : /,-. -I J ,...,r;:-/ g' 1 9 2. //Fire Place Heat ' Type Roof c--,g '.7-L7 Rooms 1st Floor BR. '4' , I — , —7..16. P ecreationlRoom Rooms 2nd Floor FIN. B. or. ,/ / 6? x /7.,',, "--- / ‘ 0 /60 /el- a */ Fr3ecir / x 2_3 = &//51 7 ,2-s /63 vmer . Driveway Breaezgw.yy w A,..,/,/,‘ _,.._ i 2_,R, 1/ 4 /6 Patio 0. B. Total 1 37 rig / , ik. if . • 13 AVAYt/9I 4—/V 5 ` ce4/ + M _^ g6CL /"/C// .1„,,,,,,---reN 77`4� %7 - i ® 3-24-2OC)a 9-- 7z, 9 9 r/. G/A/.6 Fc.z.ot"' v.- 11 NII _ k IWo.ocrhl z� I I I / sry1 I-, s 9 a:z 1.e z kg -.3,-,. \ k.‘ ow CO 3e v Ci 82� 7-6 /90 v In L./18/,-?/S¢,3 { ist L //8,57/260 y sc.e..-Ivya(r - -i b,.aoo l 37,4t loeul Asn- w r'E9.3t -9 37/t a « \ *. uz` c• 0 i Fc./5 ci L //‘a//4/3 e k (4 ,) g «Nz 449t" NOTE q W 614p u/ o V i of 3.8— SU�'UEY<5O .GI S f 13-1 MOn1viYlE�v/" p -vO e•a /N /'OSEss/oAv. t. 3 '1 k v N N -1ll . o 0\ ri - /NE s 8,,o°17',50 fry / nor .. — , 9� _. _ T g°6417 . • Unauthorized alteration a adddnn to this survey 5 a voiapm of Section 7209 of the New York / Stale Edunalon Law / ELS Associates Cones of Ih5 survey map not beanng the land iii surveyor$inked seal or embossed seal shall not Engineering- Land Surveying be Consdered to be a vald true Copy Guarantees or certllicalnns indicated hereon 730 Park Avenue shall run only to the person to whom the survey Huntington, NY 11743 is prepared and on tus behalf to IM ane compo NO RESPONSIBILITY IS ASSUMED THE UNDERSIGNED FOR fly governmental agency and larking rnslnutun (516)427-5133 ANY SURFACE,SUBSURFACE,AERIAL EASEMENTS,SUB-SURFAO listed hereon and to the assignees of the lending UTILITIES AND/OR STRUCTURES IN OR OUT OF EASEMENTS IF tnshtuton Guarantees or certifications are nnl transferable to addtnnal Instnulms a subse Q .0 f SO PROVIDED went ransf owners LOT /`�/ as/� 8 -/S-/,Z Z 3 ON MAP OF/9/)94/ e...0./' M.GP ','' �F ,f/AS IAO//Yt -2� OGT The onsets for dlmensonsl shown hereon Iran SITUATE C4 l06/OG✓6- IM stmciorei In Irp[vnpeny line,ore fa a We SUFFOLK COUNTY,N Y GUARANTEED ONLY FOR GL ,a.output..am use and therefore aro not m �v .‘ C�.e/ST//YE ..:947,145-47•0C/ u..Nd to aude she enrlrinel Farr or Ret Immo UNDER TITL ErM•F'/»S 41:•S OF ,WA 9 W41657-"e" ✓Ceeee/4:1 ; /4/C1 Watt Puue. Pnlp<Pt nhna areas addauvl In An,Pato, Intim areas /./.e.S-r ,q,AQ.e . r<_:.o"/ -1,r1e. - ,1s4/.E1 Yc41- CO, OZ"A%Y. /f,`'C' /i. 7* ,96c<- Cr9.e-diaB.¢./D,v, (e/ -,Pj T M /6t,L7 -/0 y2 -/0 -0 8 SCALED +��. FILE JOB Qui ;3 COUNTY OF SUFFOLK OCT 2 8 ROBERT J GAFFNEY SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE THOMAS ISLES, AICP DEPART MENT OF PLANNING DIRECTOR OF PLANNING October 21, 2002 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) Dawson, Christine and Glenn* 5068 Taylor, Robert and Barbara 5156 Kwit,Nathan and Susan 5163 Toth, William and Vicki 5165 Voelkel, Robert and Maureen 5167 Berkoski, Antone and Geraldine 5168 Sachman(Stephen) and Quadrani (Alexia) 5171 Uhlinger, Thomas and Karen 5175 Booth, Helen 5183 Quintieri,Edward and Paula 5188 *Premises should be encumbered by appropriate restrictions, particularly as set forth by the Z.B.A. Very truly yours, Thomas Isles Director of Planning • S/s Gerald G. Newman Chief Planner GGN:cc LOCATION MAILING ADDRESS H LEE DENNISON BLDG -4TH FLOOR e P 0 BOX 6100 a (5 16) 853-5190 100 VETERANS MEMORIAL HIGHWAY HAUPPAUGE, NY 11788-0099 TELECOPIER(5I 6) 853-4044 rF, Page 35—June 20,2002 Hearing Transcripts �� Southold Town Board of Appeals Prepared by Jill Thorp,Transcriber Member Tortora:No further variances. Ms. Wickham: Which again I think is very reasonable. There is a big difference whether you prohibited a further subdivision which may or may not be as of right than a variance. Mr. Goggins: I think an application to make a variance is a right that you have, if you get turned down by the Building Department. That is your only grievence. So what you are doing is cutting off someones right to appeal.That is unlawful. Member Horning:I would agree. Chairman: Let me clear that issue up right now. I have sat throught 7 specific councils that I have communicated with during my tenure on this Board which is 22 1/2 years. The consences of them at that time,and I haven't ask for consences from this council was that you can't use the word never.I don't know if it is going to stand up. I will confer with council on this one Ms. Wikcham. I think that is pretty much all • you can ask of us at this point. Ms.Wickham:Thank you. Mr.Goggins:Thank you. Chairman:No further comment I will make a motion in closing the hearing. SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION * * * 9:06 p.m.-Appl.No.5068 -Glenn and Chnstme Dawson. Chairman:I want to wrap this up tonight Sir as quickly as possible. Mr.Angel: Steve Angel.Essex,Hefter and Angel for the applicants.We have had two substance of hearings on this matter.The only thing that I have prepared for tonight was a very short letter responding to the letter that was submitted last time by Mr. Cippetelli. Also setting forth clearly what, I think there was some confusion as to whether we were seeking a C.O.for two single family residences or simply seeking the right to have the cottage as an accessary. I but that in writing. Stating that we are seeking a Certificate of Occupancy for a single family home with an accessory cottage.There is no intention to use it as a seperate dividable seperately usable single family residence. I have prepared copies of this letter and I really have nothing more to say than submit. Chairman: Thank you. Mr. Cippitelli of course you where not given the previlage of dealing with this, so we are going to ask you to respond in writing.Do you have anything verbal you would like to say tonight. Mr. Cippitelli: Only that Mr. Kline, one of the neighbors that has been at the previous 2 meetings and was unable to attend tonight,he had his daughter meet me up here and hand me a letter that he had prepared and asked me to hand it in to the Board. Chairman: Surely,We will take that. We would ask you for your reply within the next week or two.If there is a reply back from Mr.Angel we get everything done.We are closing this out for verbatim testimony as of tonight. We will close it totally on July 11. O.K. We thank for coming down and we apologize for draging everybody back in here.Have a lovely evening. SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION * * * Page 36—June 20,2002 Hearing Transcripts Southold Town Board of Appeals Prepared by Jill Thorp,Transcriber 9:15 p.m.Appl.No. 5135.Michael and Kathy Perivolaris. Ms. Mesiano: Thank you for accomidating me. I am here on behave of Mr. & Mrs. Perivolaris seeking relief from the Zoning Code. They are proposing to improve an existing front porch. Which is located 24' from the current front lot line. That distance is greater then the set back of the remainder of the structure, which is at 22.1'. The Zoning code requires a front set back of 35'. I have photo's of the house which really says it all.There are two photo's for you.They simply intend to enclose the present porch that is enclosed.It does have a concrete slap. Chairman:This is the old Gladys Nine house? I think the lady's name was Gladys Nine,the prior owner. Ms. Mesiano: O.K. I don't know. All I know is Mr. &Mrs. Perivolaris presently own this. They intend to make this their primary residence.They are referbishing the house now,but they have not touched that front corner. They have put on new siding and windows, etc. An undesirable change will not be produced in the character of the neighborhood. No increase in density will result in the proposed action, no change to the foot print of the house. The expansion to the or west would result in new location of the septic system and/or the oil tank. What would be in extreme measure in lignt of the situation. This is the most cost- effective and conservative means and increasing the living space without increasing a lot coverage. The amount of relief requested is not substantial because the proposed activity will maintain existing for your setback of 24 feet. The proposed activity is the greatest front setback than the North West section of the house at 21.1'. No proposed increase of lot coverage,presently at 10.32 feet. No change in the footprint or the bulk area of the house. There will not be an adverse effect or impact on the physical or mental conditions in the neighborhood. No increase in density or traffic. No increase in sewage proposed. No additional runoff would be generated. Dry wells will be utilized as necessary. This is the minimum that is necessary inadequate to at the same time preserves pretects the character of the neighborhood. Chairman:This front porch is going to be made living area of the house? Ms.Mesiano:Yes. Chairman: I just have to tell you that I failed to mention to everybody that I am a Park District Commissioner in the Mattituck Park District that was established in 1941 by State Statute. This piece of property is contiguous to the Mattituck Park District property. If anybody has any objection to my either officiating at this hearing or to my voting on this application,I would appreciate your input at this time. Ms.Mesiano:I have no objection. Chairman:The Board? The Board:No Objection. Chairman:Any questions of Ms.Mesiano? Member Tortora:What is the size of the porch now? Ms.Mesiano:I believe the porch now is 8 and a fraction X 13 and a fraction.Yes, 13.1 X 8.1. Chairman:Ruth any questions? Member Oliva:No. Chairman:Vincent? • •' Page 37—June 20,2002 Hearing Transcripts Southold Town Board of Appeals Prepared by Jill Thorp,Transcriber Member Orlando: The concrete slab,you will be building directing on that?You don't have to replace it,fix it up?It will support? Ms. Mesiano: He dosen't intend to pull up the concrete slab.He will probably put a false floor so as not to be walking on the slab. I don't believe he intends to pull up the concrete slab. That has not been expressed to me. Member Orlando:It was structurely sound enough to support the extension? Ms. Mesiano: He tells me it was. I am not a structural engineer. I couldn't a test to it. He tells me that he didn't intend to pull the concrete out. Does that have a bearing on the application? If you need more information,I can gather that. Chairman: No, we don't go into concstruction design. What it is going to do is to disrupt the entire front yard of the house,if you do that.I think that is one of the issues that we are trying not to do. Ms.Mesiano:He is trying to do the least amount of impact to the exterior as well. Member Tortora: Just as a point of reference, the building ispector had said that the existing set back 22.1 which we see on the survey. They say the new front yard setback is going to be 24. That kind of threw me when you said that the width of that is 13... Ms. Mesiano: The nearest point from the front of the house to the front lot line is 22.1.That would be the north/east corner of the house. The existing porch is at 23.8 according to the survey. Member Tortora:In other words is going to be flush with? Ms.Mesiano:No,he is enclosing what is there. Member Tortora:He is not going to make it flush? Ms.Mesiano:No,he is enclosing what is presently under the roof. Member Tortora: So actually it is going to be a little less 13'. Ms. Mesiano: That was my point. The existing setback of this porch that is going to be concerted has a greater setback then the rest of the house. I fail to see why we are here, but someone decided it was neccessary. Member Tortora:It would probably about 8'by maybe 12.6 or something like that rather then 13. Ms.Mesiano:Yes you are right. I have a scale right here.Yes it is 12'. Member Tortora: O.K. Chairman:Does anybody else in the audience would like to speak for or against this application? Seeing no hands I make a motion in closing the hearing... SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION * * ** it 6,6A, /2:UO ,� , ADDITIONAL INFO FOR BOARD MEMBERS Re: Appl. of 6 1- _ ,(,eticl,.S''nt. Hearing Date: 6 _ 4e O 2- From: From: a.eArtecc. --o / = . £P 501_9/ e ' s—;/ /h CQ #35 c'aP' joii Total pages attached: • • •.f • R c IJ FORM NO. N AYfri TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE SOUTHOLD, N. Y. BUILDING PERMIT (THIS PERMIT MUST BE KEPT ON THE PREMISES UNTIL FULL COMPLETION OF THE'WORK AUTHORIZED) N9 4296 Z Date Pao 19 , 19 69 Permission is hereby granted to: --A v.441 . 3••P&sagi x••242 RecIq Polot NA* 11192 to ' Su/ld/.ar..e.4diti i int as •exl.eting-dwelling at premises located at IA.#.183 USX= Paint..> .. ...Pzio 3• SO Evettdwaterenavad ctlktchlilgtie .1446 pursuant to application dated ' , 19.0.., and approved by the Building Inspector. Fee $.. sOO 6/03 jtir U ( Building Inspector FORM NO. 4 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT Town Clerk's Office Southold, N. Y. Certificate Of Occupancy No. .Z .3548. . . . Date . . . .July .11, , 1969 . THIS CERTIFIES that the building located at .Broadwaters. Road Street Map No.Naogaau. Rt. Block No. Lot No.#. .181 Cutch,ague,. N.Yo. . . Club Prop. Inc. Amended Map "A" conforms substantially to the Application for Building Permit heretofore filed in this office dated May. . . . 16,. . . . ., 19.69. pursuant to which Building Permit No. . 4296. 2 dated May 19,. , 19.69 , was issued, and conforms to all of the require- ments of the applicable provisions of the law. The occupancy for which this certificate is issued is private .one. .eamily.dwelling The certificate is issued to A.. Anthony. P.isacano (owner, lessee or tenant) of the aforesaid building. Suffolk County Department of Health Approval `Q-N/ilellatd" Building Inspector House # 181 Broadwaters Road .,r \ • ,1, ti` ' 3ty�, __ i ..1 \.iL 1 A.,.70:.) AdOO • f Ad00) `N AdUJ 10L13X� `Otl3X OZ13X1 , 1'1 O113J AdOJ .. .,....,_,-. ..a t0£n ��°� ��, {� -2..• Ad00 .* ;•41 _ •, \ Ordi0 'Otl3 ,.. htl3X ,.; 3X) • + _ • '' I ;1f + ii o �' +i , I r.. + /r �^ -fir. ,I • It • ;� : _ a • 11 ny ,• �. �`�,`J • • _ i '� • !fir' '' • • s •` a. �I' . ,•-•,\ • • • \ . . • ' iI • i .. - f - J �� - r .) . l `3 •1i I . 05;',....p t ,.. , • , • , . .: . . . . . . . , .. . ., . . , • -• Tor.---4:,. - ii , • q5'� .p 'i • <.K i • + �1 ______________ -...,................,..... ..........— -..-..-..—..,........... •- . ' r' , A . c:' F •7• • .--,.... v L\ ' ' tj . ., ( 1 (..4. . -. ..,: ''''4 " '• '' •,-' .. ... /(. -- •:, „L; . i" 111"t‘ 4 : -r- ----- - _. -`_ -a-..,i. ! i.1.t _ _... `•- . . - - ---7 - _ - . - i - . - I . •-,,-,, l',.r.;;1-t ?-•-, ... , . ,.., _ ,41:*; L',.:-1.2.-1• - ..- ...... ,•42...........----7,- •••••"'"-".41 =• l'.17 17j ' .1 3 ''"" • .....--:-:: „.__ -__17.1 7 ----:'''i- • . .. ' . . -- . „ ,,z,,,,--y . ._.-.., - • 6 ;s-,-.1.7.• - '...- .„.-":- . , • I ! 1 1-- -:-.F--C-• 1 i *-;-7,-• k . . , .. T.."..1- \ i 1 1 1 . t ' • t .. ,. \ •.....:... 1 ..1-• . ... .. . . •., , .... .. . .. . - < . . ” _. . - 1 _ . • I .... . . , .......-i 1 , 1 r I \ 1 • ‘:-Ills''' --.: ".. ' ''"“1 .C:'• kl -..:• -,1,i .1 k 1........,-.- --•"'"'-\ r-,1•Lzi - ',••-•.,.,'J.:IL_...---- - .. .. . . r. ' ..., ..-' • ..,. . . . _ ' i ,): •-" .- • :'` ' ., --;,,- , ' .. - ' .- ', t; (1\:... ".• .., Iti , W , & , . ,,(. t• ,'I ' , s••-•; . ../ l ..) i . -- -- .., . e . 17_ 1. /./.0,-) al '44111/ -- ..1.../(....i ..... . ....................•...••••••••••••... - •• •`, , 5 OPPOSITION AND REPLY,to: resr-w 8:05 p.m. Appl. No. 5068 - Christine and Glenn Dawson, regarding a request for a Certificate of Occupancy for two single-family residential structures located at 150 Broadwaters Road, Cuthogue; Parcel 1000-104-10-8. Applicants: (1) request an Interpretation of Section 100-241G and 100-242A of the Zoning Code; and (2) Appeal for a variance or other relief, regarding the Building Department's Notice of Disapproval dated December 14, 2001, which states that an accessory, nonconforming cottage is non- habitable based upon the Building Inspector's Housing Code Inspection Report of 4/13/00 and pursuant to Article XXIV, Section 100-241G. Outline of Opposition The Southold Town Board of Appeals should: I. Uphold the Notice of Disapproval by the Town of Southold Building Department dated December 14, 2001. II. Interpret Section 100-241G in a manner consistent with the Town of Southold Building Department. III. Reject Mr. and Mrs. Dawson's attorney's claim that Section 100-242 should be interpreted to grant the nonconforming cottage a Certificate of occupancy. IV. Deny granting a variance or other relief for the Certificate of Occupancy on this nonconforming cottage. Argument. L Uphold the Notice of Disapproval by the Town of Southold Building Department dated December 14,2001. The Disapproval stated the following grounds: "Accessory, non-conforming cottage is non-habitable based upon the Building Inspector's housing code inspection report of 4/13/00 and pursuant to Article XXIV 100- 241-G which states:" "Whenever a nonconforming use of a building or premises has been discontinued for a period of more than two years or has been changed to a higher classification or to a conforming use, anything in this Article to the contrary notwithstanding, the nonconforming use of such a building or premises shall no longer be permitted unless a variance therefore shall have been granted by the Board of Appeals." The housing code inspection report in and of itself is enough to support the contention that the cottage is non-conforming based on the facts. The Building Inspector's Report is in the Building Department file. The Report found two structures on the same lot, and also determined no use for the statutory period of two years. The lot in question is a single parcel which already has one dwelling upon it that has already been granted a Certificate of Occupancy. Therefore, the cottage does not qualify for a Certificate of Occupancy simply by being located on the same lot as the principle dwelling, because it is a non-conforming use. Additionally the cottage is merely 8.2 feet from Lot 182 immediately to the west of Lot 181. This does not conform to the minimum space requirement. Therefore, the structure is a non-conforming structure. These facts are not disputable and leave no question to be answered by this Honorable Board of Appeals. The Dawsons contend that the cottage was constructed prior to zoning. This is a primary reason to declare the cottage non-habitable and another reason the cottage is non- conforming because it is not up to code and not suitable for health and safety reasons. The septic system can not possibly handle the amount of use the Dawsons have been placing on it. It would not only be wrong for this application to be granted, but it would be dangerous to the surrounding homes and the neighbors to this property. Furthermore, the location of this cottage to the water immediately behind it known as Broadwaters Cove would make that body of water vulnerable to contamination by a septic system failure at this location. This non-conforming cottage is NOT a home, it is merely an accessory building that conveniences were improperly added onto such as a bathroom (which may or may not include a bathtub) and kitchen. It is not suitable or safe for habitation without major improvements and construction, which all would come at a great burden and risk to the adjoining neighbors and the wetland area the property is located on. It has yet to be shown that the non-conforming structure has proper and safe plumbing, electrical, and heating/insulation systems. The Building Inspection Report called for the removal of the stove from the cottage. This has not been complied with. The Dawsons have even have even refused to do this, evidenced by their letter dated 11/28/00. It should be noted, that if not for the recent repairs already done to the structure which include replacing the deck(which was done just prior to the Dawson's purchase of the property) attached to the cottage, certain plumbing alterations, and an incomplete paint job. The cottage because of the fact it has not been used for many years posed a danger to anyone who approached it. The undersigned personally saw a woman fall through the rotted deck some years ago. The surrounding neighbors are concerned with many safety and sanitary issues. Some of these issues include, but are not limited to, the septic system in use or needed, the amount of people that have already frequented and slept in the structure, and the extremely close proximity of the structure to Broadwaters Cove. II. The second part of the Notice of Disapproval is pursuant to Article XXIV 100-241-G,which states: "Whenever a nonconforming use of a building or premises has been discontinued for a period of more than two years or has been changed to a higher classification or to a conforming use, anything in this Article to the contrary notwithstanding, the nonconforming use of such a building or premises shall no longer be permitted unless a variance therefore shall have been granted by the Board of Appeals." It has already been shown in the reasoning above that the structure is non- conforming and has a non-conforming use. There is no doubt that the intent of this section dealing with discontinued use of a building or premises is directly on point with this situation. Clearly, the intent of allowing pre existing non-conforming structures that do not meet zoning and health code standards to be maintained and repaired in some degree allows older structures such as this to be kept safe if they are still used. However, when these older structures are abandoned, in order to protect the residents in the neighborhood from the dangers of a non-inhabitable building, the Town regains jurisdiction over the structure in zoning, health and safety codes. This section of the code specifically gives this board authority to apply the Town of Southhold's Zoning Codes to this structure. The Dawsons ask you to ignore your authority and responsibility to the residents of Nassau Point to protect them, and grant an improper and unsafe use of these premises. The intent that this section addresses has been clearly met. The cottage as well as the house located on Lot 181 were not used at all and definitely not used for habitation and sleeping for well over 4yrs prior to the calendar year 2000. This will be testified to and verified from the surrounding neighbors, which includes the undersigned. This cottage was not used and in such disrepair, it was the subject of much conversation and inquiries by guests and passerby's for at least double the amount of time required by the section. To claim this section does not apply to the property in question is a gross misrepresentation of the facts. My father purchased Lot 182 immediately to the west of Lot 181 the lot in question, in 1996. I have been continuously in use of the premises on Lot 182 since that time with my father. Lot 181 was not used for anything since before we acquired lot 182 and remained that way until the Dawson's purchase of the property in 2000. Once or twice a year a gardening crew would come to the lot and do a cleanup. Other than the occasional clean up or a passerby asking if the property was for sale, there was no use of the two structures located there for over 4 years. This is an example of the insincerity and misleading of the applicants in their attempt to change the character of the neighborhood and cause concerns of health, safety, and welfare of the community. The Dawsons brought this condition upon themselves. They purchased this property about two years ago. If they were misled by the prior owner at that time, any reasonable inspection of the premises would have indicated that no one had used and in no way occupied either of the two buildings for some years prior to their purchase. They purchased the property with the intent to produce an income, by renting the houses. They have been renting the property and are continuing to rent, the property as evidenced by the "FOR RENT" sign that is on the front of the property every year. They run ads in the newspapers, and in fact there have been numerous multi family renters in both buildings throughout the course of the summer seasons. Now they ask the Town Board of Appeals to legalize the improper activities that are ongoing in the house and cottage. The letter from applicant's attorney Esseks, Hefter and Angel states, "3. It is my understanding that the cottage has been in continuous use; that the use of the cottage was not discontinued for the two-year period set forth in Section 100-242G." Although Mr. Angel was misled by his clients and not to blame for their dishonesty, the applicants should not benefit from their misleading tactics to this Town Board of Appeals, Building Inspector of the Town of Southold, or to the residents of Nassau Point who will be forced to continue to deal with the extreme hardship of the changes the variance will bring to the community. They have provided letters to support their position on the prior use. However, these letters fail to prove continued use. Furthermore, only one letter even acknowledges someone had permission to use the cottage, NOT that someone actually used the cottage. Please see annexed sworn to affidavits provided by the undersigned that prove the cottage and main building were indeed NOT used for the statutory period prescribed in Article XXIV 100-241-G. Therefore, Article XXIV 100-241-G, is the proper Section to apply to the determination that the cottage is an accessory, non-conforming cottage and is non- habitable based upon the Building Inspector's Housing Code Inspection Report of 4/13/00 and pursuant to Article XXIV 100-241-G. The interpretation of the Southold building Department is correct and this Honorable Board of Appeals should uphold it as such. III. Reject Mr. and Mrs. Dawson's attorney's claim that Section 100-242 should be interpreted to grant the nonconforming cottage a Certificate of Occupancy.The Dawson's attorney argues that the wrong section has been applied to the cottage. He claims the proper section is Section 100-242. This is incorrect. It has been shown above that Section 100-241-G is undoubtedly the proper section to apply in the denial of this appeal. Section 100-242 deals with non-conforming buildings with conforming uses. The cottage in question is NOT a conforming use. Section 100-31 A(1) governs permitted uses; One-family detached dwellings, not to exceed one dwelling on each 1ot. This fact is already established and is not disputable. There already exists a single family dwelling on Lot 181. Therefore, the cottage located on the same lot is a non-conforming use. Section 100-242 is not the applicable section to use in the denial of the current application. Section 100-242 deals with conforming uses,the cottage is a non-conforming use. Section 100-241-G is the proper section to apply in the denial of this appeal. IV. Deny granting a variance or other relief for the Certificate of Occupancy on this nonconforming cottage. If a variance is granted on this cottage it will impose a great hardship on the surrounding properties and the neighbors. It will alter the current quality of life in Nassau Point on Broadwaters Cove. The quiet enjoyment by the surrounding neighbors will continue to be irreputably harmed. The surrounding homes are slowly becoming primary residences for those seeking to improve their quality of life. This community is not a Party Zone. When the occasional celebration does take place it does so with consideration of the surrounding neighbors. It is my understanding that the current situation has involved the police being called to the location on separate occasions for noise and late night parties during the week. This variance will only make the probability of this situation worse by allowing more people to occupy what is supposed to be a single family structure. The Dawsons have done nothing but use this property as an entertainment center and rental property on a weekly basis during the summer season. This cottage and house were one color before the Dawson's purchase; it is now multi colored. The paint job that was started is incomplete and two different colors on the same structure. It is an eye soar, and as is effects the physical conditions in the neighborhood. The renters have been nothing but a safety concern for all those around. We have to lock doors, that we used to be able to leave unlocked for fear of theft. Personal belongings on our property have been vandalized and used without permission. There have been many instances of trespassing. Loud music at all times of the day and night blasted across a mounted PA system. There are times more often than not when there are 6 or 7 cars parked on the property for the week. Unleashed dogs terrify the neighbors by constantly running onto the adjoining properties. We have found toilet paper and proof that people were going to the bathroom on our property, as well as used condoms in the yard. This is not what the community of Nassau Point is about. The Dawsons will not be aggrieved by the denial of this application. They purchased the property only 2 short years ago with the intent to rent from the beginning. They were aware of the fact that there was no CO on the cottage but assumed it could be obtained. They are misleading the Building Department and this Zoning Board of Appeals. The Questionnaire for Filing with the Z.B.A Application is full of misleading information. For instance, the following questions were answered as follows; D.1. Are there any areas which contain wetland grasses? Answer N/A. The truth is this property is on wetlands and, as a matter of fact, the cottage is probably closer to the water in Broadwaters Cove than any other structure in Nassau Point. D.2. Are the wetland areas shown on the map submitted with this application? Answer N/A. The truth is, the survey clearly shows high tide marks just north of the cottage. D.4. If your property contains wetlands or pond areas, have you contacted the Office of the Town Trustees for its determination of jurisdiction? Answer N/A. Because they have lied to this point they sure are not going to answer that question yes. The questioner also asked, I. Please list present use or operations conducted at this parcel?Answer, single family residential use. And proposed use? Answer, same. The truth is, this property has been used for multifamily renting. They advertise the property as 2 houses on 2 acres, sleeps 14, $2500.00 per week. It should be considered a motel with the volume and frequency of the turnover. This use will not protect the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety, and welfare of the community. If this variance is granted, an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood and a detriment to the nearby properties for all the reasons set forth above. There will no detriment to the Dawsons in denying this variance. Because 1) They never had the rights to conduct these activities on the property from the beginning. 2) They have known about the improper use from the inspection conducted on 4/13/00. Therefore, nothing is being taken away from them any benefit they have enjoyed to this point has been improper and at the expense of the surrounding community. The relief requested by the Dawsons is substantial because they can use the primary house for all of their single family needs and it is more than adequate. The only reason they want the variance on the cottage is to bring in more income through the further renting of it. The single family zoning and CO (on the primary structure only), is the proper way to protect and preserve the character of the neighborhood and the health and welfare of the community. It should also be noted that if this variance is granted, it is likely that major renovations and work would be undertaken on this cottage. There will be an adverse effect and impact on the physical and environmental conditions in the neighborhood. The cottage is not heated, there are problems with the plumbing, and the septic system will need to be upgraded to handle the volume and stress that has been placed on it. It is impossible to determine at this time what other problems will be created by permitting this use. The only way to correct these health and safety issues is with future physical changes, which are not allowed at this time, but would be made if this variance were granted. The adjoining neighbors in the community of Nassau Point ask that this Honorable Board of Appeals do not overturn the Building Department Decision and Not grant a variance on the cottage in question to increase its use. This alleged difficulty has been self-created by the Dawsons. The CO was lost before they purchased the property; they had reason to know this by reasonable inspection and went ahead with the purchase anyway. They have been conducting their improper activities there to the detriment to the neighbors. It is now time for it to stop. The Dawsons have changed the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety, and welfare of the community have been put at risk. They now come to this Board seeking RELIEF. Please Preserve and Protect the character of our neighborhood by saying NO. Dated: April 18, 2002 (1,20.pBy: RO ERT . CIPPITELLI,ESQ. Attorney for Bruno Cippitell,Et. Al. K•Q Long Island 4-5;544,0 -\--V-ki-. ci' i SPC - .MORTGAGE -_,---;,..,:, Ov/ ' # ov (RESOURCES INC. (iviA 17 East Carver Straet,Huntington.NY 11743-3409 (fat)673-6036 Registered Mortgage Braker•New York State Clanking Department (631)67$-5066 Fax 0 1-1,SS We SA (c) .. t-- . : ‘66°1 "'a° ) c)(3- ci° 1 c) Ic.‘c) ‘ --1-7- . c,) -V-\.- . 2 a,‘Ads. e..› ecALN\ LA. c Ace_ 00.c.c I (E) SOO We s---\ o,ie. - '?--c>. \odo jmoo \ OJszcxj j co s. 00 0 12,00 61-01\DLLif\-\-e2_ V._, 1 Opd I 14M00 \\ 00q04)014600 6) z5ks 1?fie.. e. �ci't)\{) ICOO I \o'-loo 100 WO I 00 Lk 000 son S Kollin s I�how� c1 ood '0-101,0 t3ci, OoTS ooO n IS- Nrc5-514) V- e-C. , L5u1 ) i\i ‘aite), " Lilt--1 \-2- -\-V--\- - 1 ?--. l'\d`lc's *•"5(`. '''-'\ `.c."e `Ockct.\- - gi 3 5 1\M- 5‘vovo 91. \0031 ‘ k \G)o ) 00cA00 1 o () zpoO 41) X) - ` 2, kdose_. e.,01/4.c)A_ (,,i) c‘ce_iIct_c_f_I �\\ VeCCA-t-C, ) WOO )OV-\ \o\zcco (1) . X.) L IcaI 1 5455 - Z \\4(3.) -_> 0650) . 2 •d 00I0 ECB 9IS szwweg .aas(ueg Ilamp io0 4L1 :21 20 LO ReW _ 4,D001,10p, K.1V4. • Abstract Services Inc. 23 8'‘Mineola Boulevard Mineola, N.Y. 11501 •Phone 516-742-4700 Fax 516-742-0675 APP. TAKEN BY: LAV CUSTOMER OF: APPLICATION DATE: 5/1/02 REPORT DATE: TITLE #: MKM-SP-7657 UNDERWRITER NUMBER • AMENDED DATE: * CONDO UNIT# APPLICANT REPORT TO: LONG ISLAND MORTGAGE RESOURCES INC. 17 EAST CARVER STREET HUNTINGTON,NY 11743 (631)673-5936 Fax#(631)673-5066 : PREMISES: 1255 West Cove Road, Cutchogue, NY (Trefnian) 500 West Cove Road, Cutchogue,NY (Cornwell) 500 Little Peconic Bay Road, Cutchogue,NY(Kohn) 2200 Broadwaters Road, Cutchogue,NY (Fevola) 2515 Pine Tree Road, Cutchogue, NY (Thompson) 2715 Nassau Point Road, Cutchogue,NY (Sullivan) 3335 Nassau Point Road, Cutchogue, NY COUNTY OF: Suffolk COMPANY CHARGES Certificate of Occupancy $540.00 TOTAL: $540.00 INVOICE 0 t Y , M.K.M. Abstract Services Dace 238 Mineola Boulevard •Mineola,N.Y. 11501 •516-742 4700 5/1/02 LONG ISLAND MORTGAGE RESOURCES INC. 17 EAST CARVER STREET HUNTINGTON,NY 11743 Re: Certificate of Occupancy Search Title No.: MKM-SP-7657 Dear Sir/Madam Enclosed please and add to your title report the following: ( ) Street Report (X) C.O. Search ( ) Housing and Building ( ) Emergency Repair ( ) Fire Depaitment ( ) Board of Health ( ) Tax Search ( ) Sewer Search ( ) Survey Print ( ) Bankruptcy Searches ( ) Other Please annex same and make it a part of your title report. If you have any questions or require further information,please do not hesitate to call. Very truly yours, Michael B. Lione, Esq. M.K.M. ABSTRACT SERVICES, INC. MBL/lay TITLE NO. 0405-7657A CO ABSTRACTERS' INFORMATION SERVICE, INC. 138-72 QUEENS BOULEVARD BRIARW000, N.Y. 11435 (718) 291-5900 (516) 742-2290 (914) 761-4451 FAX (718) 291-6681 CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY REPORT DATE: 04/23/02 PREMISES : 1255 WEST COVE ROAD, CUTCHOGUE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD COUNTY OF SUFFOLK DISTRICT: 1000 SECTION: 111 . 00 BLOCK: 03 . 00 LOT: 013 . 001 SEC: 111. 00 BLK: 03 . 00 LOT: 013 . 001 A SEARCH OF THE RECORDS CONDUCTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF BUILDINGS REVEALS THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION: CO# 24183 ISSUED 08/28/95 PERMIT# 22974 DECK (COPY TO FOLLOW) TAX CLASSIFICATION 210 - A ONE FAMILY DWELLING CONSTRUCTED TO ACCOMMODATE YEAR-ROUND OCCUPANCY, I .E, ADEQUATE INSULATION, HEATING, ETC. INCLUDES DUPLEX TYPE ONE HALF OWNERSHIP AND ROW TYPE INDIVIDUALLY OWNED. TAX ASSESSORS RECORDS INDICATE A ONE FAMILY DWELLING WAS BUILT IN 1965 . THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD FIRST BEGAN ISSUING CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY IN 1957. The purpose of this report is to provide the legal occupancy as per latest c/o on file. A complete history of all filings and copies of same for the above parcel is available upon request for an additional fee. There is no liability assumed for errors or omissions of fact due to the state of the public record or the limits defined heroin. This product is not intended to eliminate risks covered by TOEPP. The search is prepared exclusively for M.R.M. ABSTRACT SERVICES INC. on 04/33/02 0405,7657A ;600 ;- /, -,.4,' N OF SOUTHOLD MOPERTY RECORD C—MID , .,.,: , . OWNER STREET /-2,5- :, VILLAGE DISTRICT SUB. ',IT, ,+'i3-f.v� Z 4.:o- o "� Id4s ;a�i v1 L' Ad c d ;..1/ �1 #;:-',°," _ �c r. Tri �' �. FORMER OWNER N E ACREAGE �� , �� o _.S C7.) 0 J 1 L• , ,/r ,,•� ( 1tar!D/1 AA, Aitc 4-1,1 S W TYPE OF BUILDING ��' �,= 1,. r- 2ES.42‘.? / 6 SEAS. VL FARM COMM. I IND. I CB. I MISC. I Est. Mkt. Value LAND IMP. TOTAL DATE REMARKS j'GA/i/ G.rf—res A . t tp77,0 ✓ �/Y/7.2. d �•: _ : -r; ,. � �' 7 n o /� �G%J , � Sei— 7 .�yJ sU , _ % J �'f `� - +� �( C .76` .i) 6 (5 6)/ 4(4,,,..d J �/ -i..1 1 ~/ az to �c) ,A A!t ._t., `— . T' c-* ‘i. ,1 -,:'_7?!' . . .:.',f .. Gr ,'(->2) 76(•-•, ) 5/a(6.a SP V(J 5 -B i)% ('/'s / - (" 6)11,2)1 , b..e;l r" It AGE BUILDING CONDITION NEW NORMAL BELOW ABOVE FRONTAGE ON WATER a0 6, &C.) = 1 A)`-., Farm Acre Value Per Acre Volue FRONTAGE ON ROAD C,. 9 --i • v Tllable 1 Bf 3Evi E 4I� ` ' C- T i- /� CI __ �. .rti'Iloble 2 DOCK Tillable 3 Woodland Swampland Brushlond 1 ig ' House Plot Totcl - - } f TITLE NO. 0405-7657B CO ABSTRACTERS' INFORMATION SERVICES INC, 138-72 QUEENS BOULEVARD BRIARWOOD, N.Y. 11435 (718) 291-5900 (516)-742-2290 (914) 761-4451 FAX (718) 291-6681 CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY REPORT DATE: 04/23/02 PREMISES : 500 WEST COVE ROAD, CUTCHOGUE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD COUNTY OF SUFFOLK DISTRICT: 1000 SECTION: 111. 00 BLOCK: 02 . 00 LOT: 008 . 001 SEC: 111. 00 BLK: 02 .00 LOT: 008 . 001 A SEARCH OF THE RECORDS CONDUCTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF BUILDINGS REVEALS THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION: CO# 3604 ISSUED 10/07/69 DEMOLISH OLD DWELLING AND SHED AND BUILD NEW DWELLING (COPY TO FOLLOW) The purpose of this report is to provide the legal occupancy as per latest c/o on file. A complete history of all filings and copies of same for the above parcel is available upon request for an additional fee. There is no liability assumed for errors or omissions of fact due to the state of the public record or the limits defined herein. This product is not intended to eliminate risks covered by TOEPP. The search is prepared exclusively for M.R.M. ABSTRACT SERVICES INC. on 04/23/02` 030 :6578 u4i25/02 . 12:00 FAX ATS #4 [2034 FORM NO. 4 i TOWN OF SOUTHOLD 1 BUILDING DEPARTMENT Town Clerk's Office ` - Southold, N. Y. Certificate Of Occupancy , Na. Z401+ Date pet 7 , 19.09 THIS CERTIFIES that the building located at W/S Wo t. Cove. Rd Street Nassau Pointi o. Lot No. P$! 27 .1.470. 7.?'. . 9.ut9hagcz�. • "74 Map No. , conforms substantially to the Application for Building Pe$mit heretofore filed in this office dated Oc.4 22 , 19 0. pursuant to which Building Permit No. .?A04'7 . . `` dated Oct 22 , 19. 0., was issued, and conforms to all of the require- ments of the applicable provisions of the law. The occupancy for which this certificate is issued is . . .Pajva to .ania. Familyr.dwaUg The certificate is issued to . P.Utr.QVCI. c ZINfil Z 474eZ (owner, lessee or tenant) of the aforesaid building. ; Suffolk County Department of Health Approval N.Rs • 146-4.,.IGS . E...rJ•../,... House # 500 :Building Inspector 1 , TOWN OF SOUTHOLD PROPERTY RECORD CARD oDWNER STREET (:') VILLAGE DIST. SUB. LOTS' j 0,2-;,Q �,r�' 7 7 1.4C FORMER OWNER N E • ACR. - ter d, r Awe!I - S W TYPE OF BUILDING 1/1 I' `1:/3-/'r, .6r h vv`' if L st , :$, 21 SEAS. VL. I FARM COMM. CB. MICS. Mkt. Value -...AND IMP. TOTAL , DATE REMARKS 2,2 73` ;:� : u ,ne , E72-6/73 rv) SJ'f'S�r►p: 7J'�er )'�2U{.'i d.:1(1,36,011. ITO D 3 1 X16 au /5e b.0 6 .7/7 /77Soil) 4 yet. 2/G iS%.OPr /'�, 4 k"IV 1 d CoKrr G `r., • b y - /A-7k 'O Pt'i( rJ o.- i e Me r cid. (;:7/y /C- r ,-)i �ie .'II0/e1L 1 all 2p3a4- Cornwel( s4. -v 0arnwel(irnr,- /G 6! .�V1 U i. . - __AN r •. , • A',f f' , 4..4: d U°y , I a , i L,c_ .51e16.51e16666" 1 _ au 1 .. . J . ,t. , . ' iO n Ot 14 ,-�t�' •- ,y......... . . N z , • w 'Mable FRONTAGE ON WATER -0 •• ,)odland . . FRONTAGE ON ROAD • • achy • . DEPTH CV0 N use Pla.t BULKHEAD al • t '« l ' !` TITLE NO. 0405-7657C CO ABSTRACTERS' INFORMATION SERVICE, INC. 138-72 QUEENS BOULEVARD BRIARW000, N.Y. 11435 (718) 291-5900 (516) 742-2290 (914) 761-4451 FAX (718) 291-6681 CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY REPORT DATE: 04/23/02 PREMISES : 500 LITTLE PECONIC BAY R, CUTCHOGUE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD COUNTY OF SUFFOLK DISTRICT: 1000 SECTION: 111 . 00 BLOCK: 14 . 00 LOT: 012 . 000 SEC: 111. 00 BLK: 14 . 00 LOT: 012 . 000 A SEARCH OF THE RECORDS CONDUCTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF BUILDINGS REVEALS THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION: CO# 5065 ISSUED 01/03/97 PERMIT# 23880 ADDITIONS (COPY TO FOLLOW) TAX CLASSIFICATION 210 - A ONE FAMILY DWELLING CONSTRUCTED TO ACCOMMODATE YEAR-ROUND OCCUPANCY, I .E, ADEQUATE INSULATION, HEATING, ETC. INCLUDES DUPLEX TYPE ONE HALF OWNERSHIP AND ROW TYPE INDIVIDUALLY OWNED. TAX ASSESSORS RECORDS INDICATE A ONE FAMILY DWELLING WAS BUILT IN 1964 . THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD FIRST BEGAN ISSUING CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY IN 1957. The purpose of this report is to provide the legal occupancy as per latest c/o on file. A complete history of all filings and copies of same for the above parcel is available upon request for an additional fee. There is no liability assumed for errors or omissions of fact due to the state of the public record or the limits defined herein. This product is not intended to eliminate risks covered by TOEPP. The search is prepared exclusively for M.X.M. ABSTRACT SERVICES INC. on 04/23/02] 005,7657C 76570 A.I.V. - o a TNO. 0405-7657D CO ABSTRACTERS' INFORMATION SERVICE, INC. 138-72 QUEENS BOULEVARD BRIARWOOD, N.Y. 11435 (718) 291-5900 (516) 742-2290 (914) 761-4451 FAX (718) 291-6681 CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY REPORT DATE: 04/23/02 PREMISES : 2200 BROADWATERS ROAD, CUTCHOGUE I _ TOWN OF SOUTHOLD COUNTY OF SUFFOLK DISTRICT: 1000 SECTION: 104 . 00 BLOCK: 09. 00 LOT: 014 . 000 SEC: 104 . 00 BLK: 09. 00 LOT: 014 .000 A SEARCH OF THE RECORDS CONDUCTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF BUILDINGS REVEALS THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION: _ OPEN PERMIT# 26220 ISSUED 12/22/99 DEMOLISH SHED CO# 178 ISSUED 11/1957 PERMIT## 167 ADDITION CO# 5470 ISSUED 12/14/70 PERMIT# 5103 - ENLARGE ACCESSORY BUILDING CO# 27522 ISSUED 01/10/01 PERMIT# 27008 ENCLOSED PORCH CO# 28344 ISSUED 01/09/01 PERMIT# 27763 ADDITIONS AND ALTERATIONS (COPIES TO FOLLOW) TAX CLASSIFICATION 210 - A ONE FAMILY DWELLING CONSTRUCTED TO ACCOMMODATE YEAR-ROUND OCCUPANCY, I .E, ADEQUATE INSULATION, HEATING, ETC. INCLUDES DUPLEX TYPE ONE HALF OWNERSHIP AND ROW TYPE INDIVIDUALLY OWNED. TAX ASSESSORS RECORDS INDICATE A ONE FAMILY DWELLING IS OF AN INDETERMINABLE AGE. THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD FIRST BEGAN ISSUING CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY IN 1957 . The purpose of this report is to provide the legal occupancy as per latest c/o on file. A complete history of all filings and copies of same for the above parcel is available upon request for an additional fee. There is no liability assumed for errors or omissions of fact due to the state of the public record or the limits defined herein. This product is not intended to eliminate risks covered by TOBPP. The search is prepared exclusively for M.R.M. ABSTRACT SERVICES INC. on 04/23/02] 001,7657p H.I . • r 'TOWN OF SOUTHOLD PROPERTY RECORD CARD" /4.-/ OWNER STREET 2'` r':,) VILLAGE DIST. ' SUB. V LOT 46-,,,,g.'24-7 of 9 r o el:chair-KJ..., `�_ 1/D I a, . gfra 3Q'wdv Kr /eo a / v X (i,aSd U ' C 4t �,• ° FORMER OWNER N E ACR. co • .‘50 1 ,' 0• FJo'e Ct (-- S w TYPE OF BUILDING / 9U1 f V RES. Q Si 'S. VL. 'FARM - COMM. CB. MISC. Mkt. Value P16 LAND IMP. TOTAL DATE REMARKS ; �' T -- , Ay/y/7,Ki/IX9. tV., S'/Q3�• A.•�, acs ejfa;-y G'fda , ,C,;/d_ �1 o c$YO o 6-9 as - 4 LS _ aaal©r-L)a it 41057)t -03►fe. - -fa e �e�f e-00 vie./Atev .x—ra r.fr---,Et-f.-_--- , , i , 1 4' e, V 6-d• D G to 9..0 U /,.?,'.1-6/7.e:. ` y LI l L.i ci 1..,% r.,- 1.• 6'4. :44 NI 1 i i t S 1a4 x-4.....,:, i 18("a ?i X7.0 D 9 7 o D / 3 J6i••' 2 <31719 0-L i n t,(Q u fir)- -5-i', -477 \Q.r'-/-i.f 0 -c`f-rs . Ric, NEW NORMAL BELOW ABOVE / ,- , - 4ti , d - z !d/lq/qi-LIlg/ 1lq- Veli 11,015• OcesToe ..11`'x,[ UO FARM Acre Value Per Value I ,'ua Acre 12. .: ,V .4! ,- .- 0 IP id sI' ire f`1 ,SJ,o . i I Tillable 1 )��b/ / d 4°G?700( P,t.)dO5d.- n0 Tillable 2 11014/ #a7Zk dam" ,yam 0 Tillable 3 Woodland t oo Swampland FRONTAGE ON WATER Cr 1. /j Brushland FRONTAGE ON ROAD t 6 0 House Plot DEPTH ' BULKHEAD - Total . t DOCK 1 1 TITLE NO. 0405-7657E CO ABSTRACTERS' INFORMATION SERVICE, INC. 138-72 QUEENS BOULEVARD BRIARWOOD, N.Y. 11435 (718) 291-5900 (516) 742-2290 (914) 761-4451 FAX (718) 291-6681 CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY REPORT DATE: 04/23/02 PREMISES : 2515 PINE TREE ROAD, CUTCHOGUE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD COUNTY OF SUFFOLK- DISTRICT: 1000 SECTION: 104 . 00 .BLOCK: 03 . 00 LOT: 004 . 000 SEC: 104 . 00 BLK: 03 . 00 LOT: 004 . 000 A SEARCH OF THE RECORDS CONDUCTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF BUILDINGS REVEALS THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION: CO# 24395 ISSUED 06/05/96 DWELLING CO# 14102 ISSUED 06/15/66 PERMIT# 3123 ADDITION CO# 20584 ISSUED 02/24/86 PERMIT# 14553 ADDITION CO# 20585 ISSUED 02/24/86 PERMIT# 14554 CHANGE ROOF PITCH CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY ISSUED 12/21/90 PERMIT# 19602 DORMER ADDITION CO# 24548 ISSUED 06/27/96 PERMIT# 23540 ALTER SPACE OVER GARAGE (COPIES TO FOLLOW) The purpose of this report is to provide the legal occupancy as per latest c/o on file. A complete history of all filings and copies of same for the above parcel is available upon request for an additional fee. There is no liability assumed for errors or omissions of fact due to the state of the public record or the limits defined herein. This product is not intended to eliminate rinks covered by TOEPP. The search is prepared exclusively for M.K.M. ABSTRACT SERVICES INC. on 04/23/02] 0405,7657E r .I.V. . • TITLE NO. 0405-7657F CO ABSTRACTERS' INFORMATION SERVICE, INC. 138-72 QUEENS BOULEVARD BRIARWOOD, N.Y. 11435 (718) 291-5900 (516) 742-2290 (914) 761-4451 FAX (718) 291-6681 CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY REPORT DATE: 04/23/02 PREMISES: 2715 NASSAU POINT ROAD, CUTCHOGUE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD COUNTY OF SUFFOLK DISTRICT: 1000 SECTION: 104 .00 BLOCK: 13 . 00 LOT: 008 . 000 SEC: 104 . 00 BLK: 13 . 00 LOT: 008 .000 A SEARCH OF THE RECORDS CONDUCTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF BUILDINGS REVEALS THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION: OPEN PERMIT# 10016 ISSUED 111/07/78 BUILD AN ACCESSORY BUILDING CO# 4580 ISSUED 03/07/72 PERMIT# 5551 ONE FAMILY DWELLING CO 9258 ISSUED 10/18/78 PERMIT# 9904 ACCESSORY BUILDING CO# 10437 ISSUED 04/06/81 PERMIT# 11075 DECK ADDITION CO# 11747 ISSUED 06/28/83 PERMIT# 12046 ALTERATION CO# 11746 ISSUED 06/23/83 PERMIT# 12047 ALTERATION TO DWELLING CO# 27512 ISSUED 01/16/01 PERMIT## 19215 ENCLOSED OPEN DECK TO SCREENED PORCH The purpose of this report is to provide the legal occupancy as per latest c/o on file. A complete history of all filings and copies of same for the above parcel is available upon request for an additional fee. There is no liability assumed for errors or omissions of fact due to the state of the public record or the limits defined herein. This product is not intended to eliminate risks covered by TOEPP. The search is prepared exclusively for H.E.M. ABSTRACT SERVICES INC. on 04/23/02 04052.7657P 0 /25/02 12:02 FA% AIS #4 0039 t VOW/ NO. 2 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE SOUTHOLD, N. T. • BUILDING PERMIT (THIS PERMIT MUST BE KEPT ON THE PREMISES UNTIL FULL COMPLETION OF THE WORK AUTHORIZED) N? 1'0016 Z Date Ala/ ! 19 Permission is hereby granted to: OLL,n Pi J -JACOB S Tc TIC RA Id) (VALI_ 1)1 L, /a ACC S i= ; A c, 'i Su, G . AL-, CVE r to �-'Z0urMKT T3'ni\ ,c J OF-. .Pk 'Fk/\L._ -` "/8(, - 00V 9 r978 . 27 IS j/ S5 t) 'poor JT -pp. • at premises located at COTrPo6 ut,- L,0 7 N A SS P ?O/M- 4--0 P f/t} , ';/ 5"C 0 C 7 /H 'fig . pursuant to application dated , 19 , and approved by the Building Inspector. � /o o Fee $ ' "'""• .. (1),,ry ("A /cup _ / eV — i3 - 8. l A 7V1/.) rtd • Building Inspector • I - { (JuoDl)ddo ;o 1g 41:1 Sy..07 , ----wir24} A;unoO Dllgnd AJn;oN sly;law aJo;aq o;woms •y;lmeJey; pelt; uolaoollddo 04;ul 4404;es Jauuow ay;u! pawao;Jed eq IIIA)1J oM ey;IN; puo ';allaq puo abpa)Moul sly;o;seq ay;o; anJ;eio uopoollddo sly; ul pau!D;troO s;uawa;D;s HO ;DyJ `uol;oDllddD s144 DU; pup a){pw 0; pm >JOM Amos au; peuuo;Jed on0y Jo wjo;Jad o; pazlJoy;no Ainp S! puo 'sJeuMo JO JauMo !Dios ;o (•D;e 'Jail;;a e4OJod1OD '4ua6o 'Jo;DDJ;uoD) t ;'f'72 a4; st aH !�`' �� 'pawou anogO (4oDJ;uoo 6u1u61s IOnp{AIPul ;o awDN IUDDilddo ay; sl ey Jou; sAos puo sasodap 'uJoms Alnp 66leq ? •/ '-11� ar•'""'i9*)'•11A1 d .t1NflOO S'S� '51210A M3N 30 31t/1 S , h • • 234 • .P . , •,gra `.\ ;� ' Ir • J /1 1T(/, it, 1a7) 1 ` /0/ -lot JawoD JO JOUa;ul Ja4491.4m o;oo:pul puo sewou .e .*.s Mays puo 'peep o; 6ulpaoo o uol;dtJosep Jo Jegwnu 'IDolq puD ;aaa;s one 'spun A}JOdO d woi; suo{suawlp›poq-;as no a;o3lpul puo 'pesodoid JO 6u9slxe Jey;aym 's6u!pllnq Ho A1JDul;sIP puo Apoalo ato00-1 WV219Vta 107 ON auo ;f';(ssaappV • c .. •�+.-�f'y�f�'l ..... Jo;DDJauoO ;o awDN _.5/--S 4 L v {{ [J II •0N auoyd.•...""... sse1Pp' 40e1!4DJt/ ;o awoN ON au� SdN_42)4 ,o,�ssa.ppy Ty� !y5 ]'IxsaslwaJd;o JauMO;.O swot.; 'q1 oN4) A ( ) :sesl AJd wo; panowaJ eq 1p; ssseoxe IM .pap°J6a- eq Jo! HIM 'El :uol4oln5eJ Jo aoubuIpio 'MIDI 6uluoz Auo a; oln uol;onJ;suo' pesodoid seoa z( ••• pa;on;Is am saslwaJd yDlym u! 3DIJ3slp esn JO 8UO 'I I ''•'••• asD eJn o am] 01 �• � JeumO Jawao j }o DN �'[�f 4 d � •0/ — 0_6.1 6. y a0 4Z. Joaa J ci/ 4uoJ j :401 40 azIS '6 sal'o;S ;o JegwnN ,ty41-16181-1 4ldea Joel 4uoid :uol;anJgsuoo Mau 2J1;ue ;o suolsuawtQ g selaol5;o JegwnN 41461°1-1 yds() JoaN luo.. :suol;lppo JO SUOl4DJ34ID y;lm aJn;on.;s mops 40 suolsuawla salJD;S ;o JOgwnN 44610H y;ded Joel! ;uoJd :Auo;l'saJn3onJ;s 6u14slxa;o suo!suewlQ 'L esn;o edA;uooe ;o;ua;xa puo eJn;Du A;!oads 'ADuodn0Do paww Jo IDIDJawwOD 'sseulsnq ;I '9 � sJoo;o Jaqwnu'eEoJO641 Jool; yoD= uo s;lun 6u114emp 40 Jegwn.4 r s;{un 6ulllamp 4.0 Jaqwnu '6u{IleMp 41 S (uol;D0!)ddo sly; 6ul11; uo plod eq 04) ead ! pQ_0� iso' pe;owl4s3 'y (uogduosea) Q / • " f >poM ley;p ' Jo!3llowea lonowaa Jlodall uoi' y t 1ppy z'"" goollddD ymlyM"patio)jioM ;o eJn;DN • uo 3 6u!plln8 'Nar�"i t j 11701A f# SId XVd Z0:ZT T0%SZ/b"0 --- - 04/25/02 12:02 FAX — — AIS #4 C 040 . Ir`) FORM NO. 1 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE �f,,/ SOUTHOLD, N. Y. Examined �f�" (�, 19� Application No. /0 0 Approved /i i 7 , 19 Cl Permit No. / O O / 6 z— Drsapproved a/c • T'� X01 Yd !Gi ..4f-1 (Building lnsp,.ctot. APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT v Dote .....�Q/( ./ , 19 7Sl,,.. INSTRUCTIONS a. This application must be completely filled in by typewriter or. In ink and submitted in triplicate to the Building Inspector,with 3 sets of plans,accurate plot plan to scale, Fee according to schedule. b. Plot plan showing location of tot and of buildings on premises, relationship to adjoining premises or public streets or areas,and giving a detailed description of layout ofproperty must be drown on the diagram which is part of this application. 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 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 port for any purpose whatever until a Certificate of Occupancy shall hove been granted 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 Lows, 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 Iry buildings for necessary inspections. ,Vp4e4„. (Signature of ap I' anA name, if a corporation) r1 ✓6') ) ,y, (Address of ii6plicanti State whether applicant is owner, lessee, age t, architect, engineer, general contractor, electrician, plumber or builder. Name of owner of premises /1/4410X J' 9elejli!„.. `-�z.q If applicant is a corporate, signature of duly authorized officer. (Name and title of corporate officer) oofficer) Builder's License No. (J . Plumber's License No. Electrician's License No. ,' 4 1.56 Other Trade's License No � �5�3L/�O/�/- " 1 Location of land on iiwhich pro osed work will bee one, Map No.. Lot No.�..0............... Street and Number"�� .r.�'r /"a' .�A,(!TPip.i.a, ...... ....... . Municipality 2 State existing use and occupancy of premises and intended use and occupancy of proposed construction: a Exisiting use and occupancy /� b. intended use and occupancy /4411/417 L M/e–, ... - a .. -r -B.k.+a•'L.... , u. r • 04/25/02 12:01 FAX AIS #4 X037 POEM NO. 4 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT Town Clerk's Office Southold, N. Y. Certificate Of Occupancy Marsh 7 .No. 5� Date . . , 19 72 THIS CERTIFIES that the building located at Nati$84, 139Pat Road . Street Map No. 24agit,. .$tnintIK No. . . . . . Lot No. 10 Cl4ehogitlia conforms substantially to the Application for Building Permit heretofore filed in this office dated Pt.30 . . 19 7.4• pursuant to which Building Permit No. 1551z dated . . . . . . . flat . . . . . , 19 7? , was issued, and conforms to all of the require- ments of the applicable provisions of the law. The occupancy for which this certificate is issued is Private one family dwellin4 The certificate is issued to . .► fte.1631 00911. . Owner . (owner, lessee or tenant) of the aforesaid building. Suffolk County Department of Health Approval . 143.4F5111 .1 t. 97? . .B7 R. 3f 3I1a House 27t5Ator.v.i Building Inspector . v4/GD/O 12:01 FAX / AIS #4 20:38 FORM NO. 4 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT Town Clerk's Office Southold, N. Y. Certificate Of Occupancy No. • Z9?58 . . • . Date 4ctP.b V. . .18 , 19.78 THIS CERTIFIES that the building located at 27.1.5.Natanau. P.Qi2tt Rd . Stgavacx Map No. . . • 356 Block No. Lot No. 10 conforms substantially to the Application for Building Permit heretofore filed in this office dated . .August. .17 , 19. .78 pursuant to which Building Permit No. . . .9904Z dated August 18 , 19. .7 was issued, and conforms to all of the require- ments of the applicable provisions of the law. The occupancy for which this certificate is issued is Accessory Building The certificate is issued to Mr. & Mrs. Richard Wall (owner, ) • of the aforesaid building. Suffolk County Department of Health Approval UNDERWRITERS CERTIFICATE No. . . .. WR HOUSE NUMBER 271 Street . . .. . . ..Narikaa1l.Poixit Rd, Cutahog.te, .N..X. Building Inspector County Tax Map # 1000-104-13-8 ictus 1,AX AIS #4 17�.J 04 i FORM NO.4 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT . Office of the Building Inspector Town Hall Southold, N.Y. Certificate Of Occupancy No. . . Z1.0437 Date .A,pril 6 , 19 . . .81 THIS CERTIFIES that the building Location of Property 2715 Nassau Point Road, Cutchogue, N.Y . House No. Street Hamlet County Tax Map No. 1000 Section 104 Block 013 Lot 008 Subdivision . . . Nassau . 2 j-nt<.C1.10.Pr.op.Filed Map No. . 1.5.6. , .Lot No. 10 conforms substantially to the Application for Building Permit heretofore filed in this office dated March 17 , �1 11075 Z , I9 . . .p asuant to which Building Permit No. datedh 25 Marc , 1.981, ,was issued,and conforms to all of the requirements of the applicable provisions of the law.The occupancy for which this certificate is issued is Deck Addition to Dwelling The certificate is issued to . . . .$i s n d 111 3,1, Sr (Owner,leS$59-OK teaant)———— of the aforesaid building. Suffolk County Department of Health Approval N/I1 UNDERWRITERS CERTIFICATE NO N/R IF 2/- Building Inspector Rev.1/81 : , ar .i aoi ut 12:03 FAX AIS 4:3 FORM NO.4 TOWN OF SOLITHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT Office of the Building Inspector Town Hall Southold, N.Y. Certificate Of Occupancy No. . . 2.1.1.74 7 Date dune. .2$ , 19 P.3. THIS CERTIFIES that the building . . . . Alter.ti.on Location of Property . .2795 .N.as9,1-At.110 • House No. Streer Hamlet County Tax Map No. 1000 Section . ..1.0 4 Block Q1 3 Lot Q Q S Subdivision . . N.a.s s au. X.o in.ty Filed Map No. . . .1.5 4. .Lot No. 1 0 conforms substantially to the Application for Building Permit heretofore filed in this office dated N.overnher 17 , 19 82. pursuant to which Building Permit No. 1204 6 Z dated . .tlecemher 1 19$2. ,was issued, and conforms to all of the requirements of the applicable provisions of the law.The occupancy for which this certificate is issued is al.ter.ation. .on. s.xisting. dwelling The certificate is issued to .RICHARD.WALL (owner,• of the aforesaid building. Suffolk County Department of Health Approval N/R , UNDERWRITERS CERTIFICATE NO N6.0.5138 • •e 1 . �K . . Building Inspector Roy.1/a1 vyiGzior• 12:03 FAX AIS #4 0044 FORM NO.4 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT Office of the Building Inspector Town Hall Southold,N.Y. Certificate Of Occupancy No. . . .Z 1 1 7A 6 Date . June. 28 , 19 $3 THIS CERTIFIES that the building . . . .A 1 t er.a t Location of Property . .27.15 Nas.s.au. P.aint. Rd Cu.tctpg.ue . House o. Street Hamlet County Tax Map No. 1000 Section . .104 Block . . .Q 13 Lot ma Subdivision N a.as au. .P.o in t Filed Map No. .1.5 6. . . .Lot No. 10 conforms substantially to the Application for Building Permit heretofore filed in this office dated N.o v e mb.e r 17 , 19 A.2 pursuant to which Building Permit No. 1.2 04 7 2 dated . .De.c.emb er 1 19 62 ,was issued,and conforms to all of the requirements of the applicable provisions of the law.The occupancy for which this certificate is issued is a•1-tera.t.lon. .o. .ex.isting. .dwe.I.ling. The certificate is issued to RICHARD WALL (owner,dessee-ortene,J of the aforesaid building. Suffolk County Department of Health Approval N/R UNDERWRITERS CERTIFICATE NO '1460514 0 Job started under B.P . 10016Z as approved by Z. B.A . #2486-Nov. 9 , 1978 . No kitchen allowed . . . &., Building �- Inspector Rev.1/81 T { I I. R „,,L /U4' 12:03 FAX AIS #4 0045 ) FORM NO. 4 \` TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT Office of the Building Inspector Town Hall Southold, N.Y. CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY No: 2-27512 Date: 01/16/01 THIS CERTIFIES that the building ALTERATION Location of Property: 2715 NASSAU POINT ROAD CUTCHOGUE (HOUSE NO.) (STREET) (HAMLET) County Tax Map No. 473889 Section 104 Block 13 Lot 8 Subdivision Filed Map No. Lot No. conforms substantially to the Application for Building Permit heretofore filed in this office dated JULY 3, 1990 pursuant to which Building Permit No. 19215-Z dated JULY 20, 1990 was issued, and conforms to all of the requirements of the applicable provisions of the law. The occupancy for which this certificate is issued is ENCLOSE EXISTING OPEN DECK TO SCREENED PORCH OF EXISTING ONE FAMILY DWELLING "AS BUILT". NOTE: THIS CO IS ISSUED EASED ON AN INSPECTION DONE BY CURTIS W. HORTON ON JAN. 8, 1991. The certificate is issued to ANN B. WALL REVOCABLE TRUST (OWNER) of the aforesaid building. SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH APPROVAL N/A ELECTRICAL CERTIFICATE NO. H-019507 12/04/90 PLUMBERS CERTIFICATION DATED N/A Antiid Signature Rev. 1/81 • • L � �fn. _ ,) _ 2 �G• TOWN OF SOUTHOLD PROPERTY RECORD CARD �_�( _ , -- I • TITLE NO. 0405-7657G CO �f ABSTRACTERS' INFORMATION SERVICE, INC. 138-72 QUEENS BOULEVARD BRIARW00D, N.Y. 11435 (718) 291-5900 (516) 742-2290 (914) 761-4451 FAX (718) 291-6681 CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY REPORT DATE: 04/23/02 PREMISES : 3335 NASSAU POINT ROAD, CUTCHOGUE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD COUNTY OF SUFFOLK DISTRICT: 1000 SECTION: 111. 00 BLOCK: 09. 00 LOT: 002 . 000 SEC: 111 .00 BLK: 09.00 LOT: 002 . 000 A SEARCH OF THE RECORDS CONDUCTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF BUILDINGS REVEALS THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION: OPEN PERMIT# 27251 ISSUED 04/18/01 ACCESSORY BUILDING WITH RAISED PATIO AND POOL HOUSE CO# 26972 ISSUED 10/21/98 PERMIT# 25260 ONE FAMILY DWELLING (COPIES TO FOLLOW) The purpose of this report is to provide the legal occupancy as per latest c/o on file. A complete history of all filings and copies of same for the above parcel is available upon request for an additional fee. There is no liability assumed for errors or omissions of fact due to the state of the public record or the limits defined herein. This product is not intended to eliminate risks covered by TORPP. The search is prepared exclusively for M.K.M. ABSTRACT SERVICES SNC. on 04/23/02} 040S-7657G (9>d \oj z,i erP ESSEKS, HEFTER & ANGEL L COUNSELORS AT LAW 108 EAST MAIN STREET P. O Box 279 RIVERHEAD, N.Y. 11901-0279 WILLIAM W. ESSEKS (631)369-1700 WATER MILL OFFICE MARCIA Z. HEFTER MONTAUK HIGHWAY STEPHEN R. ANGEL TELECOPIER NUMBER(631) 369-2065 P. 0. Box 570 JANE ANN R. KRATZ WATER MILL, N.Y. 11976 JOHN M.WAGNER (631) 726-6633 WILLIAM POWER MALONEY � lam'' r ` �( —p 1 CARMELA M DI TALIA � �='- �t/ ANTHONY C. PASCA May 16, 2002 , NICA B. STRUNK 1,[11 MAY 17 )2i Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman, cid � and Members of the Zoning Board of Appeals /1- - r''- Town of Southold 53095 Main Road P. O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 -VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS Re: Application of Glenn and Christine Dawson - SCTM No. 1000-104-10-08 Dear Chairman and Members of the Board: When I appeared before the Board on April 18th, you requested that I get back to you on several issues by today. I plan on returning with a representative of applicants, on the night of June 6th - 1. One of the members requested that we obtain a sworn affidavit from Mr. and Mrs. Gelbwaks, the prior owners, concerning the use of the cottage. Our clients attempted to contact the Gelbwaks at their new address, but so far, have been unsuccessful. As you know from my statements on April 18th, it is my position that the continuous use of the cottage is not relevant to the inquiry before the Board. The cottage is a nonconforming structure, not a nonconforming use. Hence, the abandonment provision in the Southold Code pertaining to nonconforming uses, is irrelevant. 2. Our clients have identified several parcels in the vicinity that have two residences on them. We will present these to the Board on June 6th. • 1 , ESSEKS, HEFTER & ANGEL COUNSELORS AT LAW May 16, 2002 Page 2 3. The Board also requested legal authority in addition to Amzalak v. Incorporated Village of Valley Stream, 220 NYS2d 113 (Sup. Ct. Nassau Co. 1961), copies of which were given to you on April 18th I found several authorities in point. Six copies of each are enclosed. Matter of Hoffman v. Board of Zoning Appeals, Village of Brookville, 17 NY2d 138 (1966) is a case decided by New York's highest court, the Court of Appeals. The issue was whether, and to what extent, the petitioner could continue to use a guest house and a carriage house as separate residences. The guest house, carriage house and a principal dwelling were all located on one lot. The Court of Appeals expressly held that any variance to use either or both the guest and carriage houses was an "area variance" and not a "use variance." (Id. at 144) Jones v. Planning Board, 203 AD2d 626 (3d Dept. 1994) is virtually directly in point. There, the petitioner had a small parcel (.42 acres in area) in a rural agricultural district on which there were three one-bedroom free-standing living units, constructed before zoning. The units had been used on a seasonal basis. The petitioner's attempt to renovate them for year-round occupancy was stopped by the Town. The court disagreed, holding that the dwellings were nonconforming structures — not nonconforming uses —which could be used in accordance with zoning. Zoning permitted year-round use. The appellate court's opinion contains the following: Turning to the merits of the petition, we find unconvincing respondents' claim that petitioner's use of her property is a "prior nonconforming use". The ordinance specifically makes a distinction between a nonconforming use and a nonconforming structure (see, Town of Marlborough Code art VI; see also, 1 Anderson, American Law of Zoning § 6.01, at 48 [3d ed]), and although the property itself, and the buildings thereon, are not in conformance with the zoning requirements, the use of those buildings as single-family dwellings is a permitted use within an R-AG1 district (see, Town of Marlborough Code § 114-10 [C] [***5] [2] [f]). Id. at 628 ESSEKS, HEFTER & ANGEL COUNSELORS AT LAW May 16, 2002 Page 3 Gruen v. Simpson, ---- Misc. ---- 153 NYS2d 287 (Sup. Ct. Nassau Co. 1956) affd. 3 AD2d 841 (2d Dept. 1957) involved an application for a variance to maintain two independent residences on a single parcel smaller than the minimum size required by the zoning ordinance. The zoning board denied the variance. The court, however, reversed. The court's opinion was affirmed by the Appellate Division, Second Department. As in the Hoffman case, supra, the court determined that this was an area variance case and directed issuance of the variance. These cases, along with Amzalak, establish that the cottage is a nonconforming structure, not a nonconforming use. As a result, the abandonment provision contained in §100-241G is inapplicable. I look forward to seeing you on June 6th. Res ectfully yours, ike SRA:mb TEP EN R. ANGE Enc.(3 ca4 cc : Robert.). Cippitelli, Esq. -Via Ordinary ail Mr. & Mrs. Glenn Dawson -Via Ordinary Mail Page 3 2ND CASE of Level 1 printed in FULL format. In the Matter of Frederick Hoffman et al., Respondents-Appellants, v. Henry U. Harris, J e�-' t ah.,%1 Constituting the Board of Zoning Appeals of the Incorporated Village of Brookvil e r ;_; l Appellants-Respondents 1 1/;1 _ `,'1 [NO NUMBER IN ORIGINAL] ('�,, I 1' 1 1 f1 ; MAY I p I,; i�' Court of Appeals of New York ``; ; 17 N.Y.2d 138; 216 N.E.2d 326; 1966 N.Y. LEXIS 1499; 269 N.Y.S.2d 119 L `i____ ;'�, January 17, 1966, Argued March 24, 1966, Decided PRIOR HISTORY: [***1] variance to permit the gatehouse on their property to be used as a residence. Matter of Hoffman v. Harris, 21 A D 2d 800. OVERVIEW: Petitioners owned a piece of property with Cross appeals from an order of the Appellate Division three main structures: main dwelling, gatehouse, and of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, a guesthouse. Petitioners appealed to respondent zon- entered June 10, 1964, which modified, on the law and ing board from a ruling that the gatehouse and guest- the facts, and, as modified, affirmed an order of the house, used as rental property, violated zoning ordi- Supreme Court at Special Term (L. Kingsley Smith, nances. Petitioners argued that the use was a valid non- J.), entered in Nassau County, denying an application conforming use and sought a variance to permit continu- pursuant to article 78 of the Civil Practice Act to re- ation of the rentals. Respondent denied the request. On view a determination of the Board of Zoning Appeals appeal, the lower court agreed there was no valid non- of the Village of Brookville and dismissing the petition. conforming use and upheld denial of the variance as to The Zoning Board of Appeals had sustained a ruling by the guesthouse but granted a variance as to the gatehouse. the Building Inspector that the separate residential oc- Both parties cross-appealed. The court affirmed. The cupancy of a gatehouse and guest house on petitioners' question of a variance involved the balancing of com- property was not a valid nonconforming use, and de- munity interests and petitioners' rights, as owners, to nied petitioners' application for a variance so as to per- the reasonable use of their property. Petitioners demon- mit such continued occupancy. By the modification the strated the practical difficulties resulting if the gatehouse determination denying a variance was annulled and the variance was not granted, and the court found that the matter was remitted for the purpose of granting petition- variance did not change the residential character of the ers' application for a variance to permit the gatehouse neighborhood. to be used as a residence. Findings of fact contained in the opinion of the court at Special Term were reversed OUTCOME: The court affirmed the lower court's deci- and new findings made by the Appellate Division in sion,holding that the granting of a variance to petitioners lieu[***2] thereof. Petitioners appeal from so much of was favored by a balancing of community interests with the order of the Appellate Division as affirmed the find- petitioners' right to the reasonable use of their property. ings of Special Term that there was no nonconforming use for either the gatehouse or the converted guest house, CORE TERMS: variance, ordinance, gatehouse, ac- and, insofar as the guest house was concerned, that there cessory, occupancy, tenant, rental, nonconforming use, was a self-imposed difficulty or hardship. Respondents zoning ordinance, dwelling, hardship, occupied, acres, appeal from the order insofar as it modified the order of practical difficulties, area variance, servants, rented, Special Term. guest house, neighborhood, nonpaying, gardener, use variance, accessory use, unnecessary hardship, living DISPOSITION: Order affirmed. quarters, public safety, self-imposed, customarily, one- CASE SUMMARY bedroom, incidental CORE CONCEPTS - PROCEDURAL POSTURE: Parties cross-appealed from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Real & Personal Property Law: Zoning & Land Use: Court in the Second Judicial Department (New York), Conditional Use Permits&Variances in which the court granted petitioners' application for a There is good reason for the distinction between use and • • Page 4 17 N.Y.2d 138, *; 216 N.E.2d 326, **; 1966 N.Y. LEXIS 1499, ***2; 269 N.Y.S.2d 119 area variances and the requirement of a higher standard 841; Matter of Barbara Homes v. Michaelis, 14 Misc of proof of hardship for the former. When the variance 2d 620.) is one of area only, there is no change in the character of the zoned district and the neighborhood considerations JUDGES: Keating, J. Chief Judge Desmond[***7] and are not as strong as in a use variance.. Judges Fuld, Van Voorhis, Burke, Scileppi and Bergan concur. Real & Personal Property Law: Zoning & Land Use: Conditional Use Permits&Variances OPINIONBY KEATING The question of a variance involves the balancing of community interests and the right of an owner to rea- OPINION: [*140] [**327] These are cross appeals in sonable use of his property. The effect of having an area an article 78 proceeding from an order of the Appellate variance with the vital factor of no real change to the Division, Second Department, which modified an order character of the neighborhood, rather than a use vari- of the Supreme Court, Nassau [*141] County, Special ance, is to alter the standard by which individual hard- Term (Smith, J.), upholding [**328] the determination ship is measured. of the Board of Zoning Appeals and dismissing the pe- tition. Petitioners are the owners of slightly more than two COUNSEL: George C. Pratt, Village Attorney, for acres(90,000 sq. ft.) of property situated in the Village appellants-respondents. I. The court below erred in di- of Brookville, Nassau County. At the time of the enact- recting the issuance of a variance for the gatehouse be- ment of the village's original zoning ordinance in 1935, cause its order ignores the distinction, fundamental in petitioners' property was part of a large estate acquired the ordinance, between a principal use and an accessory by Ormond Smith in the 1920's. Smith subdivided the use. II. The court below erred in directing the issuance property in 1947, selling the subject property to Mark of a variance for the gatehouse because whatever prac- Eaton who then sold it to petitioners in 1957. Situated on tical difficulties or unnecessary hardships existed were the property at all relevant times were three structures: self-imposed. (Matter of Johnson v. Moore, 13 A D 2d 984.) III.The court below erred in directing the issuance 1. The Main Dwelling. This house was the principal of a variance for the rental of the gatehouse because the residence of the Smiths, the Eatons and now petitioners. record lacks any evidence to warrant such a variance. ( Matter of Crossroads Recreation v. Broz, 4 NY 2d 39.) 2. The Gatehouse. This brick cottage with two bed- rooms,bath, kitchen, full cellar and unfinished attic was Milton Pinkus for respondents-appellants. I. The occupied by Smith's gardener[***8] until Mark Eaton board's return to the petition for review is wholly lack- purchased it in 1947. Thereafter it was occupied first ing in affirmative findings or factual basis to support by Eaton's married son and his family and then by rent- the determination under[***6] review. It fails of any paying tenants. Petitioners have continued to rent the meaningful response to the allegations and prayer of the gatehouse (unfurnished) and receive$ 145 monthly. It petition for review. ( Matter of Galuppi v. New York is for this rental use that the Appellate Division ordered State Liq. Auth., 12 A D 2d 987;Matter of Rotkiewicz a variance. v. Department of Mental Hygiene, 283 App. Div. 458, 307 N. Y 847; Matter of Turiano v. Gilchrist, 8 A 3. The Guest House. This one-bedroom brick cottage D 2d 953; Matter of Galvin a Murphy, 11 A D 2d behind the garage was established by Mrs. Eaton during 900.) II. The board's arbitrary and unjustified denial her ownership and is currently rented for$ 125 monthly of the requested variance is a confiscatory infringement (furnished). It is for this rental use that the Appellate of petitioners' constitutional property right. (Matter of Division affirmed the denial of a variance. Village of Bronxville v Francis, 1 A D 2d 236, 1 N Y 2d 839; Matter of Foley a Feriola, 23 A D 2d 498; Matter of Clark v. Board of Zoning Appeals, 301 N. Y. The history of the zoning ordinances is as follows: 86;Matter of Willits v. Board of Zoning Appeals, 23 A 1. The original zoning ordinance of 1935 permit- D 2d 868;Matter of Crossroads Recreation v. Broz, 4 ted single-family detached principal dwellings, with or N Y2d 39;Shepard v Village of Skaneateles, 300 N. Y without accessory buildings, on a lot area of not less 115;Householder a Town of Grand Is., 280 App. Div. than two acres for each principal dwelling. Accessory 874, 305 N. Y. 805;Matter of Lippe v. Cisternino, 44 building was defined as "a building subordinate to the Misc 2d 510;Matter of Gruen v. Simpson , 3 A D 2d principal building on a lot and used for purposes custom- • Page 5 17 N.Y.2d 138, *141; 216 N.E.2d 326, **328; 1966 N.Y. LEXIS 1499, ***8; 269 N.Y.S.2d 119 arily incidental to those of the principal building." The and from Special Term. ordinance also allowed for "outbuildings and houses to be used by persons employed on the premises and other The Board of Appeals found initially that at no accessory uses customarily incidental to any of the above time since its original enactment in 1935 has the zon- permitted uses". ing[***11]scheme permitted the renting of an accessory building to a tenant for use as a residence, and that prior 2. [***9] In 1950, the definition of an accessory to this prohibition neither the gatehouse [*143] nor the building was amended to read "a building such as a pri- guest house was rented to tenants. This finding was vate garage, private swimming pool ***which is sub- upheld at Special Term and by the Appellate Division. ordinate and accessory to the principal [*142] building on the same lot and which is used for purposes custom- Petitioners argue that in the case of the gatehouse the arily incidental to those of the principal building." gratuitous tenancy prior to the ordinance should afford a basis for its lawful continuance as a tenancy for hire. 3. In 1961, this was again amended and this time Petitioners then rely solely on the case of Matter of Clune specifically excluded use as a residence except by full- v. Walker(10 Misc 2d 858, affd. 7A D 2d 651), which time employees of the principal residents: "Guest houses they cite at length. Petitioners'argument, however, fails or buildings designed and equipped to be used for habit- to take note of the fact that the gratuitous tenancy was able purpose (by other than said servants, caretakers or by the Smith gardener and, therefore,was, and still is,a chauffeurs) are not accessory buildings and are, there- permitted accessory use and can form no basis for a valid fore, not permitted. No use carried on as a business nonconforming accessory use. Until 1947 at least, there shall be permitted in any accessory building. The rent- was no violation of the use provisions of the ordinance. ing to a tenant of any accessory building alone and not The guest house, which did not even exist as a living in conjunction with the principal building or principal quarter until after 1947, was never used other than as use shall constitute a prohibited business use." a prohibited rental residence and clearly it has no basis for a valid nonconforming use. Petitioners' reliance on 4. In 1962, the ordinance was re-enacted in substan- Matter of Clune v. Walker is misplaced as[***12]Clune tially the same form. In current form, therefore, the was a variance case and not a nonconforming use case. ordinance distinguishes the status of occupants, not the extent or nature of use; that is, residence by servants is The Appellate Division properly affirmed the denial permitted but residence by nonpaying guests, relatives of a variance for the guest house because difficulty or or paying[***10] tenants is prohibited. hardship was wholly self-imposed, in that the building was made into living quarters and rented to tenants long Initially, petitioners appealed to the Board of Zoning after the adoption of the zoning ordinance prohibiting Appeals from a ruling of the Building Inspector to the such rental. However, the question of a variance for the effect that the use of the gatehouse and guest house for gatehouse is a closer one and is not precisely covered by rental violated the zoning ordinance. Petitioners argued any cases decided in this court. that the use was a valid nonconforming use and also sought a variance which would permit continuation of Section 179-b of the Village Law provides in part: the rentals. After a hearing, the board found that there "Where there are practical difficulties or unnecessary was no valid nonconforming use and that petitioners had hardship in the way of carrying out the strict letter of failed to present evidence sufficient to warrant the grant- such ordinance,the board of appeals shall have the power ing of a variance as to either structure. in passing upon appeals, to vary or modify the appli- cation of any of the regulations or provisions of such [**329] At Special Term, these fmdings were af- ordinance relating to the use, construction or alteration firmed. On appeal, the Appellate Division agreed that of buildings or structures, or the use of land, so that the there was no valid nonconforming use, upheld denial spirit of the ordinance shall be observed, public safety of a variance as to the guest house, but found that a and welfare secured and substantial justice done." variance should have been granted as to the gatehouse and modified the order, directing that such variance be Special Term affirmed the board's denial of a vari- granted. ante, saying that even if the variance requested were one of area rather than use, the court[***13]was unable The board has appealed from this modification while to fmd any evidence of practical difficulty or unneces- petitioners have cross-appealed from so much of the or- sary hardship to sustain a finding in favor of petitioners. der as denied relief which they requested from the board The Appellate Division set aside this ruling stating that, • Page 6 17 N.Y.2d 138, *143; 216 N.E.2d 326, **329; 1966 N.Y. LEXIS 1499, ***13; 269 N.Y.S.2d 119 considering the circumstances here, the good-faith use validly do so, and have done so in good faith without of [*144] the gatehouse as a residence for many years objection by neighbors or (until now) the board or its antedating the zoning ordinance, and following the ra- inspector, (4) the only permissive accessory use for this tionale of Matter of Gruen v. Simpson (153 N. Y. S. 2d cottage would be for servants, and domestic help em- 287, affd. 3 A D 2d 841) and Clune (supra), a variance ployed these days to serve a nine-room household (such should have been granted. as the main household here) are rarely provided with separate living quarters, and (5) there being no other The case for petitioners rests first on the fact that the appropriate uses for the gatehouse, petitioners are faced variance sought here is an area variance rather than a use with a Hobson's choice between continued payment of variance. The gatehouse is a principal family residence taxes, which have increased very rapidly of late, or de- and petitioners seek to vary from the requirement that molition. all such residences need be on separate two-acre lots. An applicant for an area variance need not establish spe- The instant case is[***16] thus very similar to Gruen cial hardship. It is sufficient to show practical difficul- and Clune(supra)in which the Appellate Division found ties or unnecessary hardship. Whereas some cases have that refusals to grant the area variances sought were arbi- [**330]required a petitioner for a use variance to show trary and capricious,and we are satisfied that petitioners that a particular property suffers a singular disadvantage have made a sufficient showing of practical difficulties. or special hardship through the operation of a zoning The board, however, interposes the objection that peti- regulation, that the plight of the owner is due to unique tioners should be denied relief because they purchased circumstances[***14] and not to the general conditions the property with notice of the restriction and because in the neighborhood (Matter of Hickox v. Gruen, 298 whatever difficulties or hardships exist are self-imposed N. Y. 365;Matter of Otto v. Steinhilber, 282 N. Y. 71), due to the 1947 subdivision by the predecessor, Smith. this "special hardship" rule has been limited to use vari- ances and such proof is not a necessary condition to the We find these arguments unpersuasive first because the granting of an area variance. "A change of area may cases creating a bar to relief for purchasers with notice be granted on the ground of practical difficulties alone, are use variance cases (see Matter of Clark v. Board of without considering whether or not there is an unnec- Zoning Appeals, 301 N. Y. 86) and such a rule is not essary hardship." ( Matter of Village of Bronxville v. necessarily applicable to area variance cases. In the in- Francis, 1 A D 2d 236, 238, affd. 1 N Y 2d 839.) stant case, the Batons -- who also rented the gatehouse -- would have been entitled to seek a variance without There is good reason for the distinction between use being automatically barred and we can see no reason to and area variances and the requirement of a higher stan- place their successors in any worse position. dard of proof of hardship for the former. When the variance is one of area only, there is no change in the Furthermore, while it is true that a landowner (or his character of the zoned district and the neighborhood con- predecessor)should not be allowed to create a condition siderations are not as strong as in a use variance. For ex- and then assert that condition as an [***17]excuse for ample, in Bronxville (supra), the question was whether a variance, such is not the case here. The gatehouse a bank could make the floor area of its new building existed as a separate residence [**331] long before the more than 1 and 1/2 times the area of its lot despite an first ordinance and, when it came time to subdivide in ordinance limiting the total floor area of a building to 1 1947, there was no need for Smith to set aside two sep- and 1/2 times the lot. There was no question of change arate acres for the gatehouse since the occupancy by his of character of neighborhood since[***15]the bank was gardener was clearly a permitted accessory use. Even if a proper use. In such a case,it seems fair that only prac- Smith had foreseen the use by Mrs. Eaton's son, it is tical difficulty without unique or special hardship need unlikely he would have acted differently since the ordi- be proved to obtain a variance. nance in 1947 did not clearly state the [*146] intention to differentiate occupancy by servants from occupancy To this end, it can be said for petitioners that (1) by nonpaying guests or relatives. The provision of the the gatehouse was designed, built and used for separate ordinance that accessory buildings could be used "for residential occupancy for many years and antedates the purposes customarily incidental to those of the princi- original ordinance, [*145] (2) that it represents a sub- pal building" --while not allowing rental use-- would stantial capital investment, adds materially to the value quite possibly have been interpreted as allowing use by of the property and yields a desirable income, (3) that relatives. It was not until the 1961 amendment that the the prior owners rented the gatehouse for several years ordinance clearly stated its intention to make occupancy and petitioners purchased in the belief that they could by servants permissible and to make no distinction be- • Page 7 17 N.Y.2d 138, *146; 216 N.E.2d 326, **331; 1966 N.Y. LEXIS 1499, ***17; 269 N.Y.S.2d 119 tween occupancy by nonpaying relatives and tenants, of families. The same buildings and the same number prohibiting both uses. Therefore, had the gatehouse of families were there[***19] well before the original been continuously occupied by nonpaying relatives(such ordinance was even passed. The issue is not whether the as Eaton's[***18] son) to the present time, it may well gatehouse may be occupied but whether it may be oc- have been a valid nonconforming use or at least a very cupied by rent-paying tenants. The only practical effect strong case for variance. Since, by the ordinance's own of barring the rental of the gatehouse is to deprive the ruling and the board's own argument, there is no dis- owners of a beneficial use thereof while forcing them to tinction now between occupancy by nonpaying relatives demolish it or have it remain vacant. and occupancy by tenants, petitioners should now be no worse off by having tenants than if they had relatives The question of a variance involves the balancing of in the gatehouse, and, therefore, should be granted a community interests and the right of an owner to rea- variance in either case. sonable use of his property. The effect of having an area variance with the[*147]vital factor of no real change to Though the interpretation of the ordinance as of 1947 the character of the neighborhood, rather than a use vari- is not the question before us, the preceding discussion ance, is to alter the standard by which individual hard- does go to the heart of the matter. The point is that grant- ship is measured. We agree with the Appellate Division ing of the variance will not really change the essential that petitioners have demonstrated practical difficulties residential character of the neighborhood and need not in the way of carrying out the strict letter of the ordi- negate the village's power to distinguish between princi- nance, and a variance should be granted in order that the pal and accessory uses. The board offered no evidence of spirit of the ordinance may be observed, public safety adverse effects or any countervailing considerations of and welfare secured and substantial justice done. The or- public safety, health or morals. The only affidavits sub- der of the Appellate Division is affirmed, without costs. mitted by neighbors were favorable to petitioners. The variance would involve no change in the size or number Order affirmed. of buildings on the property or in the size and number ' '__.." Page 3 3RD CASE of Level 1 printed in FULL format. In the Matter of Frederick Hoffman et al., Appellants, v. Henry U. Harris, Jr. et al., Constituting the Board of Zoning Appeals of the Incorporated Village of Brookville, Respondents [NO NUMBER IN ORIGINAL] Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, Second Department 21 A.D.2d 800; 250 N.Y.S.2d 767; 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3572 June 10, 1964 PRIOR HISTORY: [**1] out costs. Findings of fact inconsistent herewith are reversed and new findings made as indicated herein. In a proceeding under article 78 of the former Civil Practice Act, to review a determination of the Board JUDGES: Ughetta, Acting P. J., Christ, Brennan, Hill of Zoning Appeals of the Incorporated Village of and Hopkins, JJ., concur. Brookville, rendered March 18, 1963, which: (a) sus- tained the Building Inspector's ruling that the seperate OPINION: [*768] [**2] There was no nonconforming residential occupancy of the gatehouse and the guest- use for either the gatehouse or the converted guesthouse; house on petitioners' property was not a valid noncon- and, insofar as the guesthouse was concerned, there was forming use; and(b) denied petitioners' application for a self-imposed difficulty or hardship. Moreover, the a variance so as to permit such continued occupancy, the residential use of such guesthouse came into being sub- petitioners appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, sequent to the adoption of the local Zoning Ordinance. Nassau County, dated July 8, 1963, dismissing the peti- However, under the circumstances here, and in view of tion and denying the application. Order modified on the the good-faith use of the gatehouse as a residence for law and the facts to the extent of annulling the Zoning many years antedating the Zoning Ordinance, and fol- Board's determination insofar as it denied petitioners a lowing the rationale of the recent similar cases (Matter variance with respect to the gatehouse; and matter re- of Clune v. Walker, 10 Misc 2d 858,affd. 7AD 2d 651, mitted to the Zoning Board for the purpose of granting [*769] mot. for lv. to app. den. 7 A D 2d 852;Matter petitioners' application for a variance to permit the gate- of Gruen v. Simpson, 153 N. Y S. 2d 287, affd. 3 AD house to be used as a residence. 2d 841),a variance to permit residential use should have been granted as to the gatehouse. Petitioners established DISPOSITION: As so modified, order affirmed, with- a proper case for such a limited variance. Ate v J Page 3 -j 1 ~_ 609 N.Y.S.2d 972 printed in FULL format. MAY y 1 . f, In the Matter of DEBORAH JONES, Respondent, v. PLANNING BOARD OF THETOWN-OF__ �? MARLBOROUGH et al., Appellants. 69046 __ ___ SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, THIRD DEPARTMENT ' 203 A.D.2d 626; 609 N.Y.S.2d 972; 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3604 April 7, 1994, Decided April 7, 1994, Entered CASE SUMMARY PROCEDURAL POSTURE: Respondents, Planning Board of the Town of Marlborough(planning board) and building inspector, sought review of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Ulster County(New York), which granted petitioner owner's application, in a proceeding pursuant to N.Y. C.P.L.R. 78, to annul a determination of the board denying petitioner's request for certificates of permanent occupancy. OVERVIEW: Respondents contended that petitioner had failed to exhaust her administrative remedies. Inasmuch as Town of Marlborough, N.Y. Code§ 114-35(E) explicitly did not permit an appeal to the zoning board of appeals from a planning board decision, it could not be said that petitioner failed to exhaust her administrative remedies. The court found unconvincing respondents' claim that petitioner's use of her property was a "prior nonconforming use." Even if the conversion from seasonal to permanent occupancy did represent a change of use, the only limitations which the zoning ordinance placed on such a change were those specifically relating to the application for and acquisition of permanent occupancy certificates, namely that a floor plan had to be provided, and that the planning board could impose conditions with regard to safe ingress and egress, protection from the elements and conformance with heating, plumbing, water, sewage, and lighting codes for new construction. The court agreed that the record contained no evidence justifying the planning board's denial of petitioner's application. However, the board had not made any findings with respect to the foregoing requirements. OUTCOME: The court modified the judgment of the trial court, which granted petitioner's application to annul a determination of the planning board denying her request for certificates of permanent occupancy by remitting the matter to the planning board for further proceedings. The court affirmed the judgment, as modified. CORE TERMS: occupancy, permanent, certificates, nonconforming, nonconforming use, zoning ordinance, seasonal, dwelling, permitted use, conformance, administrative remedies, conversion, ordinance, modified, binding, repair CORE CONCEPTS - Governments: Local Governments: Administrative Boards Governments: Local Governments: Powers &Duties By providing for planning board approval and mandating that certain health, welfare, and safety requirements be met to the satisfaction of the planning board before an application for permanent occupancy can be approved pursuant to Town of Marlborough, N.Y. Code § 114-15(D)(2)(b), the pertinent section of the Town's Code implies that planning board disapproval of an application is to be binding upon the building inspector. COUNSEL: [***1] Richard W. Hoyt, Walden, for respondent. Francis E. Ferro P.C. (Francis E. Ferro of counsel), Milton, for appellants. JUDGES: Before: Mikoll, J.P., Mercure, Crew III, s Page 4 203 A.D.2d 626, *; 609 N.Y.S.2d 972, **; LEXSEE 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3604, ***1 • White and Yesawich Jr., JJ Petitioner instituted this CPLR article 78 proceeding seeking review of the Planning Board's decision and an OPINIONBY: YESAWICH order compelling respondents to issue certificates of per- manent occupancy. Following denial of their motion to OPINION: [*626] [**973] MEMORANDUM AND dismiss the petition on the ground that petitioner had ORDER failed to exhaust available administrative remedies, re- spondents answered the petition. Finding that the por- Yesawich Jr., J. tion of the zoning ordinance which governs the conver- sion of seasonal dwelling units to permanent occupancy Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court imposes no density requirements, and that no rational (Bradley, 1'.), entered October 1, 1992 in Ulster County, basis was advanced for denying petitioner's application, which granted petitioner's application, in a proceeding Supreme Court granted the petition. Respondents ap- pursuant to CPLR article 78, to annul a determination of peal. respondent Planning Board of the Town of Marlborough denying petitioner's request for certificates of permanent By providing for Planning Board approval and man- occupancy. dating that certain health, welfare and safety require- ments be met to the satisfaction of the Planning Board be- Petitioner is the owner of a 0.42-acre parcel of prop- fore an application for permanent occupancy can be ap- erty in an R-AG1 (rural agricultural) zoning district - proved(see, Town of Marlborough[*628] Code § 114- which has a [*627] minimum lot size requirement of 15[D] [2] [b]), the pertinent section of the Town's Code one acre per dwelling unit-in the Town of Marlborough, implies that Planning Board disapproval of[***4]an ap- Ulster County. On the property are three free-standing, plication is to be binding upon the Building Inspector. one-bedroom dwelling units, which were constructed Additionally, it is apparent from the record that the prior to the Town's adoption of its zoning ordinance and Building Inspector himself considered the Planning for which the Town has granted seasonal occupancy per- Board's decision binding, as did the Planning Board, wits. When, shortly after [***2]purchasing the prop- which undertook to inform petitioner directly that her erty, petitioner commenced renovation and repair of application had been denied. Inasmuch as the Town these units with the intention of adapting them for year- Code explicitly does not permit an appeal to the Zoning round use,respondent Town Building Inspector directed Board of Appeals from a P1rnning Board decision(see, her to apply to respondent Town Planning Board for Town of Marlborough Code § 114-35 [E]), it cannot be certificates of permanent occupancy in accordance with said that petitioner failed to exhaust her administrative Town of Marlborough Code § 114-15 (D) (2), which remedies. outlines the conditions under which seasonal dwellings may be converted to permanent occupancy and which re- Turning to the merits of the petition, we find uncon- quires Planning Board approval for the issuance of such vincing respondents' claim that petitioner's use of her certificates. property is a "prior nonconforming use". The ordi- nance specifically makes a distinction between a noncon- Petitioner so applied, and after several meetings at forming use and a nonconforming structure (see, Town which the matter was discussed and petitioner's submis- of Marlborough Code art VI; see also, 1 Anderson, sions were considered, the Planning Board denied her American Law of Zoning § 6.01, at 448 [3d ed]), and application. Although the Planning Board's letter of although the property itself, and the buildings thereon, denial, and minutes of its meetings, do not make the are not in conformance with the zoning requirements, grounds for the denial entirely clear, it appears to have the use of those buildings as single-family dwellings is been based in large part on[**974]a determination that a permitted use within an R-AG1 district(see, Town of the change to permanent occupancy constituted an im- Marlborough Code § 114-10 [C] [***5] [2] [f]). The permissible extension of a prior nonconforming use of Town's ordinance, unlike that under consideration in the property. Respondents also argue on appeal that the Matter of Castore v Breite(167AD2d 799,563 N.Y.S.2d nonconforming use had been abandoned prior to peti- 361, lv denied 77 NY2d 806), does not specifically de- tioner's application for occupancy certificates; although fine a "bungalow colony", or anything else which could this factor was discussed by[***3]the Planning Board at reasonably be interpreted as encompassing the units in- prior meetings, there is no indication that it was a basis volved herein, as a different use of the property see also, for the determination, nor would it have been a valid Matter of Allen v Hattrick, 87AD2d 575, 575-576, 447 one, as hereinafter noted. N.Y.S.2d 741). Hence, the provisions relating to aban- donment of nonconforming uses and prohibiting their ) i ) Page 5 "" 20::"A.D.2d 626, *628; 609 N.Y.S.2d 972, **974; ~ LEXSEE ' 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3604, ***5 extension are inapplicable. new construction. Furthermore, review of the Town's zoning ordinance Viewed from the standpoint of whether compliance reveals no limitation on a property owner's right to has been had with these requirements, we agree with change the use of a nonconforming structure from one Supreme Court's assessment that the record contains no permitted use to another. The only restrictions placed on evidence justifying the Planning Board's denial of pe- nonconforming structures pertain to reconstruction af- titioner's application. This is not, however, as peti- ter the structure is destroyed or damaged beyond repair, tioner argues, entirely dispositive of the matter, for the and to the enlargement of a nonconforming residence Planning Board has not made any findings with respect (see, Town of Marlborough Code §§ 114-27, 114-28). to the foregoing requirements and it must be afforded Consequently, even if the conversion from seasonal to an opportunity to do so (see, Matter of Viscio v Town permanent occupancy does represent a change of use of Guilderland Planning Bd., 138 AD2d 795, 798, 525 (see, Matter of Castore v Breite, supra, at 801; but N.Y.S.2d 439). see, Matter of Allen v Hattrick, supra, at 575),[***6] the only limitations which the zoning ordinance places Mikoll, J.P., Mercure, Crew III and White, JJ., con- on such a change are those specifically relating to the cur. application for and acquisition of permanent occupancy certificates (see, Town of Marlborough Code [*629]§ ORDERED that the judgment is modified, on the law, 114-15 [D]), namely that a floor plan must be pro- without costs, by remitting[***7] the matter to respon- vided, and that the Planning Board may impose con- dent Planning Board of the Town of Marlborough for ditions with regard to safe ingress and egress, protec- further proceedings not inconsistent with this court's de- tion from the elements and conformance with heating, cision, and, as so modified, affirmed. plumbing, [**975]water, sewage and lighting codes for • i a�!q Vic'+'- I'I it ,�,',•,+, t"F -�-� a _.__ ' Irk :4,}.'ry a,,,,,,, �! }' �'� -' :y i i-----,-,- . "__ „� '� Y:•,. GRUEN v. SIMPSON 2!$1 c f�,"—- _ _,_r `I i•°l . ,f�•S ,, `1,'` ''' NOLAN, Citana163N.Y.S.2t1237 ! � I ;,-,,,,,,,,,,,,;,w,-,,,,,4,-,,,,, ; P. J., and BELDOCK and HALLINAN, ;1-,'1 1 MAY ] *'t 0!f .: '`scont 7 , �, ac., ;-ee,i't, ,,' JJ, •concur. f� j4 ;s ,,,'::;, MURPHY I ,, and UGHETTA, JJ, 7 e-1,.,�.r' dissent insofar �' x,, as the reversal is- "- - - '' a; g�yY,f{4.',- conditional and vote to reverse and to grant a new trial, on the ground, ;fi l' '. that the verdict is,against,the weight of the credible evidence, 0 r "" 1:-,,,,, -:i, �' following mewith the a a •tixr; �`,t?, morandum: In determiningthat the door 'i.''' 1 r. gave wayunder i 1 ;; !° the impactrespondent'sbody, E ��°'��„{,>,{-,;�''�E of falling whichweighed � only --'srt 'Ps`>` `'rt” the jurydid 115 pounds, �' _`•. not. give proper, consideration as to whether respondent `i �:44rt,_• forced open the bottom of the door under the stress of mental disorder. { r,`' he ; }f :k O 5 KEY NUMBER SYSTEM (illi ver- A1A y,- ,y ; T q i'oP ;rant a R2� ? • - ' ', ice the ''•r4' ffi T• �'1 ! "t,t4,r ,..',i-;,t.4,41,:,... Tn the Matter of the Application of ,;, ,, r<1Rudolph GRUEN, k1S,, SIMPSON, Petitioner, v. Colin C. 1�'`. ''' Fred S. Yale, G. W. Leroy Travis, William J. Drake and j F2Itsmii,. 2,.r'p,,.•r,; David Pasternack, Constituting ' 1 ° ;, ter ,`: toting the Board of Appeals of the Village of I i`,CI l 3wr, Great ;;f� kip ,,' Neck Estates,:Re pondents. ° ,Kv,nF, ,Lb's,, Y„A:,''44W , ., Supreme Court, Special Term,Nassau Count Part I. �f"'' p down May9, y' � �' i %,.E i.� ;E t; 1956. I I; ;rant- ;;is u� �� • r 'I99 ,f4'..0;1,'' Proceeding under the Civil Practice Act,, i'�E �Il § 1283 et seq., y `�°' a i ��.'• g to.obtain •1 1� 1.1 ,' r " review of refusal by village board of appeals to grant variance to permit � ar' ! •brine ''.4•1:-E1ra< e,'" landowner to continue use, as rental property,F p p y, oE,dwelling adjacent to � H'' •,,,,,,,,--t,-i o. ;:`:, main dwellingused Court Special . + pfd ,. by landowner. The.Su reme �' ''.1P ;ZS ,Al_i'MC; Howard T. Hogan, P , Term, '}lis` a , J. held that, where, since 1926, tract of land had Felt- ,�,r,, , • •:,e-4,q,,, contained main dwelling,and an adjacent dwelling which had been used 1,'h'" ,, ;�'� ��'"�' to house selandowner's`' • :-� ; ` '4:- set.' of , `� "�`��;- withoutalter in �, ,�� << I' �� 'id 111 TTA „'_ `•• way the essential character of the neighborhood,,and, at time landowner • >- i purchased the_tract, village officials were acquiescin in rental fi �� .: g of the 1 '1i PC:'' n ram-,rk--• adjacent dwelling to an independent family, and landowner would be l r,� 2,,,, burdened with cost of demolition of adjacentN dwelling or payment of , ,c! ja,Y; ,�K ' T`' taxes on empty building � essee ''',4-"A, '"�� '°�; p y g unless granted variance to permit him to rent :pant. ` ' the ad acent dwelling '' ,'i E11I4! x� ,' ,' j to an'independent"family,--and, in either event, ;+i l'. Y :e of f ,` st, ; landowner would have, in effect, two separate'properties divided by topo- ' � haft, ,, ,. : graphical characteristics of thee'land refusal'to grant the-variance was• ' ', • )0 inF,X fQ.. ry;, arbitrary and capricious. '7 �u11,r- Ruling reversed.' ,;ii'�' 1,,. the '{ ao t:`Irl, �. idg- ';,' `: 1' Municipal Corporations B21.17 i ° � r g • - ,, In'absence of contrary ` • y statutory provision, special hardship need !1'11111' °�"; . `,,," not be establishP , ' ` ' r _ ed ax fr.' as condition to grantin�;,% zx � , #�::},, g an area variance fiom pro- �f k#• z'u������� F=N-;�' visions of a-zonin ord' � 'y ' i k- 4h-- g finance.• ; i , 1111111, Ngo le'� I:tit „i.4s �,‘%''' I'ipg�A'.E' 91'�4:. 1 . ./ 3 1---) . ,i, In . \--/ irk IJ, 4 i i 1 y 's.:, ,,,41:41,,L, ol'e):174'..'1 i : ii , 288- 153 NEW YORIe-SVi'kEIVIENti:2'cl SERIES : 4 , , 2. 1VIunicipal CorpOrations'c='621.26= ,:•.,, ..! ;; : •••,:. ,3,•:, '',,,.4:-. ' 11!•';,[' 60 Hi?.4 r, Where, since 1926, tract of land had contained main dwelling and ' [ '' 9• IN, :1;r l'il IN . , ! .„ , • " " an adjacent dwelling which had been'used to'-house servants of land- o*ner's•predecessor, without'alteringin'anFWajr the essential'Character' ' 1i 1 of the.'neighbOrhoOd, and, 'at tiMe'landownei'PnrChiqed the'ira-9f, village ' , ;- • officials *9i-9 acquiescing in:rental of the adiacent-dwelling,-.tO an ifide-' pendent family, 'and larklOvViier would be biiidenedi.*itli'COst of demoli- tion ,' .,I, „,„._,,_, ,'1,';o,i,:i-', -,0 ,,,,,,,,4,,,, . t 1 l' i tido Of'adjacent dwelling'or payment of tak'eS on eniptji:bifildifig unless' granted variance to 'permit'him to'rent the'adjaCent'dwelling to an'iride-:' pendent family, and, in either event, landowner would have, in effect, two separate properties divided by topographical characteristics of the '%':k.1j.,."^::.' 4' 11.-:.'''' , 44 ijilk land, refusal to grant the variance mas.,arbitrary and capricious. • w?,,,, 1 iNi 1.11,.1 p.:.,ii,1 .4,41 3' 3,ra"P.•;".' ji,11,"1• ,•;11,1! Rudolph Gruen, Great Neck, for petitioner. 4,1, 11' 'r,," 14' Conklin &Bentley New.,York City, fpr respond.ents. . „. _ 1.11.r.i6ki'''‘,:gillssi,,,,., ,,i,,, 7ci, . t! i:i ri;;'1,,',il .: •-.. .. .. .,....,J., .. ,, .•,.... , -..•.', .. ...., .i '.. . _... ._- .-. .', 'n jRL ..7` 17 ril ,1 ,,, „.,04.....,., 0_,,,t,.. ,., ,...,.... -41,, , --,,,,,. -,,,), ,,,;v ,4, ..,36t--,... _!....,., 517. ,4'::31.1/1•1o1--,S•a11.3.4, t: •1 A 1'.!''II':,‘k ''A 13,1-1,Y,0 A-1KP T.P.QP-4.-1C1-, 3-1.1tice.,;. r.',4..i.:::','T:iti;;1-P l.?—tc,%-,-;"L ,1 .,„-l;., ti Vi:V !lig itir, This is a proceeding brought pursuarit-t-o‘hrtfile18`df the2Civir-Prac- f Ill ,;,-W, M'4 tice Act to review the act the Board of Appealspf the.Village of Great s I, 4',,r; 4/,,i; '410,1 Met Neck Estates in refusing to grant a.variance to petitioner which would •--,',..'!'.,g40-tp.' il A'0 :1;; . 5,•.!,:ii,,41 q' N; P I permit him to continue to use as an independent dwelling, a residence, firgi4, k:::;' il'i•.',::,,',, originally an accessory building, on his property, such residence occupy- f 0q;1?,•11'?.?,•111'•'1' inea''plOt less than the minimum area of 1.2,900''S'citiai-e'f:eet prescribed fir,44,k141,14-1/:,:, WrS3',3, ,fry., Si 141 • ',,,', 141 4, ,W.,-3'34:-4...i3134, 4 '3';;4.3fi 4.•‘•• F.3 r -3' !;" Si',-34", ',,i 3 '3'3.7'2,', by the zoning ordinance ''''' ''''":''. `"" .1'-' 3: -- ' 'AO! i'.',3, -.,•,: •i;,., '1 g,''4 ' . • 1: V4!,!tf404 v 'By decision dated'Ocibber 8, i955 the Board denied 'such'a •V ariaride. ,r. , I r. '`...,. ti 1 , St '..'j.,,4til;IIII:": (11:6;,''' 1 Upon appeal this Court rex-rifted-the matter to the Board for i fiirher'cle-:- liberation by reason of the'fact that it had based its rtfusaf. upon Several eWAi`1itjs: Oh ri.1! (4 fli!1 grounds, some of which were'beyond its'13rOvince'to 'dOnsider.' ' There- 1ri after, the Board reconsidered thMattef'andon February 14, 056, . ' q fi again denied the applicationn ilir,r6Und thalethel-e'irere"nOPraaical t -iN, ,i',..v1 difficulties or' unnecessary inlilie way'oi'Carning',Silt.the'striCt• o: i 1:'':III ' :-z,r--• , . Ill il'!,p4(,,,I -,• ---r:* - t if--.*,i letter of the zoning Oromance , -: . _ The Court is now called tip- 'Al t'Vq6:--2,-.",,:,. 411. Cliti I 1 on to review this latter decision: '''' ''' ''' ' '' '''' '' :'l'''' '' -''''''' ''' ,*-,--z:,,r,,,,,,,,,,,, ti ,,,„..th.,,,,,t..,,:., - . . ,,, . .•; , • - • i-, s I• , , , .• , • 5-i;. , ,..- : , -. . 1.4401 ...4,' .P,Vg;•.,,: re The,Board, in its original decision,'has summarized the facts Concern- A'4,' ITOA•:', .NI1M' 0;[ i'(lilL 1[5 4)11; 4t{ 111 1 i,',IA; ' • r '''1:,; , , '' " ''1•, "' (Ji ,,' •• , ,.'' +. , ,..; ing the history of thesepetrns9s as follows .. . " ' . : "Both the main dweliincf:and thet cottage were built prior to .. . - - • •,!,_ .":1,031.:,, IVI:gre 4. `v•.-,Aor--.1,• ,..4. 7F1-J.: ti st (` /lilt h C''.- III i ' 1926, and were in existence at the time of the enactment of the., , . _ . original Building Zone Ordinance on February 2 ,' 1926,„ At '''''S-,.ViP'Z')::'' ,,,,,, :„,,,,,„t„ le cligii . ',', *:.' 1 g':1;":' .,:'':' 1 that time, and for some years afterwards, the cottage was oc- • ,,N. ,z,„;. ,, .,•,g1r.,c_.,e',',-h.' Iriil, ;1,1'111, , cupied by servants and employees of the occupant of the main ,f4.?,..„.,,_,.;,,,,,,,,,,, of 1...,,•! , 1 I k!' Iii .':,0'd,i ; 1 , 1,.'.Rii . dwelling; and constituted a use accessory to'the main dwelling:' ,'". ' " At the' time of the acquisition'bYthe'present owners in 1951, , , 1,0,1,;;,,,,,,,,,, 4'''',44' ',z..1,:`: .-_,..,p--A.74---:,,'-:• ';?- 1.1*'-.v";, tic tu ikd 1:110 ',.,6 -,,,t-W,1 I and-for some years-'preViouSly,"thelcbttage was:rented to an in- ' ; ,.: ;,001-3V, r`e;'' ' so 11 1 I!V''''' 11 dependent family, and until recently, hacti-been so used and oc- i ,'• -:?..,*2,,,,,,,,,i,,,,, . .1.,t3.,. ,,A,„-,-,,,-,,• :.;•,•31.- 4P-. '," te ,,d., l'f',,,"--, ,ip: ll ! .v-3.• :, r I:1; rk,,...1 .!1;,'.,,,i, ),,e, ,f ' 1 .iii,..;. I ., ;;.17A- 2iis,_ •it •,.,.:- , 4.1 , .; :..*:4;,,,,yitt:4':;i. ', ,0 ..,,,,1 ,1 1 _ --.„2-..t.-,- ,-,..„-.;',,-;•-: .. , . t.-1. ",L y ,;.":," - ' -GRUEN V. SIMPS ON' , 289 ,,j "1 n I�,i,II i ,,t':•;;-V,', r, "' s �:` '.- Cite I '�'yii 1 1 �'"�'•1`''fid-;�`�,'', '` � ii,'4J r '• copied.. The applicant:desires to be permitted to continue such rid ;,,• ,- -cip,, use. . ,, i id- ° /cgpThe petitioner was first informed of the fact that his useprem- ,40,;414.:07,,,„; "; �' is-.1• of the I ter ,... ',•«%' ises constituted a,zoning violation by means of a letter from counsel for -- ;ige the Village,which contained the following statement: s°=��git - '• "Since your property is•substantiallylarger than the mini- 11 ., Ali- rr "'"i=: g , } p. ' vv. ,,,,',,,.& , , 'mum area required in a residence B district and since the vio- '� il1, - ess' r: ,f,),-,,,,,,,,4:" de- ,i,',` w^,`;,_ , lation_ may have,commenced prior to your purchase of the - !'%,� 'i 'j°` property, that "�" C, ; ,', itis ,. possiblean application to the Village Board �i }� ;� °ct ,,'>," ",'4'-,"{`s';` of Appeals for a variance might receive sympathetic considera- I i �I' the ,,�t, ,,, F;;y tion: This course of procedure is open to you,,if you care to 1 '� :s�'- II S" E': .,fy' n,,+G pursue it." , , , , _ . 1 ,' : r 4,"_.. The total area of petitioner'sproperty is 21 640 square IV. t1 pro er q e feet. �-��^r =it's- I'' ��F' I'F "rt Xs'0 There can be no doubt that the particular ; °'''!I'p •;' j ,:, ,,; hardship with which peti- 1,!11; ��'�i'" (� a-.�k tioner is confronted is self imposed, since he had constructive notice of ' , "�p s,+f F •S F e4! the existence of a violation at the time,he purchased the property. Were f' ej', Fi ext 'fig"'' this an application for a "use" variance the Court would not examine ; :,';', ;I '1 j further into the facts, but would, of necessity, sustain the Board's deci- 11 1 ,l t : I'I reat , ks', t%, sion, Clark v. Board of Zoning Appeals, 301 N.Y. 681, 95 N.E.2d 44. I,!l {rl +"� rald .� 1r-�` ;- !!;:t rice, :,;+1,.; C .,'��n ' [ ] However, the rule in this'Department has been stated to be as PY follows': is 'co d:°to'=.the-rule thatl•in;th sence' of �'I I i�` i ',t; , << ows' This Court mmitte e'ab' kik.111', 41 tip ibed A statutory provision to the contrary; special liciydshi�i='need no t'be estab- .1.,11.i;',11 , '' �r lisped'as a°condition to an`area..,, '1;;;I; I'I)ii,0, y t,3granting varia�tice. Village-of Bron �ti r e v. T' x- I,I ; � ; nce. L,� 7,. viii i rands, 1 A.D.2d 236, 150 N.Y:S.2d'9,06.. ' I �, ; ,,.i) •• - ` ��{ , It is apparent from the Board's decision, that it was unaware of this y,i i'`' ', era)' � `�jEt statement of the law at the time_it was'made. Eliminating, then, the '1 <<'I factor of special hardship from this situation, there remains ° `'sere= �,• nxset '��;�.;'rji.,,_ `'., ,,; a ns only thei 956;" ;..,'l„t�� • question of whether practical difficulty exists. ;,. ''jM�h ''.1.15 >7 h .ti i; �� � tical ".,,---;.' : t�;,�.�, ''•With the consent of both parties;the Court made'a'physical inspection 6"`''�' Y, �;- ksAP;; I 5 tr1Ct' • Ti a' ' -'�; of the premises arid fourid: (i)'they they are situated in an established com= 11!�j`'' • {{�� a` '�� munity' of substantial homes,' (2)• that they constitute a•hillside with i "'` I' E{I;� l .. . r; r*" the smaller dwelling'at the street level of Dee- dale'Drive, and the main til 11 R'w{` Deep dale' residence at'the level-of Oak Drive;the latter beingat least 20 feet higher II, iI ,;a4# :ern- ti . �' ' ° " j ; t' than the former, (3)'although they'differ in size, both 'houses are sub- 1;. '', Ilrl!it, N°. : -. stantially constructed and constitute separate and complete living units, I § I ''<ij N. "' (4) the main house has its own garage, but adjacent to and at the same " '" ofthel ;; ; yt�t levelower dwelling there is ample room If ,'6,r r ,=.,r, p for a separate garage. "F -;,,�,�;� ��;��'�.,' Having ��, �'�.� I 197.40' purchased his property ,� r ',4_ _,. ,.,; P P Yin 1951, at a time whenVillage ;,� the ..,,Avi -4.PO4,!"-' k.4., „_, officials were acquiescing in the'rental of the smaller'building, ' .r, PO,� g 'the peti= I�I a �l„�. i;=fir w, ;' tioner is'now faced with the alternatives of (1) tearing down the struc- ' •r„ kA t tune; or (2)'permitting it to remain'vacant (It is of no use as an access l II k"<• 4.,„, sory building since the main house now contains adequate servants' uar- ` sl R - Pd4� ers). In-the former case lie is burdened:with the cost of demolition; ;, "tai.,4,11;11° . .'C�� ;1"'Vfr'T��kT''�Vit' 153 N.Y.S.2d— ,# w 1::,` '. titAr Z4 `"t'.E- 4, i ' r • .. ._ '-vn� 11111111kik h �, LL, ' '''112':_"':- r I, ';; k'I I u;,.2' ,11;14ikyk t 9 ' 290 153 NEW YORK SUPPLEMENT, 2d SERIES ' '.-#Ntl 1 � „,Yfl is,}' , .t41 ;'i ;t, ;� in the latter with the payment of taxes on the building. In either event, •;-../.1,0;' 3„ y ' 1 ',ii fl14§� he would still have what, in effect, are two separate properties, effectively 1 s 4"� ;?'{ divided by the topographical characteristics of the land. "'uFA 'i," :C;iI iii I :sJI}'ir`r'u;;12'0, j' , -1.17;,'.21/,, 'i, `jI�_,,.,,4; [2] In view of this, and particularly in view of the fact that this "s �� 'f'.' p;fi'l I i� lii k[Pi'' physical condition has existed since prior to 1926 without altering in any ,fi i ''''fI 11:.111M way the essential character of the neighborhood, the Court must differ iii yi =lir r,'; '31 1 r ° „'kri from the conclusion reached bythe Board of Appeals. This appears to `,-,, � �� iI1E'f'i'� be a situation in which the refusal to grant a variance is based upon a ,. 'ria;I11II ` 'FAd;� misconception of the-applicable law, when in fact, all the requisite ele- F` IS ��C' i -I , �II4 �l ��� pr.? gfii-; ments for an area variance are resent. The Court finds that a denial, r' ''" ''' ' MI,$�� �: �' 'aH���'!� under the circumstances and with a full understanding of the law, would '�'`` ''' �; t Y 2 f :1y4� p.-V cilit ,y.i y • 4,� £" `° q �s be arbitrary and capricious. Accordingly, the ruling of the Board of F, , ; .iiii nt` s, ;' 00411. l li -�;j3�1; - F i j�P Appeals is reversed and the prayer of the petitioner is granted. ;, 1 y ;., t qi�1 1,IJ s•I , ;0'"x�'y'1 1�jj{I 114'I4'4 O F RET HUMBER SYSTEM t .1.,11:1.4- ;,,,:' o t � Z1 1.11A �, �.,, I�i(fl ' 31:';* '`�'�i3"'1FM1 t'''''',1:11-7,011:11:' 1t �j 9'�. • (,�lj ('kE ,: �a 2A.D,2d148 . . " , fGt 'a rzu, to 1� =,-,e•-;” ;. ', �j�1,0 Matter of the Claim for Benefits under Article 18 of the Labor Law made by ',..k d Fl x,' �11' i ' q1 �kM ft ti,- ,' �;' Patrick KEANE, Frank Shields, Joseph L. Howard, John J. McEnerney, r- � '',, ?3,!-;`„.., 4 se"-P-;,!:, 4� y; C I4 ' "' Doviziano Pucci, Samuel Samuelson, Respondents. Bethlehem Steel Com- ..' !=°xt. , F rA,,Otfi,sr ;' ;i! y' pany (Shipbuilding Division), Appellant. ' Isador Lubin, as Industrial 4 µ' Ea 4 ;r a q 1'l 1`{I€� Commissioner, Respondent. tx ° 1{ { ilk 1;5t, F ,„, tl „ #1,11.k ff i I r ti jl Supreme Court,Appellate Division,Third Department ,r {{ *Z. ., L SV i ! III , :�..F: ��`."' v+ 1i , !ii:1 July 9, 1956. 41.,,,,,.:•:13,, .,1x,° f r.,,t4:' 4:' y iIE#Itji, ,q''Il,� "'r ,y n4eF�, rr f41V I` i' Proceedingon claims bylaid-off employees for unemployment "t" ° -�# s'°`'' fiats ',/1„,l j;€ h; I,4-If compensationbenefits. The ,'r'' R• �`;ay. �,,it/4 i, Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board , � "�;'; .r z,v "gin 1014'4/ly1 i `r,� held employees were entitled to benefits and employer appealed. The ,, ,';: 1 n, a f Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Gibson, J., held that evidence sus- ",�`°���•�{��-,��'`i + i f. 1, �0rp , . Iii �h�., Y �� J tip"��, I#,; d !,i k#li tamed findings of board,that no strike, lock-out or other industrial con- '` ,Fli�/"//a2-'`, !I, j ' A-11141i{q� troversy existed during period of employer and union negotiations for ;A • vv itli'34,11Ali t a new contract. -f,,Q- g';� ,,;,, �y a, "'C ��y Decision affirmed. ''- ':." �k<<,: ; ,{`I }tt ij �4.!.. f Sir's YA }� � J fit j1,55i, wR zr, ;'. f mgr ili, 7 '£ -U #'i i 1. Social Security and Public Welfare X591 17" ` °' f i '' # #li'l[,i1,; In proceeding on claims by laid-off employee for unemployment ;'` x -t, " ,,r' • :,5 { �'g, ? V 1 i` compensation, evidence sustained finding of Unemployment Insurance -,i ' :4-,.9w-2,�;, 114,4 P "•,fill! Appeal Board that no strike, lock-out or other industrial controversy • - ,,,,,,:„.,„44..,, , , ',"' < < overly e.� - '' ;f �,%, fisted during period of employer and union negotiations for a new con- ;$ F r :' j 1 �1 �i tract. Labor Law, § 592, subd. 1. :: .,i; V. a , ',Ill: ,;,,i"11,"ri .;:;,. Jx 41,43;01 ,{ 'r r.'1 4t 1 tx�r� J'.:si W� l'i ri 1 I �� � Y� �Gam. >' Page 3 r , 5TH CASE of Level 1 printed in FULL format. In the Matter of Rudolph Gruen, Respondent, v. Colin C. Simpson et al., Constituting the Board of Appeals of the Village of Great Neck Estates, Appellants [NO NUMBER IN ORIGINAL] Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, Second Department 3 A.D.2d 841; 161 N.Y.S.2d 843; 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5957 April 8, 1957 JUDGES: [**1] dent families. The notice of appeal brings up for review an order dated February 6, 1956, which, in a proceed- Beldock,Acting P. J., Murphy,Ughetta,Hallinan and ing to review a determination of the board dated October Kleinfeld, JJ. 8, 1955 remitted the matter to the board for reconsid- eration. Respondent's property contains 21,640 square OPINION: [*841]In a proceeding pursuant to article 78 feet. The ordinance requires that each building occupy of the Civil Practice Act to review a determination of the an area of not less than 12,900 square feet. Order dated Board of Appeals of the Village of Great Neck Estates May 28, 1956 unanimously affirmed,with$10 costs and dated February 14, 1956, the board appeals from an disbursements. No opinion. Appeal from order dated ' order [*842] dated May 28, 1956 annulling the deter- February 6, 1956 dismissed, without costs. This order mination and directing the issuance of an unconditional is not an order in a proceeding finally determined by the variance to permit the use of two buildings on respon- order dated May 28, 1956. In any event the appeal from dent's property, in said village, as dwellings by indepen- said order is academic. • II ,0,o�oSOFF04 �� ay Co Town Hall,53095 Main Road A7 � Fax(631)765-1823 P.O.Box 1179 � 0. Telephone Telephone(631)765-1802 Southold,New York 11971-0959 �_�®( . ,I, BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Stephen R. Angel, Atty C/o Esseks, Hefter & Angel, Attys P.O. Box 279 Riverhead, N.Y. 11901 Re: Premises @ 150 Broadwaters Rd., Cutchogue, N.Y. Owners: Glenn & Christine Dawson Suff. Co. Tax Map #1000-104-10-8 Dear Mr. Angel: In reference to your letter dated October 1, 2001, please be advised that in accordance with the Building Inspectors review on April 13, 2000, a Pre- Existing Certificate of Occupancy will be issued for the principal dwelling and a non-habitable accessory building. You have the option to appeal this decision through the Zoning Board of Appeals. Very truly yours, SOUTHOLD TOWN BUILDING DEPT. ef ohn M. Boufis, Building Inspector JMB:gar In support of the application, copies of the following are annexed: 1. application filed 4/6/00; 2. application filed 10/30/00; i 3. letter of SRA dated 5/18/01 with attachment; 4. letter of SRA dated 10/1/0lwith copies of certified mail receipts; 5. the following papers from the Town of Southold Building Department files showing that the cottage was treated as a separate one-family dwelling and was issued a certificate of occupancy for that use: (a) application for building permit dated 7/8/76 made by A. Anthony Pisacano; (b) copy of map submitted with application showing that the application was for the cottage; (c) building permit dated 7/12/76 issued to A. Anthony Pisacano to construct a deck "to existing one-family dwelling," "cottage;" (d) certificate of occupancy issued to A. Anthony Pisacano dated 8/18/76. LI2432-C(4) L6/Q,- 6/afj. ESSEKS, HEFTER & ANGEL , COUNSELORS AT LAW IOB EAST MAIN STREET P. O Box 279 RIVERHEAD, N.Y. 11901-0279 WILLIAM W ESSEKS (631)369-1700 WATER MILL OFFICE MARCIA Z. HEFTER MONTAUK HIGHWAY/ TELECOPIER NUMBER (631) 369-2065 P. 0. Box 570 ' I STEPHEN R. ANGEL JANE ANN R. KRATZ WATER MILL, N.Y. 119761 JOHN M.WAGNER (631) 726-6633 'WILLIAM POWER MALONEY CARMELA M. DI TALIA May 18, 2001 ANTHONY C. PASCA I NICA B. STRUNK Building Inspector, Town of Southold 53095 Main Road P. O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 • Re: Application of Glenn and Christine Dawson for certificate of occupancy i Dear Sir:, We are the attorneys for Glenn and Christine Dawson, who are the owners of property located on Broadwaters Road, Nassau Point (SCTM No. 1000-107-10-8)." On-April 3, 2000 (filed April 6, 2000), the Dawsons applied for a pre-existing' certificate of occupancy for the property to include the cottage located thereon, as well , as,the house. On that day, Mr. and Mrs. Dawson submitted a check in the sum of $100.00 as required by Southold Town Code. I enclose, for your assistance, a copy of a '' survey of the property, prepared by ELS Associates and dated 3/24/00, showing the cottage, as well 'as the single-family home. From my review of the file, as well as discussions with Mrs. Dawson, I understand that you have declined to issue a certificate of occupancy for the cottage, • ' ' except as an "accessory non-habitable building." In this connection, I refer you to the housing code inspection report dated 4/13/00, and your inspection sheet dated 10/12/00, which was sent to our clients. This inspection sheet purports to ask them to remove the stove in the cottage. I would also note that it appears -- from my review of the documents referred to previously -- that your justification for not issuing a certificate of occupancy for the cottage as a habitable dwelling -- is based on Section 100-241G of the Southold Town , Code, i.e., that somehow the nonconforming "use" of the cottage has been lost. ' ' ' • ESSEKS, HEFTER & ANGEL COUNSELORS AT LAW ; I May 18, 2001 ' i, Page 2 ' I respectfully disagree with your position, and, on behalf of the Dawsons, I demand that you issue a certificate of occupancy which reflects that the cottage, can be utilized as a habitable one-family dwelling,,along with the other one-family dwelling on the property. I enclose, with this letter, two checks, both dated 4/19/01, to replace the , ' checks previously submitted to you, because I understand that the previously submitted ' , checks are "stale." , . i The reasons for our demand include the following: 1 1 tt 1. The cottage was constructed prior to zoning. ' ' ' . 2. The cottage is an actual one-family home with all improvements necessary for , it to be used as such, including, for example, kitchen, bath, plumbing, electricity, etc. , 3. It is my understanding that the cottage has been in continuous use; that the ' use of the cottage was not discontinued for the two-year-period set forth in Section- , 100-242G. - ' 4. The applicable provision for determining whether the cottage can continue to be used as a single-family residence is not Section 100-241G, but rather, Section 100- 242 ("nonconforming buildings With conforming uses"). Here, the cottage is located in ' a residential zone, and has always been used in conformity with the uses provided for . 1 1 in such a zone. The structure is nonconforming. You will note that.nothing in Section ' 100-242 refers to a loss of rights under zoning as a result of non-use. Reserving all rights, and based upon the reasons set forth above among others, ' ' we respectfully demand that you,issue a certificate of occupancy for the Dawsons' property, which certificate of occupancy should indicate that both the single-family residence and cottage are lawfully existing. ' . Respectfully yours, , SRA:mb , _ STEPHEN R. ANGEL ' Enc. ' cc : Mr. & Mrs. Glenn Dawson ' } 7 } n CHRISTINE B. DAWSON 2 918 GLENN T. DAWSON 37 TENTH ST. nI 1-108/210 fi CARLE PLACE, N. Y. 11514 DATE t / i RD OOF 72QIIJA Ve S_`+ 1 Y lV 1� f __O_Wf_____h (.1'Jo it-e3 DOLLARS CO s.`.'°v.m.,.. + t . in.wa.a t HSBCfci 4.15 HSBC Bank USA ' Huntington,New York 11743 d 14064..eAkc, , (c,1, eck FOR 1 )co 15(d > C.O. 0_71-- (3 (70,•_______ . ivi. f + ':0 2 100 10881:9 70058 1 5 21' 29 i8 i i CHRISTINE B. DAWSON 2 919 GLENN T. DAWSON I } 37 TENTH ST. DATE t/J IO 1-108/210 i CARLE PLACE, N. Y. 11514 t PAY TOTIIE �i1r, , A ) \ i ? ORDER OF CJ W'v CJ� ���� I $i 7S7 �— 1 i + e-1! \ll� DOLLARS 0` sen;.b.o.nmv i..w,., + oei HS$C 11.115 HSBC Bank USA + Huntington,New York 11743 i F(n, r e0(3kL.edkAerfr C1\eck + FOR `1(UllSAc \1Ic 1.1 OF VC.L`1c Z1,12t....±,g)a/`..-- 111, i - 1:02100 /0881:970058is211' 29 i9 ®HARLANR c ....... ... ., c... ............. ... n ..........,r ....r-.. .u....... ..,..,.,.-.........- .....y......-r. .n-,....,. ESSEKS, HEFTER & ANGEL COUNSELORS AT LAW 108 EAST MAIN STREET P. O Box 279 RIVERHEAD, N.Y. 11901-0279 WILLIAM W ESSEKS (631) 369-1700 WATER MILL OFFICE MARCIA Z. HEFTER MONTAUK HIGHWAY TELECOPIER NUMBER (631) 369-2065 P 0, Box 570 STEPHEN R ANGEL JANE ANN R KRATZ WATER MILL, N Y 11976 JOHN M WAGNER (631) 726-6633 WILLIAM POWER MALONEY CARMELA M DI TALIA October 1, 2001 ANTHONY C PASCA NICA B STRUNK Building Inspector, Town of Southold 53095 Main Road P. O. Box 1 179 •Southold, NY 11971 Re: Application of Glenn and Christine Dawson for certificate of occupancy SCTM No. 1000-104-10-08 Dear Sir: We represent Glenn and Christine Dawson, who are the owners of the above- captioned property, which is located on Broadwaters Road, Nassau Point. We wrote you on May 18, 2001, on behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Dawson, and demanded a certificate of occupancy for the above-captioned property, which reflects that there are two single-family residences located thereon. Mr. and Mrs. Dawson had previously made application for such a C.O. Neither the Dawsons nor us have heard anything in connection with their outstanding applications and my letter of May 18i1). Please issue a certificate of occupancy for Mr. and Mrs. Dawson's property as demanded in my prior letter. Reslti 7fully y tr-s SRA:mb ST SPI-1 R. A GEL cc : Mr. & Mrs. Glenn Dawson CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED - 1 , U.S.Postal Service , CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPT (Domestic Mail Ohly; No Irisurance Coverage Provided) Article Sent To: -n. pec�f9it, roll-W-Ithatate J:I Postage $ /v/l,Ul , P` Certified Fee Postmark M Return Receipt Fee Here ' 0 (Endorsement Required) O Restricted Delivery Fee O (Endorsement Required) , - CI Total Postage&Fees om. R 1 Nte(Please P!nt Clearly)(To be c p ted by malle) ' -. . it Street,A No.;0 Box No. m C!t•State,Zl'+• i 11 9'1/ ' PS Forn1 3800,July 1999 , w, See Reverse for Instructions I ' SENDER: COMPLETE THIS SECTION COMPLETE THIS SECTION ON DELIVERY ' ■ Complete items 1,2,and 3.Also complete A. Received by(Please Print Clearly) B. Date of Delivery item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. ■ 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 ., hp-Agent or on the front if space permits. r' ' C GQ0 �❑Addressee D. s delivery address different from item 1? 0 Yes • 1. Article Addressed toi If YES,enter delivery address below: 0 No "� 53 uPj s .cit� / - Dial n 3. Dicle Tike4 1 ' P 0 _ f�')hl 1. i/1� !•1 Certified Mali"' ,Expr ss Mail ��"ff" f/.:' '_•stered Re rn Receipt for Merchandise , , ' Attt-f—b-0--t) 1LC-t-/l9n/' Are falx-'�9, .O.D. • 4. Rest s)tecT„QIItra Fee) ❑Yes 2. Article Number(Copy from service label) 1D91 ;'r3a�o, ,1� 3 ."1603 �5, ; :: ;: ., :: , i , r . . i 'PS Fohii'381'1,°Jul 139§E !' ' 1!' i ;'Dorntic Rrn Rece esetui t l "1 1 I. "' t 1' y P 102595-99-M-1789 . i d` USeD x1 Sfi cs c.IF rt-g' k a , • 3: Nature of (check whidt applicable): New Building Addition Alteration pant •• �. �,••• Removal Demolition Other Work l J,,��// (Description) 4. Estimated N acCi4ct celed1 id r e fee latA (to he paid on filing this application) 5. If dwelling, nutter of dwelling units •titrfier of dwelling units on each floor If garage, tanker of cars 6. If business, commercial or mixed occupancy, specify nature and extent of each type of use 7. Dimensions of existing structures, if any: Front Rear Depth Height Thither of Stories Dimensions of same structure with alterations or additions: Front Rear Depth Height Number of Stories a 1St8. Dimensions of entire new construction: Front Rear Depth Height Thither of Stories 06) `7�V a 9. Size of lot: Front Rear Depth ,� i 10. Date of Purchase W/0® Name of Former Owner ...6tbw C•/ S J; II. Zone or use district in which: remise p s are situated 12. Does proposed construction violate any zoning law, ordinance or regulation: /l(q S T •e . � "`�" 13. Will lot be regraded ] Will excess fill be removed from premises: YES /�'� NO _ 14. Names of Owner of premises .��✓I Q y �V Address �✓� 54". t-'/' //' )y Phone No.ygo5'�,+`5 Name of Architect s Address Phone N3• Name of Contractor Address P1one Na. 15. Is this property within 300 feet of a tidal wetland? * YES NO *IF YES, SOUIllOID TOWN TRUSTEES PERMIT MAY BE REQUIRED. • PLOT DIAGRAM Locate clearly and distinctly all buildings, whether existing or,proposed, and indicate all set-back dimensions from property lines. Give street and block number or description according to deed, and show street names and indicates whether interior or corner lot. • SCAM CF. NEW Y( l �ir`�J SS OO[7N[Y OF C�1f' S �r� Q!\v�S d\.J being duly sworn, deposes and says that he is the applicant (Name of individual signing contract) above named, Ile is the O u �\ of said owner or owners, and 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 bpp me,this �✓ day , (�l :216 Notary Public .. a.... p,R�'" �G.. gi4 NOTARY PUBLIC,;�'e o New York ••••• Po�� No.01K- ";'' (Signature of Applicant) Qualified in Nassau County Commission Expires,07/18/2002 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS THURSDAY, APRIL 18, 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 by the SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS at the Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York 11971, on THURSDAY, APRIL 18, 2002, at the time noted below (or as soon thereafter as possible): 8:05 p.m. Appl. No. 5068 — CHRISTINE AND GLENN DAWSON, regarding a request for a Certificate of Occupancy for two single-family residential structures located at 150 Broadwaters Road, Cutchogue; Parcel 1000-104-10-8. Applicants: (1) request an Interpretation of Section 100-241G and 100-242A of the Zoning Code; and (2) Appeal for a Variance or other relief, regarding the Building Department's Notice of Disapproval dated December 14, 2001, which states that an Accessory, nonconforming cottage is non-habitable based upon the Building Inspector's Housing Code Inspection Report of 4/13/00 and pursuant to Article XXIV, Section 100-241G, which states: Whenever a nonconforming use of a building or premises has been discontinued for a period of more than two (2) years or has been changed to a higher classification or to a conforming use, anything in this Article to the contrary notwithstanding, the nonconforming use of such building or premises shall no longer be permitted unless a variance therefor shall have been granted by the Board of Appeals. 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 this hearing. This hearing will not start earlier than designated. Files are available for review during regular Town Hall business days (8-3 p.m.). If you have questions, please do not hesitate to call (631) 765- 1809. Dated: April 3, 2002. GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS Town Hall 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 Law Firm of -- ROBERT J. CIPPITELLI Admitted in NY and CT 175-16 Liberty Avenue,Jamaica,NY 11433 Telephone (718)725-1133 GI) /7 l Telecopier(718)725-1144 July 9,2002 ft --- .._ ._._ 11-r! Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman, ,y�UL `,, And Members of the Zoning Board of Appeals I, , 1 i Town of Southold 53095 Main Road ---- =----�-- I P.O. Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971 Re: Further Opposition to Application No.5068 Christine and Glen Dawson Dear Chairman and Members of the Board: I present to you my final submission in the above referenced matter as a reply to Mr. Angel's letter dated June 30, 2002. At the last meeting,that this issue, was before the Board petitioner's seemed to change the relief they are requesting. Petitioners admit they do not seek to utilize the building as an independent single-family dwelling. This statement was of great surprise to me because now the decision of the Board is made easy. The Dawsons were never entitled to use the building in question, for that purpose and now they admit it. In accordance with the Town Code no Certificate of Occupancy can be granted to that structure for single family USE. More importantly, the Dawson's are before this Board with "Unclean Hands". They purchased this property in this condition and now seek to make zoning changes that the previous owner could not make. The USE of the building was abandoned by the Gelbwaks the Dawsons were aware of this and purchased the property in its current condition. Testimony has been presented that the entire neighborhood was aware of this abandonment. Therefore, they are not entitled to continue with the pre-existing non- conforming use. Furthermore, as to the pre-existing use this Honorable Board raised an extremely important issue. There is evidence to believe that an even prior owner fraudulently obtained the original use. This matter should be brought to the attention of the proper authority to further the investigation. The Town Attorney or even the County Attorney should be made aware of this possible fraudulent conduct. A past wrong when uncovered should never be ignored and it is never too late to right a past wrong. To ignore it would be as improper as the original fraud. Proper Real Estate practice always includes Title searches and diligent efforts to uncover problems such as these because Real Property is always subject to past activities that involve the real property. This point furthers the fact that the Dawson's have self-created their situation by purchasing the Law Firm of - = ROBERT I CII'PITELLI Admitted in NY and CT 175-16 Liberty Avenue,Jamaica,NY 11433 Telephone (718)725-1133 Telecopier(718)725-1144 property under these conditions and are now before you with unclean hands seeking relief that they are not entitled to. The letter dated June 20, 2002 by Mr. Angel states that, "Specifically, they seek a certificate of occupancy for their property, which permits the maintenance of the cottage as an accessory to the main dwelling." I am of the belief that the Building Department already granted the Main structure the Certificate of Occupancy and according to the Town Code granted accessory building status to the `cottage'. The problem however is with the next sentence in Mr. Angel's letter, which states, "Though they seek to confirm their right to occupy the cottage for residential purposes, they do not seek to utilize it as an independent single family dwelling." It could not possibly be any thing other than an independent single family dwelling if they CONTINUE to use it for residential purposes. I respectfully submit to this Honorable Board please, do not fall for this smoke screen! As stated above the Dawson's never had the `Right' to use the building for residential purposes. However, with complete disregard to this Board and the Building Department and the Town Code of Southold they continue to use the building for residential purposes up to and including this past Fourth of July weekend the building is being slept in. It is detached and quite a distance from the already existing single family dwelling on the property to request this Board to declare it a cottage for residential purposes as an accessory to the main dwelling is a joke. You are being asked to ignore the Code, ordinances and common sense and declare this building single family dwelling use status under a different name. As for the case law I have presented to this Board, it is directly on point. Mr. Angel even admits that the cases deal specifically with use variances. However, since the Dawson's have now made clear by Mr. Angels letter of June 20, 2002 that they are no longer seeking a use variance and an area variance can not overcome the fact that the use of the cottage is simply improper, the case law that both Mr. Angel and myself have presented would seem unnecessary. However, I submit that the use issue has been the point of this entire hearing and that this Board has fulfilled its fact-fording duty. Therefore, enough testimony and submissions have been heard by this board to reach the determination that the Dawson's are not entitled to use the building for residential use. Because of the diligent fact fording process employed here and incorporating that process into the ultimate decision should provide enough to make this boards denial stand the test of further challenge if necessary. In conclusion, by calling the relief that the Dawson's seek something different on the last day of hearings should not change the result that the building is not proper for residential use on the lot it is located. Equity and Law do not provide relief for those who come forward with unclean hands. However you choose to define what single family residence is, any house that the owners claim to have 14 beds to sleep in is surely more than 5 unrelated adults need any given night. The Dawson's have to abide by the same Codes as the rest of the community as a whole. They have no special hardship simply by ...e Law Firm of - ROBERT J. CIPPITELLI Admitted in NY and CT 175-16 Liberty Avenue,Jamaica,NY 11433 Telephone (718)725-1133 Telecopier(718)725-1144 virtue that they purchased the property with the prohibited use they are perpetrating. Respectfully,this Board should deny the Dawson's application. Very truly yours; Ro rt J.icri iteYli, ESQ. RJC/bb 1 Law Firm of 41. ROBERT J. CIPPITELLI Admitted in NY and CT 175-16 Liberty Avenue,Jamaica,NY 11433 Telephone (718)725-1133 Telecopier(718)725-1144 /IFS 7Lrr L7T-1.07-\-1-771,7; • July 9, 2002 it 1 IL Gerard P. Goehrmger, Chairman, L. And Members of the Zoning Board of Appeals - - Town of Southold 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971 Re:Further Opposition to Application No. 5068 Christine and Glen Dawson Dear Chairman and Members of the Board: I present to you my final submission in the above referenced matter as a reply to . Mr. Angel's letter dated June 30, 2002. At the last meeting,that this issue, was before the Board petitioner's seemed to change the relief they are requesting. Petitioners admit they do not seek to utilize the building as an independent single-family dwelling. This statement was of great surprise to me because now the decision of the Board is made easy.The Dawsons were never entitled to use the building in question, for that purpose and now they admit it. In accordance with the Town Code no Certificate of Occupancy can be granted to that structure for single family USE. More importantly, the Dawson's are before this Board with "Unclean Hands". They purchased this property in this condition and now seek to make zoning changes that the previous owner could not make. The USE of the building was abandoned by the Gelbwaks the Dawsons were aware of this and purchased the property in its current condition. Testimony has been presented that the entire neighborhood was aware,of this abandonment. Therefore, they are not entitled to continue with the pre-existing non- conforming use. Furthermore, as to the pre-existing use this Honorable Board raised an extremely important issue. There is evidence to believe that an even prior owner fraudulently obtained the original use. This matter should be brought to the attention of the proper authority to further the investigation. The Town Attorney or even the County Attorney should be made aware of this possible fraudulent conduct. A past wrong when uncovered should never be ignored and it is never too late to right a past wrong. To ignore it would be as improper as the original fraud. Proper Real Estate practice always includes Title searches and diligent efforts to uncover problems such as these because Real Property is always subject to past activities that involve the real property. This point furthers the fact that the Dawson's have self-created their situation by purchasing the Law Firm of ROBERT J. CIPPITELLI Admitted in NY and CT 175-16 Liberty Avenue,Jamaica,NY 11433 Telephone (718)725-1133 Telecopier(718)725-1144 property under these conditions and are now before you with unclean hands seeking relief that they are not entitled to. The letter dated June 20, 2002 by Mr. Angel states that, "Specifically, they seek a certificate of occupancy for their property, which permits the maintenance of thecottage as an accessory to the main dwelling." I am of the belief that the Building Department already granted the Main structure the Certificate of Occupancy and according to the Town Code granted accessory building status to the `cottage'. The problem however is with the next sentence in Mr. Angel's letter, which states, "Though they seek to confirm ; their right to occupy the cottage for residential purposes, they do not seek to-utilize it as an independent single family dwelling." It could not possibly be any thing other than an independent single family dwelling if they CONTINUE to use it for residential purposes. I respectfully submit to this Honorable Board please, do-not fall for this smoke screen! As stated above the Dawson's never had the `Right' to use the building for residential purposes. However, with complete disregard-to this Board and_the Building Department and the Town Code of Southold they continue to use the building for residential purposes up to and including this past Fourth of July weekend the building is being slept in. It is detached and quite a distance from the already existing single family dwelling on the property to request this Board to declare it a cottage for residential purposes as an,. accessory to the main dwelling is a joke. You are being asked to ignore the Code;. ordinances and common sense and declare this building single family dwelling use status under a different name. As for the case law I have presented to this Board, it is directly on point. Mr. Angel even admits that the cases deal specifically with use variances. However, since the Dawson's have now made clear by Mr. Angels letter of June 20, 2002 that they are no longer seeking a use variance and an area variance can not overcome the fact that the use of the cottage is simply improper, the case law that both Mr. Angel and myself have presented would seem unnecessary. However, I submit that the use issue has been the point of this entire hearing and that this Board has fulfilled its fact-finding duty. Therefore, enough testimony and submissions have been heard by this board to reach the determination that the Dawson's are not entitled to use the building for residential use. Because of the diligent fact finding process employed here and incorporating that process into the ultimate decision should provide enough to make this boards denial stand the test of further challenge if necessary. In conclusion, by calling the relief that the Dawson's seek something different on the last day of hearings should not change the result that the building is not proper for residential use on the lot it is located. Equity and Law do not provide relief for those who come forward with unclean hands. However you choose to define what single family residence is, any house that the owners claim to have 14 beds to sleep in is surely more than 5 unrelated adults need any given night. The Dawson's have to abide by the same Codes as.the rest of the community as a whole. They have no special hardship simply by • Law Firm of ROBERT J. CIPPITELLI Admitted in NY and CT 175-16 Liberty Avenue,Jamaica,NY 11433 Telephone (718)725-1133 Telecopier(718)725-1144 virtue that they purchased the property with the prohibited use they are perpetrating. Respectfully,this Board should deny the Dawson's application. Very truly yours; Ro rt J. piteYli, ESQ. RJC/bb -)/ el) - • ,@� ESSEKS, HEFTER & ANGEL COUNSELORS AT LAW 108 EAST MAIN STREET P. O. Box 279 RIVERHEAD, N.Y. 11901-0279 WILLIAM W. ESSEKS (631)369-1700 WATER MILL OFFICE MARCIA Z. HEFTER MONTAUK HIGHWAY STEPHEN R.ANGEL TELECOPIER NUMBER(631) 369-2065 P. 0 Box 570 JANE ANN R. KRATZ WATER MILL, N.Y 11976 JOHN M.WAGNER (631) 726-6633 WILLIAM POWER MALONEY ' CARMELA M DI TALIA ' ANTHONY C. PASCA June 20, 2002 1/ NICA B. STRUNK ��//- eD Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman, and Members of the Zoning Board of Appeals ' Town of Southold 53095 Main Road P. 0. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Re: Application of Glenn and Christine Dawson - SCTM No. 1000-104-10-08 Dear Chairman and Members of the Board: As you know, we represent the applicants in the above-captioned matter. ' I am submitting this letter for two purposes: 1. to respond to the legal authorities raised by Roberti. Cippitelli in his letter dated 6/6/02; and 2. to make clear what relief the Dawsons seek from this Board. Mr. Cippitelli cites two cases for the apparent proposition that the interpretation we seek somehow should be considered a use variance. The first case is Matter of Clark v. Board of Zoning Appeals, 301 NY 86 (1950). This case involved an application to construct a funeral establishment on a vacant residentially zoned parcel. The second case, Matter of Otto v. Steinhilber, 282 NY 71 (1939), involved an application to construct a large commercial skating rink in an existing residentially zoned neighborhood. Both involved applications for variances. Both were treated as use variances by the Court of Appeals. ESSEKS, H EFTER & ANGEL COUNSELORS AT LAW June 20, 2002 Page 2 Here, of course, the cottage is a residential structure located in a residential zone. It is neither a funeral home nor a skating rink. I respectfully refer the Board to the cases cited in my letter of May 16, 2002. The second purpose for this letter is to let you know what Mr. and Mrs. Dawson seek.. Specifically, they seek a certificate of occupancy for their property, which permits the maintenance of the cottage as an accessory to the main dwelling. Though they seek to confirm their right to occupy the cottage for residential purposes, they do not seek to utilize it as an independent single family dwelling. Res ectfully yours, SRA:mb S EPH N R. ANG L IS i M ��--3P�\ia Douglas Klein � �Mae Rd I S,-":"'..7, Cutchogue,NY 11935 L. Gerald P. Goebringer, Chairman And Members of the zoning Board of Appeals Town of Southold • I did not want add wood to the fire on June 6, 2002, But I would like to submit This letter to the Board, as I believe there were some untruths told at the hearing Of which I have listed below. The deck fell off the cottage, because of abandonment. It was replaced on or About of the closing date. The cottage received a new roof after the closing date Because of the abandonment and a leaky roof which alowed access for Raccoons. It was Quoted that there was no work done to the cottage. I believe that abandonment has been proven in testimony of which I have Personally testified to. I am convinced that the cottage {storage shed } should Remain as is and appeal denied. I also think that it is possibly that the original COs could have been fraudulently obtained as it was brought to the attention of the public and the board on June 6 2002. This matter must be addressed and be but to rest. Because of this issue of fraud and the proximity to sea water the CO In question may fall into the jurisdiction of D.E.C.;TOWN TRUTEES; or THE BOARD OF HEALTH. In closing, I know that the shed was only used for storage(motor cycle) (outboard motor)with limited walking space, it was in abandonment with a leaking roof and families of raccoons as homesteaders. :inc>r"y , idl .D ouglas . Klein 734-2725 ESSEKS, HEFTER & ANGEL COUNSELORS AT LAW 108 EAST MAIN STREET P. O. Box 279 RIVERHEAD, N.Y. 11901-0279 WILLIAM W ESSEKS (631) 369-1700 WATER MILL OFFICE MARCIA Z HEFTER MONTAUK HIGHWAY STEPHEN R.ANGEL TELECOPIER NUMBER (631)369-2065 P 0 Box 570 JANE ANN R KRATZ WATER MILL, N.Y. 11976 JOHN M WAGNER (631) 726-6633 WILLIAM POWER MALONEY CARMELA M. DI TALIA June 20, 2002 ANTHONY C. PASCA NICA B STRUNK Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman, and Members of the Zoning Board of Appeals Town of Southold 53095 Main Road P. O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Re: Application of Glenn and Christine Dawson - SCTM No. 1000-104-10-08 Dear Chairman and Members of the Board: As you know, we represent the applicants in the above-captioned matter. I am submitting this letter for two purposes: 1. to respond to the legal authorities raised by Roberti. Cippitelli in his letter dated 6/6/02; and 2. to make clear what relief the Dawsons seek from this Board. Mr. Cippitelli cites two cases for the apparent proposition that the interpretation we seek somehow should be considered a use variance. The first case is Matter of Clark v. Board of Zoning Appeals, 301 NY 86 (1950). This case involved an application to construct a funeral establishment on a vacant residentially zoned parcel. The second case, Matter of Otto v. Steinhilber, 282 NY 71 (1939), involved an application to construct a large commercial skating rink in an existing residentially zoned neighborhood. Both involved applications for variances. Both were treated as use variances by the Court of Appeals. ESSEKS, HEFTER & ANGEL COUNSELORS AT LAW June 20, 2002 Page 2 -Here, of course, the cottage is a residential structure located in a residential zone. It is neither a funeral home nor a skating rink. I respectfully refer the Board to thecases cited in my letter of May 16, 2002. The second purpose for this letter is to let you know what Mr. and Mrs. Dawson seek. Specifically, they seek a certificate of occupancy for their property, which permits the maintenance of the cottage as an accessory to the main dwelling. Though they seek to confirm their right to occupy the cottage for residential purposes, they do not seek to utilize it as an independent single family dwelling. Res ectfully yours, , L SRA:mb S EPH N R. ANG L 4110 Gerald P. Goebringer, Chairman And Members of the zoning Board of Appeals Town of Southold I did not want add wood to the fire on-June 6, 2002, But I would like to submit This letter to the Board, as I believe there were some untruths told at the hearing Of which I have listed below. The deck fell off the cottage, because of abandonment. It was replaced on or About of the closing date. The cottage received a new roof after the closing date Because of the abandonment and a leaky roof which alowed access for Raccoons. It was Quoted that there was no work done to the cottage. I believe that abandonment has been proven in testimony of which I have Personally testified to. I am convinced that the cottage {storage shed } should Remain as is and appeal denied. I also think that it is possibly that the original COs could have been fraudulently obtained as it was brought to the attention of the public and the board on June 6 2002. This matter must be addressed and be but to rest. Because of this issue of fraud and the proximity to sea water the CO In question may fall into ithe jurisdiction of D.E.C.;TOWN TRUTEES; or THE BOARD OF HEALTH. In closing, I know that the shed was only used for storage(motor cycle) (outboard motor)with limited walking space, it was in abandonment with a leaking roof and families of raccoons as homesteaders. Sincerely Douglas c. Klein 734-2725 Law Firm of ROBERT J. CIPPITELLI Admitted in NY and CT - 175-16 Liberty Avenue,Jamaica,NY 11433 Telephone (718)725-1133 Telecopier(718)725-1144 June 6, 2002 Gerard P. Goehringer,Chairman, And Members of the Zoning,$oard of Appeals 6/6/02 �^ Town of Southold 53095 Main Road - P.O. Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971 Re: Further Opposition to Application No. 5068 Christine and Glen Dawson Dear Chairman and Members of the Board: This letter is being presented in furtherance of the personal appearance before the Board on the night of June 6, 2002. At the April hearing, the Board granted Petitioners the opportunity to,attempt to obtain a sworn affidavit from the former owner of the property located at 150 Broadwaters Road. This affidavit, if. obtained, was to be exchanged with me by May 16, 2002. Petitioners failed to produce the affidavit ,as declared so by the letter dated May 16, 2002 by Mr. Angel to this Board. At the April Hearing, every adjoining neighbor gave live, sworn testimony that the property located at 150 Breakwaters Road had been abandoned by the Gelbwaks who owned the property prior to selling it to the Dawsons. Since the Petitioners have failed to carry their burden of proving continuous use, this matter should be closed and the Petitioner's relief should not be granted. In light of the sworn testimony, affidavits were not requested of the neighbors who are being effected by the illegal activities occurring on at the Dawsons property. If however, this Board would require such affidavits they can be produced. The reasoning given by the Board to have this evidence exchanged by Petitioners with me on May 16, 2002 was to enable me the opportunity to take proper actions in response to any'evidence not presented on the night of April 18, 2002. In light of this reasoning if Petitioners submit any new evidence not exchanged with me prior to May 16, 2002, such evidence should be precluded from submission for these matters. In the alternative if the Board shall feel compelled to accept such new evidence, I respectfully request an adjournment of these proceedings so that the neighbor's position will not be prejudiced and we will be able to oppose such.,- In the paragraph labeled "2" Of the letter on May 16, 2002, to this Board, Petitioner raises the issue of other parcels in the vicinity that have two residences on them, and that presentation of such will be on June 6. This information is outside of the reasoning of the June 6 Hearing. Introduction of this unspecified information is prejudicial to,the surrounding neighbors' position in that it avails no opportunity to us to • Law Firm of ROBERT J. CIPPITELLI Admitted in NY and CT 175-16 Liberty Avenue,Jamaica,NY 11433 Telephone (718)725-1133 Telecopier(718)725-1144 present opposition or a position to any new and unexchanged evidence. I respectfully request that this Board not allow any new arguments by the Petitioners at the June 6 Hearing, or, if so allowed, I respectfully request an adjournment to examine and take a position on the new evidence. Mr. Angel presented this Board with 3 new cases on May 16, 2002. It is my position that the Hearing for June 6 is for Evidence on the continued use of the accessory building located on the lot owned by the Dawsons. The Hearing on April 18, 2002 should have been the conclusion of Petitioners argument, specifically the legal aspect of this matter. I respectfully submit that the exchange set for May 16, 2002 was for specific information, as stated above, that this Board's members had requested of the Petitioners. It was not for the introduction of new case law to enable petitioners an extra 49 days of research time and have an unending argument. These new cases should be rejected by this Board as untimely and improper for the purposes of concluding this matter. However, if the Board chooses to accept this improper submission, it is irrelevant to the case at hand. Petitioners have suggested time and again that this is not a "USE" code problem but rather a structure or area problem. It is true that the accessory building does not conform to the property set back restrictions in the Town Code. This argument has already been made and presented to the Board in April, so there is no need to re- discuss the detriment to the adjoining property owners' quite use and enjoyment of their property in regard to the opposition of an area variance in this case. The heart of this matter and the only issue is that this building has an improper USE and, furthermore, that the use was abandoned and cannot be re-granted. The cases presented by Mr. Angel are not on point and do not control or set precedents for the matter at hand. I present this Board with the case of; In the Matter of Susan H. Clark v. Board of Zoning Appeals of the Town of Hempstead, 301 N.Y. 86. The New York State Court of Appeals spoke of"use" variances and, specifically, single residences, which is directly on point with our matter. The Court held "that one who thus knowingly acquires land for a prohibited use, cannot thereafter have a variance on the ground of `special hardship", supra 89. The Dawsons purchased this property without the C of 0 and cannot now be legally granted one for the USE they are perpetrating. Furthermore this case goes on to rule on a Zoning Board of Appeals authority while dealing with decisions of singular disadvantage through the operation of zoning law. This Court reconfirmed the decision in Matter of Otto v. Steinhilber (282 N. Y. 71) which said "before the Board may vote on a variance, there must be shown, among other things, 'that the plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances and not to the general conditions in the neighborhood which may reflect the unreasonableness of the zoning ordinance itself'. The Board, being an administrative and not a legislative body, may not review or amend legislatively enacted rules as to uses, or amend the ordinance under the guise of a variance." The Court further holds that when the matter is common to the whole neighborhood, the remedy is to seek change in the zoning ordinance itself. The substance of these holdings is that no administrative body may destroy the general Law Firm of ROBERT J. CIPPITELLI Admitted in NY and CT 175-16 Liberty Avenue,Jamaica,NY 11433 Telephone (718)725-1133 Telecopier(718)725-1144 scheme of a zoning law by granting special exemption from hardships common to all, Supra at 91. Here the zoning code specifies one single family dwelling per lot. This is common to all. The Dawsons have not shown special circumstance, and the condition is self-created. The neighbors in whole demand that the relief the Dawsons are requesting be denied. Mr. Angels cases presented are off point and not relevant to the matter at hand. First, Matter of Hoffman deals with area and speaks of use variances. The part of the case that deals with use is the guesthouse in question, and the C of 0 was denied there because the use was not continuous and the condition was self-imposed. To that extent, this case is on point, but the reasons Mr. Angel uses this case for are the gatehouse. That variance was granted based on area variance and continuous use and, furthermore, it was found that the gatehouse condition was not self imposed because the previous owner could have applied for the relief requested,making this an area variance case and not on point. The case of Jones is so far off point it only requires one sentence. Jones deals with specific zoning dealing with "bungalow colonies" and seasonal use. Nothing about that case is relevant to us here. . Furthermore, the case of Amzalak, which was presented in April, by Mr. Angel, is also of no relevance. That case is a declaratory judgement decision granted on a Motion. Albeit having similar facts,the case is not binding, and of absolutely no authority. The case of Gruen is just as unpersuasive as Jones.-Gruen deals with continuous use and it is an area variance case with all the zoning requirements having been met. Mr. Angel is right in as far as these cases are all Area variance cases and have no authority in our case where the issue is clearly an improper Use issue. Mr. Angel would like to convince this Board and make all believe he has an Area variance case, since his burden is much less if it were. He has been told this is a Use case and continues to present untimely and time consuming materials to distract the issue. The Dawsons have two structures on one single parcel of land. They cannot have two C of O's. They already have one for the primary structure. There is no legal way for them to be granted the second C of 0 on an accessory building that has been proven abandoned and in violation of the town Zoning Code without a legislative act which changes the Town Zoning Code. The Dawsons do not have 'a singular disadvantage exclusive to them. The entire surrounding neighboring body has appeared and testified to this Board about the disruption they are forced to contend with, and only the Dawsons seek to be different. Very truly yours; 1.1 Rob rt J. Cip itelli, ESQ. 301 N.Y. tib 1 i 1; 92 N.E.2d 903 View National Reporter System version In the Matter of SUSAN H. CLARK et al.,Appellants, v. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF THE TOWN OF HEMPSTEAD et al., Respondents, and RICHARD W. BARNES,Intervener, Respondent. *86 Municipal corporations Zoning---Variance---(1)Variance of town zoning ordinance so as to permit erection of funeral home in prohibited residential area improper where property when purchased had been used for years to purchaser's knowledge for residential purposes--- (2) One who knowingly acquires land for prohibited use not entitled to variance on ground of'special hardship' --- (3) Proof insufficient to warrant variance in case of alleged unnecessary hardships; such variance not warranted except on showing of hardship peculiar to property in question; zoning law not to be destroyed by granting exemption from hardships common to all *871. A determination of the board of zoning appeals of the town of Hempstead granted,over the objection of more than two hundred nearby residents, a variance of the town zoning ordinance so as to permit the erection,on a lot in a'B Residence District',of a building to be used as a combined residence and funeral home. The lot,when purchased in 1945,had for some years been in this zone (in which the proposed use was not permitted)but the purchaser nevertheless took the lot and then applied for the variance. The determination should be annulled. 2. One who knowingly acquires land for a prohibited use cannot thereafter have a variance on the ground of'special hardship'. 3. Moreover,here,where there were no unauthorized uses anywhere in the vicinity,the proof was insufficient to warrant a variance. Section 267 of the Town Law empowers boards of appeals to vary the application of zoning ordinances 'where there are practical defects or unnecessary hardships in the way of carrying out the strict letter of such ordinances'. However, if there be a hardship which, like the alleged hardship here, is common to the whole neighborhood,the remedy is to seek a change in the zoning ordinance itself.Nothing less than a showing of hardship, special and peculiar to the applicant's property,will empower the board to allow a variance.No administrative body may destroy the general scheme of a zoning law by granting a special exemption from hardships common to all. Matter of Clark v. Board of Zoning Appeals of Town of Hempstead, 275 App. Div. 939,reversed. APPEAL,by permission of the Court of Appeals,from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department,entered June 6, 1949,which unanimously affirmed an order of the Supreme Court at Special Term(FROESSEL,J.),entered in Nassau County in a proceeding under article 78 of the Civil Practice Act. The order of Special Term(1)denied an application by petitioner to annual a determination of the board of zoning appeals of the town of Hempstead granting a variance of the town building zone ordinance so as to permit the erection of a funeral home in a residential zoned area; (2)dismissed the petition, and(3)affirmed the determination of the board. Irving H. Schafer for appellants. I. The owner failed to show practical difficulties and unnecessary hardships as a matter of law. (Matter of Otto v. Steinhilber, 282 N. Y. 71; Matter of Y. W. H. A. v. Board of Standards&Appeals, 266 N. Y. 270 Matter of Levy v. Board of Standards&Appeals,267 N. Y. 347;Matter of Pounds v. Board of Standards&.Appeals, 129 Misc. 676,223 App. Div. 861, 248 N. Y. 591; *88 Matter of Von Elm v. Zoning Board of Appeals, 258 App. Div. 989; O'Brien v. Town of Greenburgh,239 App. Div. 555,266 N. Y. 582; Brocoris Realty Corp. v. Village of Scarsdale,241 App. Div. 735; People ex rel. Fordham Manor Ref. Church v. Walsh,244 N. Y. 280; Brous v. Town of Hempstead, 272 App. Div. 31; Matter of Ostrove v. Cohen,269 App. Div. 1054; Matter of Aberdeen Garage v. Murdock,257 App. Div. 645,283 N. Y. 650. II. The granting of .../default.wl&RS=WLW2.75&VR=2.0&SV=Split&FN=top&MT=Westlaw&CFID=O&Cite=?6/5/2002 3UI !N.Y. 60 applicant's appeal fails to do substantial justice to surrounding property owners and was arbitrary, unjust and oppressive. (Holy Sepulchre Cemetery v. Board of Appeals of Town of Greece, 271 App. Div. 33; Matter of Y. W. H. A. v. Board of Standards &Appeals, 266 N. Y. 270.) George R. Brennan for respondents. Intervener-respondent has sustained the burden of proof by showing that the land in question cannot yield a reasonable return if used for the purposes limited by the district uses and that the plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances and not general conditions. (Matter of Otto v. Steinhilber, 282 N. Y. 71; People ex rel. Hudson- Harlem Valley Tit. & Mtge_Co.v_Walker, 282 N. Y. 400; Matter of Rubel Corp. v. Murdock, 255 App. Div. 224, 280 N. Y. 839; People ex_rel. Sullivan v_McLaughlin, 266_N._Y._519; Matter of Foy Productions v. Graves, 253 App. Div. 475, 278 N. Y. 498;Nectow v. City_ of Cambridge, 277 U. S. 183; Matter of Hickox v. Griffin, 27_4_App. Div. 792; People ex rd. Werner v. Walsh, 212 App. Div. 635,240 N. Y. 689; Matter of Chizner v. Walsh,236 App. Div. 731, 261 N. Y. 707.) Nathaniel A. Kahn for intervener,respondent. I. Intervener-respondent met the tests set up by the law in proving practical difficulties and unnecessary hardships entitling him to a variance. (Matter of Otto v. Steinhilber_282_N. Y. 71; People ex rel_Arseekay Syndicate v. Murdock, 265 N. Y.,158; Proc Bldg. Corp. v. Connell, 264 N. Y. 513; People ex rel. Hudson-Harlem Valley Tit. &Mtge. Co.v. Walker, 282 N. Y. 400 Matter of Rubel Corp.v. Murdock,255 App. Div. 224,280 N. Y. 839; People ex rel. Sullivan v.McLaughlin, 266 N. Y. 519; Matter of Foy Productions v. Graves, 253 App. Div. 475,278 N. Y.498;Nectow v. City of Cambridge 277 U. S. 183; People ex rd. St. Albans- Springfield Corp. v. Connell, 257 N. Y. 73.)II. The granting of the variance did not create any injustice to surrounding*89 property owners,and appellants have failed to show that the action of the board was arbitrary,unjust and oppressive. DESMOND,J. This proceeding was brought,under article 78 of the Civil Practice Act,to review a determination by respondent board of zoning appeals of the town of Hempstead,Nassau County,by which determination the board had granted to intervener-respondent Barnes, a variance of the town zoning ordinance, so as to permit Barnes to erect,on a lot owned by him in a'B Residence District,'a building to be used as a combined residence and funeral home. Petitioners-appellants are a few of the more than two hundred nearby residents who objected, before the board,to the application for this variance. Petitioners were defeated in the courts below,but we granted them leave to come here. We hold that the board's action in authorizing this variance was without legal basis. The premises of intervener-respondent,as to which the variance was granted,is a vacant lot, 100 feet wide,on the west side of Westminster Road,in a section of the town of Hempstead known as Cathedral Gardens. When intervener-respondent bought that lot, in 1945, it was, and for some years had been, in a'B Residence District'under the town building zone ordinance. In such B residence zones,the permitted uses,under the ordinance,are: single residences,clubhouses, schools,churches,professional offices in dwellings, and some others.A funeral home,or undertaker's establishment, is not such a lawful use. ' Nevertheless,intervener Barnes purchased the lot,then applied for a variance. We could end this opinion at this point by saying that one who thus knowingly acquires land for a prohibited use, cannot thereafter have a variance on the ground of'special hardship'(Matter of Henry Steers, Inc.,v. Rembaugh,259 App. Div. 908, 909,affd. 284 N. Y. 621). But beyond that,we hold that the proof here made out,under applicable rules of law,no case for a variance. At the hearing before the zoning board of appeals, intervener called witnesses to show that, about 260 feet south of his property, Westminster Road, on which his lot fronts, intersects the wide,much- traveled Hempstead Turnpike,that the lands along the turnpike are zoned for business,that on the corner lots at that Westminster-Hempstead intersection there are two *90 gas stations,that the parcels nearest to intervener's,on the west side of Westminster Road,are both used for physicians'homes and .../default.wl&RS=WLW2.75&VR=2.0&SV=Split&FN= top&MT=Westlaw&CFID=O&Cite= 6/5/2002 JU 1 IN.Y. i5b `lF taxa vi offices, and that,just opposite to Barnes' lot on Westminster Road,the frontage, for 600 feet north from the gas stations, is owned by a church corporation, on it being a church, a rectory, and(erected after the hearing)-a parish school. All of these are,of course, specifically permitted uses,under the zoning ordinance,and there are no unauthorized uses anywhere in the vicinity. A real estate broker called by intervener testified, before the board,that intervener's parcel could not yield a reasonable profit if used only for purposes allowed under the ordinance. However, it is clear that the only basis for that conclusion was the witness' opinion that no one would be likely to buy that lot as the site for a fine residence, and it was not claimed that any effort had been made to sell the premises for any of the authorized uses. There was dispute, in the testimony heard by the board, as to whether the presence of a funeral parlor would depreciate values in the neighborhood. It was brought out, also, at the hearing, that intervener was then conducting his funeral establishment in a store around the corner on Hempstead Turnpike,but wished to move his business onto Westminster Road. The proof just above summarized was insufficient for a variance. Section 267 of the Town Law empowers boards of appeals to vary the application of town zoning ordinances(subd. 5) 'Where there are practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships in the way of carrying out the strict letter of such ordinances'. But,as was recently held in Matter of Hickox v. Griffin(298 N. Y. 365, 370-371): 'There must at least be proof that a particular property suffers a singular disadvantage through the operation of a zoning regulation before a variance thereof can be allowed on the ground of'unnecessary hardship". Most frequently cited for that proposition is Matter of Otto v. Steinhilber(282 N. Y. 71, 76)where it is written that,before the board may vote a variance,there must be shown, among other things, 'that the plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances and not to the general conditions in the.neighborhood which may reflect the unreasonableness of the zoning ordinance itself. The board, being an administrative and not a legislative body,may not review or amend the legislatively enacted *91 rules as to uses, or amend the ordinance under the guise of a variance(Dowsey v. Village of Kensington, 257 N. Y. 221, 227),or determine that the ordinance itself is arbitrary or unreasonable (Matter of Otto v. Steinhilber, supra). If there be a hardship,which, like the alleged hardship here, is common to the whole neighborhood,the remedy is to seek a change in the zoning ordinance itself (Arverne Bay Constr. Co. v. Thatcher,_278 N. Y. 222, 233; Matter of Levy v. Board of Standards & Appeals,_267 N. Y. 347).Nothing less than a showing of hardship special and peculiar to the applicant's property will empower the board to allow a variance(People ex rel. Fordham Manor Ref. Church v. Walsh, 244 N. Y. 280; People ex rel. Arseekay Syndicate v. Murdock, 265 N. Y. 158; Matter of Y. W. H. A. v. Board of Standards&Appeals, 266 N. Y. 270, appeal dismissed 296 U. S. 537 Matter of Levy v. Board of Standards&Appeals, supra; People ex rel. Arverne Bay Constr. Co. v. Murdock,247 App. Div. 889,affd. 271 N. Y. 631;Matter of Halpert v. Murdock,249 App. Div. 777,affd. 274 N. Y. 523;Matter of Otto v. Steinhilber,supra;Matter of Hickox v. Griffin, supra). The substance of all these holdings is that no administrative body may destroy the general scheme of a zoning law by granting special exemption from hardships common to all. The orders below should be reversed and the determination of the zoning board of appeals annulled, with costs in all courts. DYE, J. (dissenting). I vote for affirmance. To reverse the action of the board of zoning appeals and annul its determination is to say that the granting of the variance was arbitrary and capricious and constituted an abuse of discretion. This we may not do on the record before us. It is axiomatic and no longer open to doubt that where there is evidence to constitute a reasonable basis for the determination the court has no right to interfere and substitute its judgment for that of the administrative board charged with the duty of making a determination(People ex rel. Hudson-Harlem Valley Tit. & Mtge. Co. v. Walker, 282 N. Y. 400 Matter of Rubel Corp. v. Murdock,255 App. Div. 224,affd. 280 N. Y. 839;People ex rel. Sullivan v. McLaughlin, 266 N. Y. 519;Nectow_yStr of Cambridge, 277 U. S. 183; People ex rel. St. Albans-Springfield Corp. v. Connell, 257 N. Y. 73). With this I take it there is no quarrel. We .../default.wl&RS=WLW2.75&VR=2.0&SV=Split&FN=top&MT=Westlaw&CFID=0&Cite= 6/5/2002 sill N.Y. 86 Page 4 of should note also that no question is raised here as to *92 the validity of the ordinance or that the board has the power to vary or modify its application under appropriate circumstances.Our differences arise in testing the proof adduced in light of certain elemental prerequisites deemed essential, such as proof that the land in question cannot yield a reasonable return if used only for the allowable purpose and that the required variance will not alter the essential character of the locality: here it is conceded that there is such proof. It is in consideration of the sufficiency of proof as to the third element that our difference develops which calls for a showing that the plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances and not to a general condition in the neighborhood which may reflect the unreasonableness of the zoning ordinance itself(Matter_of Otto v. Steinhilber,_282 N._Y._71), a majority being of the view that the proof was insufficient to warrant granting a variance in the proper exercise of discretionary authority(Town Law, § 267) as the hardship, if any,was a common burden which would not be deemed unique as to this property(see Matter of Hickox y_Griffin, 298 N.Y. 365; Matter of Ernst v. Board of Appeals,298N.Y. 831). For convenience of discussion,I refer to certain undisputed facts: The property upon which Mr. Barnes desires to erect and conduct a funeral parlor is situated in a residential'B'zone(the variances sought in both the Otto and Hickox cases, supra,were for nonconforming uses in an'A'zone). This parlor would be located within 300 feet of the 6-lane,highly trafficked,Hempstead Turnpike and within 150 feet of a business zone. The lot to the west of the Barnes property is vacant and its owner is not objecting. Dr. McKenna immediately to the north does not object. Dr. Cherwin across Regent Place to the south is the only adjacent owner objecting. The objectants Liebl who represent the property to the north of Dr. McKenna and on the corner of College Place have since sold the property to the church;the appeal should be dismissed as to them as moot. The church,rectory and parochial school directly across the street-- concededly the school has been built since this variance was granted at which time that land was devoted to a public parking lot,a nonconforming use--are not averse to the Barnes proposal through its spokesman,Father Smith.In summary then,this is the physical situation *93 of this particular piece of property: it is flanked on both sides by physicians' offices and virtually surrounded--at least to the east and north--by institutional buildings. To the south is a congested business community with two gas stations, one on each corner nearest the subject property,uses which probably do more than any other to depress residential realty values. Under the existing zoning ordinance (Building Zone Ordinance of Town of Hempstead, art. 5)there is no practical conforming use to which Mr. Barnes could devote this property. Fully aware of the elemental requirements laid down in the Otto case(supra),counsel for the applicant was very careful to adduce proof through a real estate expert to meet those tests.Material and pertinent to the sound or'unique'requirement is the following: 'Q. In your opinion,is this situation with respect to Mr. Barnes'property unique or is it a general condition in the neighborhood?A.No,I would say it would be unique. First it is hard to classify it in a Class A when you are only 150 feet from the Business Zone,a parking field and a contemplated school and a church,and put it in the same category as you would when you get to the first block north where you are going in a high class residential property. 'Q. In other words, in all of this Cathedral Gardens section is there any other parcel that you know of that shows the same situation,being opposite a church, a parking field, a proposed parochial school, the professional offices on both sides,and the close proximity within 150 feet of gas stations and a business area?A.No,I don't know of anything. In fact,I would say that this is almost a perfect set up for this. One of the most important elements,I would think, would enter into this,would be the fact that being used as an undertaking establishment where the majority of cases are taken to the church, and where,if he operated elsewhere,he would have to be the same distance to the church,he would eliminate a lot of congestion,which,I believe,is one of the hazardous things.' In addition to this testimony the record indicates that the board personally viewed the premises and surrounding neighborhood. Taken as a whole then the record contains proof substantial in character .../default.wl&RS=WLW2.75&VR=2.0&SV=Split&FN=top&MT=Westlaw&CFID=O&Cite= 6/5/2002 301 N.Y. 86 ragc , ui and quality,which by the standards usually applied in administrative proceedings is more than sufficient to sustain the board's implicit finding that the plight *94 of the owner is due to unique circumstances and not to a general condition in the neighborhood and this view is not contrary to the cited authorities denying relief. In those cases-- Otto, Ernst and Hickox(supra)we had no evidence of any sort and no such compelling physical circumstances as the proof here demonstrates. In the Otto case it was emphasized that a variance was not warranted upon that record. There the applicant sought a variance to erect a roller skating rink--a commercial use--upon property extending 500 to 600 feet into a residential'A'zone. There it was held that the record'does not set forth any proof of the three elements constituting unnecessary hardship within the meaning of the zoning laws.' (P. 79, emphasis supplied.)I take this as a clear indication that the three tests while separately numbered are part of the same whole,the pronouncement of a standard by which the permissible but nevertheless existing discretion of the zoning board is to be guided. In the Long Island University case(Matter of Hickox v. Griffin, supra,p. 371) 'Not an item of proof* * * appears in this record'in support of the variance there sought under the singular disadvantage test of the Otto case. Here there is no claim that the ordinance is unreasonable but where such is shown due to the imposition of restrictions which would limit the property to a use for which it is not adapted,we have ruled that'In such case the owner of the property cannot be required to ask as a special privilege for a variation of the restriction' (Dowsey v. Village of Kensington,257 N_Y_221, 231)_The converse should be equally true. This is not a case where a claim is made that the ordinance is in general invalid and unreasonable. (Rockdale Constr. Corp. v. Incorporated Vil_of Cedarhurst, 300 N_Y_642.)A property owner should not be required to fmd his relief by a change in the statute. The framers of the zoning ordinance undoubtedly recognized that a general ordinance could not always be successfully applied according to the strict letter of its terms. To meet the unanticipated exceptional situation,the board of zoning appeals is given authority in a reasonable exercise of discretion to afford relief(Village Law, § 179, subd.b; Town Law, § 267; General C�Law,_ 81). In Matter of Ernst v. Board of Appeals (supra)we declined to substitute our discretion for that of the board. I therefore feel, as did Judge(then Justice)FROESSEL *95 at Special Term,that'notwithstanding the fact that a different result might well have been arrived at,this Court has no right to interfere, and to substitute its judgment for that of the administrative officers', especially when their determination finds support in the record. The judgment appealed from should be affirmed. LOUGHRAN, Ch. J., LEWIS and FULD, JJ., concur with DESMOND, J.; DYE, J., dissents in opinion in which CONWAY,J., concurs; FROESSEL,J.,taking no part. Orders reversed,etc. [See 301 N. Y. 681.] N.Y. 1950. In the Matter of SUSAN H. CLARK et al.,Appellants,v. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS.OF THE TOWN OF HEMPSTEAD et al.,Respondents, and RICHARD W. BARNES,Intervener,Respondent. END OF DOCUMENT Copyright(c)2001,Randy A.Daniels,Secretary of State,State of New York. .../default.wl&RS=WLW2.75&VR=2.0&SV=Split&FN= top&MT=Westlaw&CFID=O&Cite= 6/5/2002 iw -,.-..,:;.../.• ,..- ..W.,7:1"... ipii'l',' .1'4 WI..;-.." ';'''''.'.; '..'"' - ' . "”'••. ' lik"' ' 1 '-",VX, ' ''..41117...‘..- N 7'n" •• 44,s,' . . " • • t ;•fr ' . ' •,. .. ,..4..• • •4" '",e0r.". '''',."--;'. •il 4:".41.kigt- i'"'.. • • 'V i " . •?i',A• , -.''' .- .er-,• ..tr '"'. " ... '.:. "'I"," . *41. '• --;'‘'••'' " ....•fr-. •:`','""*?;..Sr.:;'' --•.:t. .- „, ./i r 41, .. ,„ -,-i-.?.•,_ ., .:.4.. ..:, .,..c._ .. ..,-,.4., • • lite,-,,,; 1,,okar ''”, . •:-.. - - • Li . ':.::..., :. 1..27-...V.,,.:;...,•' . ' ; ',.'..-...4,11. .',...- / , - -..•41,...!", , 4- • . ,.. - _irri '• \ ..------- 1, — 1 ' 7-7- .--..-._. 4 ' ' •... ?. % • t 0. :. ', ;I 'A' .., . •'A .:--' \ ' -'''''''C'' — ., ... -. 1 ,,,,'„.:61,,;--,4?!--• . ...'• . • N.....:.. I , ' . ' . ' • ;,,,( A et . . , li • . 4: .. ,. . ,4der-' .! •e`... - -, . , - - ---- -,-• __,Igt,„,.. . ,,,,, . . .„ . , 91, T ' I—1Irt 4' -.T- '- ' „...., -•(Psso-..1 , r/i 1 , l',1 —,0,-; '•,..,;f, --,,-,—,4-....-..,s-,, • .;•,,'s,, ,, "--#P5A •-.•,,- :;. --' .„-4.,;' ':-'1• s•, • ' sit • .f• ,-".s.',,- ,•• ' ...._ r.7...e. : - ....a a 0 1'....i. ,..rrt::,.,-,!c; 't. 5' -.- "jtn..;,i-,;:*,k_rZI.:_;-;,,,5`-_,..15-,."•' ...'- - --. .-'...i4.4',-,'•*;r5'''' -.4''''!-: 5,] -;-‘,.: . :-ft'll.Wk..1,C'il-'4%.:',' ':5'-'-'. ".' , -.. , ...... ,, .., --- " .... • '54-. 4.- •"-..,...,'"r--.. --t• • sr- — .._- -- •• . ......, „- ..., .......,- _ . . -....._.... .. . - , • - .•41;-: '---`' '; ."'*.7.--,7,1:',--...-,:•,-,15.1i.„--__ . ,-.0--,--..,..v,,,, ,'",---.•.•-•-i,' . . , ,..'It,;--',--_-.:•-•-*. r .•-'..,77 . ,:-.-,..,:r*,,:'•"."', •'400.4!''''' .-.•---- - .'- ' .... ... .,,,....!A • . v• .....)s. - - ••• . _ 45.'i 1 IL -- 'cit. .- . • ..0- i_ 4 1 / . .,..*-4.- AC , 4: ...,:.1, A ii" /•',"' '":","''• ' t•". t" t I ii I 1,.. 4 4 . ; k . , ._ .44-1-3,04.*.'•a.44., . ..".., • . ' C V • .,...: I.1/#41",......... 4 1 004.:-. - • / ,• / : . • .. ,_. •tl - •• iii,,, *1.6-, ---;-... • -..-.. . / -- -..,- , .....4„..,,, • 4r .:`• • 1 '-ii,'•-6'.:°' i ,:. ';:iv. , ,, .. , 11111 . .,, , ... iqii 4404,14-0- . . __ , t..IAte:• , ' lti ; • . i' '- ° ' • , • °.• — ..;.:;ss'''`"4* , . ,i,etittity ,.. 4,- 4 .' . t,. ' '1,_3i.L. „lob..'...?3:,,c,..;;..„'".A: , •.... , ,.."..-,,,,..,. „,-...-:..:, ,„T: .../..a,.." U. ,,i -_,.:.:,1.,4 . • I' ,,, .„ '.9.;.i....... . ' , ...,-! - f.fri,, lr--;.- Jac • , .. , ,,..; . A.....4:%f•' lit'• .,- • 7. -; 1. . '-• 'I:" - . t • '‘''''''' .' :• ....,• ---. -'• ' –. ' •' -. ••.(11 .g...t 4 • . . - ,I•r ..4. - ,' •k ' ''411,..... , . .*1 ?lir'''.'. . •;1. ' ,. .. , v. ' - ...''t."4'1.15'.'. ' • =-'- o .--i.......111,rrt•i ,•11.1i ' ' .• , - . . . .. .„ ..... . - - 4 41,.at t,,,,.,.---,. ,,..+•,•:.:4.4.4i.s4 ' • xjfibi0,74,-,.,:‘.., Ala lie .,F.- . - ,„4::16:g -41444:7,-.:*--‘ ' '. ' . ' •' 't ' 4. ,,,tilie r 1. .._.:. '7 . . • : . ' :-.. -- '''...':,.. ,,,,i% ...t -:-.. ' • " .-,..... • 45i.e, , • . ' MIIINgt, • AI • ...... • ...,--' .. •' ',. .- / , V To .. WI—— — I 1 ..f . • : , .-. .. .....ift. ...... . __ - , ... ... . ._. , - . - . .• . __. . . .. . _ p� 7 / t, r X,ir. a F y � ,� r . �t 'h._ Vk ter.'; gyp *4�� ` .. 19'!Y!f' .. c ,a k c +. rY �M.. .j ,. ' ,--04.,' - ti' - wt �1" '`` itit pry"_ .. J:..tr" ..t:-.... l V�X 1 ' i tat 11 1--- oh 4 Ai r rK .rae r . Y _ . !,-. .,, , - , , .i. ... ..s' ,:"Ntt:. .,,`, ,,'3.4b111041*4 p,..':* , ,,,, • 1 e....,.. . SO • , ., .4. ,,,r -46=4.74VA.‘• . ',:',"• , 4 *••'4 .. .*' . 34 A. .A% ' SP,..lr'n'Nrillk .- ..41••*10,411110k giVIOV 141:.4 ' ' "Ilt; .', *.41,9P-41 '11• ' 1-;‘,... '‘ . . ••• .• '7'1' '' 4 -.0*Frifir.fr'7, - .7 -4 'W1.4,-1 .'0174., .... -,kr 4• .. ...' • ' g,"."' - '''..:::': ' -,.''u-Ak 0 I AC • c ..../.. ''‘'.4,f;: :!‘.. 4. '' - *,,,",1. ., ,,.e. • ,• `iii?4,,, \•'1,' k: ' /PP -, 4.V..--' - ' ''•, ..,..fir, , '''' ,‘ -- A„ -45,da.ep • -.. . i - , ..• ,,„....„,, , ... , .,,,,c ,•,,,,, .7 ,.- ..,..,, 4 • ,,- leli::'llt.4' # A *- .- . •L .' .• A •„ . -x .0114. . .•• ,,„,* OR• r, ,.., . , - ‘,.. • ..,-- ..,, • ,k4":-.9, . .../,',3'-• ''' „1" Plife. '' .! ' .1. ;.:•'.1. 1.",..."--,r- '3 - --7.1-. • '''' 'I'm :h. - ,y * ' —'t• , -- r. ' - -I-- ..-: • t•"•\?•• ' = ' --f-4 ' .,• c '44z- ' ha- ..' ' - ,046,N ,-,..,, . ,r 444• -,,.? .".— I. 0 :s ' --.L-. -.6. ,'',-,„,._,•-,...' - ' , .'..,4.41•-,..'::.. ". 1 TyrmN : a ":•,,, ', 1. i i &,,,,,, _,.„,..4..,.. ,,...7,_ ....,-„A-, • -..,•,, . ,,,—.. . ,,,,, „..-..,, • ..• , ,..„ . , , „:. ,....„ .•,, d . .... . , ,,,,. _ _,..)- ':-'41300," it''' ,• 40, , ,,, .. .1, - .,, 4. — '7 ...• - .. . . • ... .., '• ,-"t• ,)Ifr' . ... , .,, xi y� . , 'Y ! ems� A •! ' ; t A 44 cry' ' it": t ."•'' '....V F ,.• .. • "*C. •.,e, ,ii.411 "...,• Ir • , tr- i 4.'4.. ''.. . ' .,.: ''' -of'*44'3R., ...• .--.4,,,,x.; - .. . - . • ' . • . . '•+'"', 4 mli.t itt i : '" 1 r. i ,:.^, '''' ''''F." ti 4%• t. ,- , ..., • .ete..r., . e.N,i,,e,., ,,..e.=4,-N.1.-. e'• -- • .." . '4,- ,•,, , . , ' .e 'i4 ', iiiltk =-.,.' r ' . .., .' • 5 ,.,...,, „,,,-.4. •... ,, .„,,. ....• : .4 •• ff'i• .•-• . '.4.4 ' : ' ' ''"Tec''. •Ife 741#ft• ' • '''; •• .--...- •• •. .• • ...2N . - • '., • —.•-t ',-#.-',. ',.___.2,41,M.....• •11*.•••,., .,,....4"," te . , 4: - • lit le* • ' •' , ' 'ee i gb, i io 41' ''' . 4,pi.I - • '' •• ;I,* ..- • .... -U• '- 4. 4. . . „,....._ i .: , .. • , 14°2. „,--_..... „al i ,141 ,.4 1 \ '''''•+---.' , ,--.' ,..4„m„ ..,...........;- . -1`.'_. ..,,..,-.. -'...,,r,,„ . ",..e,-;''.4.- - , " ''''- • . r- , ;IA- '''' ' :...- .4." e 41111101!"\ Jt•`"al'',1115".k .,••„,,:i,..,,e„.,',ei,i...-.4*'''''.:.';': - .„.•=,., S4r.'-'' ... - ..est.-16`4' .•• - - 4t ' • s-..4, -, - ..... '',..I'"""l'"` ei<',,,....0 '- ''," - -:-..A..:-4._-_.. . a '404.:,,:"-41,"t"• ..-- ' ' \ • - . _ .- .., , . --17",".„V4 ...‘e!...•'' ,...f'''' .""., "-, . -eh, -,- . .. ,.l"P" '''' 1:: ''•'' ,• . et ,e e=e r - fe., = • ,,,,,,-?.'f;lit*.r.,:- r-• 1 e. ' • •-' A "' °' •';.•,.-11,1, . . . ..' ,P,:s. . . . . ..-ott-*t 1,-;---:-.: .1' .4. -- ..,. - . r•,-« , 0..1 N.r.4.•, . 4' , • .. ••,-.447, ,•,' , ni .• ..."., •• ',....i.! .'46.1:,•• 4 •.. 'Z'y's - k. ''' ':oti,•,,, ,. . -tr,.. ;•1:-,,; '- rIt5".% , 4c.L. , -., , •',44,V,' , •.' •,..,P.—.-1,4'', - ' -r‘r•. .,• ' • - .., • -s-tf.. - sil Ar ._ . C,,..1. -Z---.4.1, I''''.. 's - L -..7:' •'. . A $'-‘,-,--., -„,,,-...:(-.!--; - ' •-•. .. , .., _ . .... . f..„... _ :. .,,„iie,,,,f iit . ,,, . ,,,,-(0,/,1‘,-,.-..-. -..• - . , - , i,,• .-, , -'...,,-.-• Alks,,, • • ' 1 s - . - ..,-..: ' 1 ',. , , ,,6. ;«.,.-. • ':-.-..j-:,--=-._ 44,..;,,.-• • I. ' :• • -" . . .. _ ., . . -:-,. •-- •-.*,-;',..z k„ t,:,..,:, 411IN ti •... -.. ' . - - , . . 1 ,-•,..•m . . ... -: ., , - -,t. • - , • i ifiii ,..,•,,-,.i.., 11 I ... . • . „. , . ...•-."...,\ ...,:7,--,. ' _ - - • .-..- , . • • --x'. - .., '''''''- •'' -' ' ". ,•1'rilikijo .'-!'',: ' ..'..--..'..'-,:l.:-. , - ,,„.--... •- ..-, Atli.'" , .•--. Iiiiiiii t. - . . . --.,-.'i'., '" ' ''...-.:"iv.,_•"- -:,.:::::',;i, ,' I V '4 n q' } :it l'firj A 14) V6IO2,2/8fr lir I d' ..• t � ` F i 11'1 •� 1J� ` ��i`�� `j I.V. -- li�, 'J V . f 1 _' t \ , . • 1 1' 7 �� 1. t\ ` 1''� I i I -444: ! 1 • i, it — I1PIIF; R1r, .t i 0,-4,4]_ `-4'G; .14 L, ,,,it `': ,& y f AMZALAK v. INCORPORATED VILLAGE OF VALLEY STREAM 11 'li°''t'1; i,'e'r4''' Cite as 220 N I S.2d 113 .4'I'jl1';'I nt against r k:° [3] The money judgment of $18,105.04 consists of the rents and cop. i ! dens; and ,':1,4:14'; ' income from the property directed to be reconveyed to Jennie Pisano. .` j,i,(;i,;; I i i, the action ' 3°;„' It is the "use and enjoyment" contemplated by the statute (Civ.Prac.Actr I"i`° 1 by Josepht'''';'1-:'-; § 120) and the lis pendens properly applied to that judgment. l/ if ,; ;', ";`Ii Accordingly, the court determines that the lien of Jennie Pisano for ';':10Vii o April 1, -..'} i:';; 18 105.04plus interest, is a first lien against the fixture award on 'll'q r+'�°}� .1 p a. R , $ , g ;x!11!';1'".';,I ' r'= 1 ,; Damage Parcel 25 in this proceeding; and inasmuch as this lien is in i,;1€: 1 i ` '=,lrr excess •of the total award, the fixing of the attorney's •lien becomes aca- / ;`,`.;i�;�,ij reory that L,� .11,t�:.1. 'c ,' demic. The award, with interest, is to be paid to Marie P. Boyd, the � i ;ti' �n of the � .r,�; s,, Committee of Jennie Pisano. Ilht�y°i, 4 11, 1957, ;�'�"i Vit' ,i,;�;r�„1, 'mptroller �6 t Settle order on notice. �r 'a°P`';;f' w�l �`.'avf, +'+ 2 7' ''id'''s'I i. that "In s'd4j'�, lV✓ ';r,G-,ii';, r the pos- < AAit-' YY 110410 itiff, may .' �"Y ki O KEY NUMBER SYSTEM Q+ .'�.'i antparts v.i� S''' T 1 rlikr i;lttt,,sl''''I i; f i, ,,','i;;1,,; an action . z 5; t' -s�Y`'iF , „1,,,z,°, ° `.,' Maurice AMZALAK and John Amzalak, Plaintiffs, v. INCORPORATED ,! 11{'i'i ecuted or ' 1 'e VILLAGE OF VALLEY STREAM, Defendant. ''d1 1, ie action .,'1, ri ; I.! oll 1, • :,. Wit Supreme Court, Special Term, Nassau County, Part I. ��I!1 a party `, t l. , ' .f. Aug. 29, 1961. t�',1 -' I :rly filed, t �. flu r� ;, �.. .„, Landowners brought an action against a village for a judgment ''�"�l'`1111 its filing, � "�' � �:. village'si '' ,?I',,!j', b 1t - declaring that the zone ordinance was ineffective to prevent the a lu h,:1 , • encum- " 101' .,s, : use of a certain structure as a one-family dwelling. The landowners p r, f 76 N.Y. ., °T ' 'I !! E„ made a motion for summaryjudgment. The Special Term, Howard T. 'il f Levine ",,-c..s;i4. J g Al' l,�,,1 • t, Y;_ Hogan, J., held that the evidence established that the structure, which 1?';a;Iil ,"', '';` was used for a three-automobile arae and apartment, was a one-family ;1'11 4" �,�,�.., garage P � ,fl�i°1al f;1'1 pendens �r3'V residence, and that the structure was merely a non-conforming building ;! 1 �f I, '= and not a non-conforminguse within statute providingthat if "non-con- I ,,, 1 :al prop- , `' use" Id ^'1l,,,I ;"Pay== forming ceases for continuous period of one year, land and building '. lei!1 the stat- ,, t'�, - ,1[; i 1 i ,, previously devoted to non-conforming use shall be subject to zoning 'i ri Y.1111?11 follows: '', 7r y5 regulations. ;d; the PA.',. Summary judgment granted to plaintiff. i 11,1; 1 i s • or ' EE'*r+.v l { ise' . =i _ �';,';It{{'I �T't;'; 1. Zoning x256 Is. :,1'lil i, iis. TV:I!: III* ,-1 ',eal ,4.. Evidence established that structure used for three-automobile ga- 1 ,1'11 ,•:R, rage and apartment was one-family residence within village's building d °s''I the ;",� = I l ;:'.11; i,-1,. zone ordinance. :If.'zt3 !1; �.`�I,. !1 "41++ I Aal use, ', 2. Zoning x322 I', Ih+,11 ar F.' ' 'l;'IC'r[ 1( essarily ='•=y;• Residence, which was erected before adoption of building zone or- �, 3���:•� ,l°J, , : -q,,: dinance and winch did not comply with area and rear yard requirements i'.! C;i ,,I '0.,1';'' }i4. 220 N.Y.S.2d-8 j,' ',iil � I,1, iap�` " 1:11'',p,''!I I >.� ,�I1 i'',ICI'I I I r t� 1 '' ill!!1ry b -'1}f' ,.4='„-'+- iI, i ,1. ',fir".4. I '11!:1I I ',I t`",,' AMZA] '0 li 114 220 NEW YORK SUPPLEMENT, 2d SERIES ..`, ' 'I j'ji ' :1 of ordinance, was non-conforming building but not non-conforming use -:F'.�`^.' devotc ! ' use" F ect tc within provision of ordinance that any "non-conforming shall be ;, :1 ' 1 f; :ll ,I ij,A-' land c .I subject to all regulations as to use where use ceases for continuous period "A --, . iil; I:'I of one year. s ; had n '' I !': . Seo publication Words and Phrases, for other judicial constructions .;; f.;, The def l; „I'l! ' u n i i', rt` 1'•:i. ,,A,' ,i and definitions of Non-conforming—Use. gZt0. with the a �' ;li ,"!' it has rein, I /illi' �I „Y1a.. �' i 3. Zoning x337 ' kg ,40,1: ` its right tc (,;;,,,� 1I Village's building zone ordinance providing that if non-conforming ,- '' �, use ceases for one year, land and building thereon shall be subject to all k. 1• " 'u !,•:"1 regulations as to use as though such non-conforming use had never ex- ",*" who savor I+=, Itr,,,,1 ill '; „r .a used as a , fisted must be strictly construed. 04, 1', 1;,.,,• , I {`'E, examined �',, ' ,I — — • s more that !.i Ili Henry A. Maccaro, Merrick, for plaintiffs. 'F ." space, the ':,1 ii' ' ' ' the policy '" ! Si,° ( II Robert M. Blakeman, Valley Stream, for defendant. ,.'4-;, ' (1!,' !I '...7,. : deuce. 1\ Il of the re l';'; It :' �, HOWARD T. HOGAN, Justice. - ' 'r minatioi ` „!`S a jYzi, , ';' „ . • a one fax I'1'I j;;';f r ' . Plaintiffs in an action for a judgment declaring that the defendant's 'i:I' „�:; ,I' `` with a th I Building Zone Ordinance is ineffective to prevent the maintenance and f` "- IS'! {' use of a certain buildingas a one-familydwelling, move for summary •J' y 0, ;I;,, I'I judgment. :>' J, , , fl J1-'d 'I ;ta4 to which ''`q'' ,Ji 1;1'; The facts present a•somewhat unusual problem. Plaintiffs are the own- '',.h` '; = !! ;41,i g;',1• situated 14;' 'I•'� ; ers of a structure located in the rear of an irregular plot in a residential as a non- a i'!i ;-.',',',i'",' district. The plot is also improved with a one-family residence located ',';L: VV '; :,14'. such doe 'I?,ll ' I� along the front line of the property. It is conceded that both were erected •,fir',, ' 01:, 1,0;j''I 1j adoptionanyzoning ordinanc EE ! before the of ordinance, in fact, before the incorpo- '`: Howeve I'' e;'' I, ;; ration of the defendant Village. Both structures, regardless of their •. building e;11, ; :}I‘II':i nature or their use, are non-conforming as to one or more of the area '•; ' P i,,,,,,t, j;I; ance prc restrictions and side and'rear yard and front setback requirements. )41. ,,,, i •IIs. 1;I',! ordivani The rear structure is the subject matter of this action. It has a three- A ', ll , �• ; car garage on the ground level, and an apartment consisting of a dining ,, • , [31 Ih'' room, living room, bedroom, kitchen, bath and enclosed porch on the first '�M''h'55 for the p 'i4.,j.•1 ' �' floor, three bedrooms on various levels above, and a verysmall cellar G its non it r 0H-1 I with a central heating unit under a portion of the structure. The single the rigl- 4.4 I1 i,• ,; ',I entrance is on the side wall. The ceilings in parts of the structure are un- •c�+'} be stric `I ..;-4,1_. the oth usually low. The owner-occupant, who had been living in this building ;, R I'' 'I, '`"'" therefo j; ,.;., ' ; at least intermittently since 1922, died there in January 1958. The ;,; :�' 1 ! •''''•.1I remained vacant thereafter, and were sold byher executor to '''t S ,;, • ', premises Sine( ;!• '' the plaintiffs on January 30, 1960. This period of non-use for two years J• to the I; ''i ' ' '- �, is significant because the defendant's zoning ordinance, (Art. IV, sec. ;,��' costs. it i• it 8, sub'd 7) provides that: j Subi !, ! 1,I "If any non-conforming use ceases for a continuous period '�. 'II '' ' of one year or more * * * the land and building theretofore x - �ilJlSl;;ly 1i''iTiI�lt`�,1 fi' VALLEYS 115 . fi�� :',, AMZALAK.v. INCORPORATED VILLAGE OFY; �, Cite as 220 N.Y.S.2d 113 111 jl [: devoted to such non-conforming use shall thereupon be sub- 1 ng use • €�.�:� #`,-;p.,.'' '.. ' 'ect to all the regulations as to use for the district in which such S'•, 1 ++3.€. hall be :.i,E, ���.,'. J period .,r^' G , land and buildings are located, as if such non-conforming use l .t ' t, '•1S -,'•y t` had never existed." (Emphasis supplied.) '`'' ik l 11 " defendant contends a) that this structure is, in reality, a garage, .'..-', f, ,. l h; The ( �,,� �� :�� ,• ,,�,���, with the apartment use as merely incidental, and (b) in any event, since ,1": 1 �°• 1"r ''}-'1 1 ' '1 It r -J it has remained unused as a residence for more than one year, it has lost "�4;, I t kit ''r�•'�%�'�,•t�' its right to continue as a non-conforming use. ,�;�y;r�i ' � k�� t,l ,rming ffa,';,:. "11,,',, , • ' to all .3� y,r„ [1] The Court has read the affidavits of a large number of persons {' r ri`f j''iii'.!, �, ,-' who swore that to their personal knowledge the structure was always` 1,j+.;, j 'er ex- r."4i• :;d AF;' used as a residence up to the date of the owner's death. The Court has r ;' F; r:_ l I E�;�11 i 4N,,• examined the plan drawn by a surveyor, illustrating that considerably EI ,'`1 ; I;„ Y,.. `' more than 50°fo of the cubic content of the building constitute living 1 'i,'i '' �.,, • space, the records of the sewer and taY department of the Village and i 1 i t f f - ,,.,,�:^. I: v,-y.'-ter: ' the policy of insurance, all of which characterize this structure as a resi- 17'i�il1 „ , t deuce. . Moreover, the Court has visited the premises with the consent ,h • -:it.r, i• .is „.';',1.t.111,11,:' , cv i 1,4,4.; , of the respective attorneys and has conducted a thorough physical ex- #7:�, 'ill `;.,: :X: '=• <.r�,�''w amination. Based upon all of this, it finds as a fact that the structure is ki i.�, ' , :�l' y al” 1 � , dant's ' PIN"' a one family residence, albeit not a desirable one by modern standards, I11, •i :e and fir;,' with a three car garage integrated or built into it as an incidental use. i''',g1i imary ;l: ,'; finds that the use 7 I I ;I 1: {` 1, [2] As to defendant's-second contention, the Court 9 r i ice "'-','; to which the building has been put was residential and that since it is' own- ,411/11-Pre'-i....--: situated in a residential district this use is permitted as of right and not ,)• ' I ;f4. lentialIr,' { li j `:;=�'�'�'�•rr:' as a non-conforming use. It is unquestionably true that the structure as '' �� ,. rested F�-; ",y,,: such does not complywith the area and rear and re uirements of• the i€1 zh�t Y q y , , rested iiiii ` �', ordinance, and possibly does not comply with the side yard requirement. fi., I •POI: �,, i'; t�`�s.,k However, this renders it only a "non-complying or anon-conforming 'ki � ' �� their �,,�,�„i,.. l'; ',7E� ' '4. building but not a non-conforming use. This condition of non-compli- , fist"� 17 1 , I I ,Y area '' '.t;;.g%p bzoning �,� /Ii Y t• 1ante probably was created by the adoption of the original use TT 14 k, , '';''.',111Y'? <4 Dili jr`' 'a!11 ;•;Fs4 •'. ordinance and has continued to this day. C three- t •• ;�'.;•' ,.011. '�' lining ,;;<'' , [3] The zoning ordinance (supra) makes no provision whatsoever it 1-, , e first •�• �„y;, ; for the demolition or cessation of use of anon-conforming building for ,f{;j'; •�, •xr! cellar .--cs1,, its non-use for any period. It is limited solely to the termination of. �ti �• ,,,.;�:, . single �,$;:F�'' the right to use a building in a particular manner. This ordinance must, �;�?” , 3i: '"�:` be strictly construed, Whether this structure is in violation of any of III;lf ; ; ilding the other ordinances of the Village is not in issue on this motion, and, i,; , I : li! I The '��.'; therefore, not passed upon. � I ' :or to , =.: , Since it is the building and•not the use thereof which does not conform x�!j� i' ' i '; :4,, years to the ordinance, summary judgment is granted to the plaintiff without li,1ll,1a„I'',l ;• , sec. costs. •?' i I '! Ir ;° I�r1, h . Ij Submit judgment. j ti j ' ri' Iil, li l ,' Il 1161 l'1I1"I 1I: ;1 i '!Illlt 1' ' November 16, 2000 To whom it may concern, This is to advise you that while we, Marian and Gerald Gelbwaks, owned 150 Broadwaters Road Cutchogue from 1978-2000, our son and cousin had use of the small cottage by the water during summers. It was our understanding that the owner previous to us, Anthony Pisacano, also had used the cottage by the water while he owned 150 Broadwaters Road Cutchogue. Sincerely, • • 1 rt C Elk _ 11111Th 1 6,e 04.0 /9 TE/e 5 ' 01/4 (,,/00v, Ai Ai/6.-A/ w.ar2 N77°46 �/7 , i, 3 -24 -2000 .7---- 7Z, 9 9 r/E L/ fa-:FC.2.o x n iiii tk) N Iwo. ozre,1 4 44/ I \ T• \ . '-4 I , z 8'z ��.,? J o O 32 No �� �` \ kki -***:... /eo /82 /6/ In { V L../i8/3/ ,5-:;c5 \ t:',1-V . L //857/260 I. \ SC.2. va`cai ,37•Gt / i oc 1 'r z ,3'' r 0 "+ ■0 -- Me"' ft F- FC. AS tE I d t L //68//4/3 n Z.9 £� O tj is '`) 4 . 1n 1 o i Fi" 4's t... NO 7E: ' ~ v J W s04� it 3.8 u/ S!/G'lJEY�O . S i I AMW1//10.EA/�&.D ,A4/.0 3 Ii 61 t 1� J /A/ os�ss/oti. v 0 0\ S 3aa/7,,549 J / 14_6114 ,— /3 /20 gp i 1,"//9 rEie 5 „,,--- 1--F -,- ' . , ��;��\��1AM G ■• � �i fUnauthonzed alteration or addition to this surveyf is a violation d Section 7209 d the New York Y; �' S State Education `aw ELS Associates �, % ), , /' Copies of this survey map not bearing the land \ surveyors inked seal or embossed seal shall not Engineering - Land Surveying ��ND SUP` be considered to be a valid true copy 730 Park Avenue Guarantees or certifications indicated hereon shall run only to the person fa whom the survey Huntington, NY 11743 NO RESPONSIBILITY IS ASSUMED BY THE UNDERSIGNED FOR is prepared,and on his behatt to the title compa- ny governmental agencyand lending institution (516) 427-5133 ANY SURFACE, SUBSURFACE, AERIAL EASEMENTS, SUB-SURFACE listed hereon,and to the assignees of the lending UTILITIES AND/OR STRUCTURES IN OR OUT Of EASEMENTS IF institution Guarantees certifications are not J SO PROVIDED. a ,' transferable to additional institutions a subse- /8/ �T/5 8 "/�-/f2 _� z/'�a rn queowners LOT G ON MAP OF 4//�,E/P//2.EO A141, 4'./.9 �.' /V."5 7 ,A4`1%..446,'The offsets(or dimensions)shown hereon Iron, SITUATE �`�1r�'/°G E SUFFOLK COUNTY. N Y the structures to the property lines are for a spe GUARANTEED ONLY FOR L7 --""1/( C <=7-41•‘-"-/-5774-1/ - �Y�1/c'/--/,/, .P4 L /�;/✓ clic purpose and use and therefore are not in �.� tended to guide the erection of Fences Retaining UNDER TITLE/'!»s.45:5 ?OF /v/X/ , '. 7; '4&' ✓{'±ie� .-- , //'`- Vvnods Patios Planting areas addition is /7---/e�)- 41"V <�lj l /, , 7-/-7-=`,i-- '4<. /, 9 d C” CO, 5i - -- ' ounoings and any other Construction 1! /7/.5-, C' Mo,Cl(.7-. 'c -..e �� -/ . . (✓.s42' 1 0 , CTM _ /�� ! 1 -/0 —0p �_ SCALE 1' ' FILE JOB_67C•3 Z , , ,--,_ . • . ,,,, ,,, ,,,. :, • ..',,:- .• --, • •• r,f; 414 f'0 - , 1 ,. , , fi,,', , • - ., : „.;‘,;- - : , , ,....il ,',.. , , , i,,'.,, , _....f,,•;•-•;al,: ,. til..,) ,L,..• , I ,(, yi . . •,.';''..i.1,;J.:..., 'i,;h',,, •',',.','".. '-'•,,', •-;'.f•TOWN 4111 cSONITHOIM 1.' i •. :1 ;..';,.,,141'.,.c; , ,-1 14,1-i,k.:,,,--,11, ,,t,i:.i.::cts' T ' • . i '•,, •*'•,',11•••12N,T,,;:ta.,*,*: ;..‘t.,i-„c:;...J..,-°41r.',e.,Ii,„RUI11.0 INGg,`DEPARTMENT ' , . , . • , . . . ,..,••,,..4-,.,,...,3,,,,,, ,,..s.„,,.,, ,..!•lif...,',",i.,41 t*,'. .it,, "f*'''. `.'• j' i‘,1,:4 '1",'Zt•i' '11 ,A1/341,14',`‘;.;.:J,Iii•sY0W_,N'i,c1,ERIC5IRFFICE . , . gt,';41'11, ,k - M,10t,', !'.114'13 ,591,1T1101,171 ,N-,Y1 • • • , • , y,:..'%,:k.4.,•.., !it7,..,-r•r4.1.,-..,' ... ..•'/ '' ' ,u!1 ,•• ',..,. 1,,,,, .,; 1:. ' i .t.,,•ii`•i':',•, • :::!0..,,,,!,,,,,,,,t,t, 0.2p1-4,.;7-.,P,-'w'r 1.1,1,,,iii ,-- tilti';`t:,•zslItkly'00-$1141.0144;1,, :,,..!• r A ;,,, .' . ,....:, '.„ ,-.t., :Int,. ., ,frop.V/ 77 i ,,* lied!,`II iii: ''' ' .. •- iti'' It .i. 'iiiitti'llt 1 ,. il.0"04.*tl'IctAlial.'','''4'2.•fif,'-'4h3.6.4W,L'i,111--., i .,, " , rtppliCCItion 9,,,,,a,,,‘,—,,,t,tr t 1 tvrt e m!.I ; ." '3 ' V' !''' :,P.', '-, 1_ -1.: q- '' 41,.te,ei,,',' ,:-..i''4P.,1,,';',,.4 ' ''1, , 1,,,,,,,..0e0• ,,',46•„,4,N611:170•4 AtelCi-v4 It'• .,4,31.1V•Yil.A r‘IN''"6:,;*'/W-0. ' -. ' •;.Z . ' ,.- tilt ttt tittlitttc,1 ! tirNrfilititlilier., .ti,i'P'ft. i t nit tit., . , "..:Eli,fP. ,164.,'4C4''''"4-''''''' :i .4kill1,:t.'0,11.1:'4t,-:•, _'I 'V rq-`•••• ,•,, „,"V. '' '- J' • • • i 7- , (l • , rCIT121- ! •gr glii t'-111-'51i''t'11;11"4.11i.; -tif-tfii41 i'.1':;74'.‘f t;:iliii‘;'''IllatitItiTit's I•I '. ' ,.?",,"T"•', . I.„ t,11: l1,1.•-, !..".”,.'1, " 111 11!)" '"; •,.• J.!/!.! ...,, . i I- -,Pr•t tf• -1 /z ' • •I'v--.,,-z• . i , :4.,.4.--,i,...,,,A,, • -...,'...... -,..„,,---,•,— --- .0g.v. ,,-1!„,!--,,x-rtlyAw,i,•,,q,-10, ,,,, . , I,.,1 „ , 4t1 1J s,..,3-,,ii., '4.--. 'il,.,T,z14.0',--...-., l•ituttillitilitNiiir,iiiiiliiii!litii'fIliitIttiii'00tmttrttrIt •,.-. .1, r-,t,„.„. ,, ,. .'...if ..,•..,...:.,,s,,.i;::,`e-,',.ip..-,,1- :.•,7).P„i,,,.-A•kt)',I. cify'-,!..,..,..',1--,-7,4,•-.,:- i.;1 .:•;.i....v,.-7, ,,,....;,i,-,.,.,.. • ,• . • • '!...,,,,?:5A'ir,;,.•,..:,:. •,. .- ., .t,,;,., •,,i m_:r , ,q,-,,z,,,i,z,w-• ,• , . . .. ' ; •• f.,)...k..,,,,,,,s. •,.,., ,....', ,:... •-• , •-' 7 '. •• - 0' .. • • e•iiitt•t •• • .,, lei • ;, i • , ,• - •:1,4.,.••,,,,) .-. ,‘••••.,..,• , - , • - , ••"Iv I et et . 1te VIT. 7,-, , MT TIT - 1 It T. 1 , 1 I „ - 1"::4.:',, i''''.,'..';'"; • ! .• .%'• • ' r:A ,-- -.3.:- uilding Inspector) , . . • ' . :•. : i''',,,',!,:;.e'•:, '.• •, '•,'•••• ' ir7:',•••', ArF4 ,9A 11 . PON'FOR•0()MD G PERMIT 1 . I, , 1: ' ' • ' ' -''' . ,. i, ,„ , ,,,., , . .,-, :,. • - . 1 , • .. ,,, ,.,,i Tj :.:::".1 t';; :'.. : i, , '. ' . ,!....,1 t , 't ',':- ... •• !i . • ,‘ . i Oute r114,4,101,..,tm.,,,,,,,m..4 . , :, ., j -..f. 1:Cci!.1,f P ' '.i ,'• : -.. , ., • , INSTRUCTIONS ' .• , . . ,• . , . . . ' , '.I ... I , iv '--. , ,, , s , . 'TWI :1010419n,,m1-14t be.completely filled in by typewriter of! in Ink and submitted In triplIcote to the Building ' r 4or-with 3 PetR ar plany'r.iectirvp1.9113lcin,ta NOWT Fee oqcordItto to schedule.. 1 , • .1 _. Plat filan,§hO*Ing IRCeitglit Oficitil.p9rp.f Pttilclinqs nrt-prerrilS §f relationship to adjoining premises or public streets or ! grid giving a cletoiloci-descriptiqn,citiOriit of property must Ite drawn on the,diagram which ls part of this applicotionr• ,. wor . , ..• ,21,.., . Tile ic'rc9Yereff-hy thICaPpliaallani May not he commeri ed be,fore Issuance of Puilding Permit, . , PPah,cipprgYal;ef.tili& appliciltianc Mei fluilciing Inspector Will Issue a Building Permit to the applicantsuch permit he Kept.orvthe Oreinl4es,ovolloble,fetinspectiOn throuphatit,the work, 1 . ' '''' -'- " • Ng 134iiriirig Iligll b@, accu_pled rak,.,riserfln whole or In part for any purpose whatever until a Certificate of Occupancy hove-been orcintecl hylhe,PvilIcling InsPectofi-,iJ:-1',, - , •;ti: -.1 ''':,-,- • ;!,1;41, ,,,., !if,.,:,,414.::: ,.,.::.• . ., , .. .,,i,,,,,',1,-ft.0',1. ' . ',,,",,':' T.': N,V,;!':1;', 'Io•:r) !.'',1\?1111'. i•L.Ni1+41%.:.:1i; ' .1'.P2:•:' lr,, " 'jei t*''' 'i.,'.... ,' • , PI„ICATIQN"„19.1-1E11F1311,MAP,g.!to the riitilding,Pepartinent ,for the Issuance of a Building Permit pursuant to the ing-14ane,Prdinancp ofithPiP111,0f1,POutilqiclii,§1-lffalli,icROntyr NPw York( and other applidable l_ows, Ordinancas or atiggOgr,.fille, canStriiction:V.Ptilldlrigs!fidclitIons ar,altorcItiarisciar for removal or demolitioni'as herein described. ipplicont.fflprees ta.caniplyAith all applicable;lawk•ordinances, building code, housing code/ and regulations, and to • !' authori*ed Inspectors on prOmiSe4 and In hnlIdInge for necessary inspections, 1 ,' ‘ , • • . : ',...-.,,...-- e4 a ,. „ ., . , . . . , . , , , ,„ • •,,,, . .„ ..••• •, • ... •••.....••••,, . •... .. •, • •,t•-•••••1*,••ITT9"1" 1:1 '14 ,, i i , I ' , , (Signature of appliiii ti or name, if'a corporation) •• ... , • , . • • • , , , , „I'llopmp9,11i, t7.4.,,Shat.ehamA.41.14.y,,i,,,,J17.86,..,,, .,., . •;.... i • , • , , , • , (Address of applicant) i , . • , , • • " . . - 1 . „ _ • 1 , • , whether aPPIICantiC-aWnerf.lesSee,'agent,'architect, engmeer,, general contractor, electrician/ plumber or builder, rt•-,t‘,.;,,,. 11„:,T.. ,... •4;F. ..`.4 . . • .:: .. i ... 0- 1:•1.**..,. .2..*`.•''•••I'.,-,PV:;,,,.1:4:-.4..11, ..,,,.1..,irr,Ji•,:;z1fii,,.i...:•,..:,_1 . .,-,,• ,it...;,',..!. ..,:f ,*!,,i.,I,S,-*T.A405,11,...!„3, , ,, .. , , . ,..,75,...*...1 ' ' '.; **• °liner ..' .-,' :"... ,*.‘* * • '160,t' , , : I ,,,ItItettill'ilin!fittM•MItIft91,,ritt,ITTWIT. t1IMMI!,11,1TIIMITIIITP!III!“1"1”/MMIPTe91”1/IMM.,$1!•!1•9T,..1. . ,te• !WWI/MI.011.'1.1Tel.•,11,r/lItlfrnt_ .. ' • , , • • i I • 1. * . , a'nf nios'iner ,,Wpremlies'.- Ac AnthanTacano, : . , ; , _ _ , ,,,,,,, g ilt If t! 1,7 : MT UMMUMTI ,!rut f•If•TT•uf emmtrtmlirttruimr”.1!.‘,9•0,.!,,.!tp...111111'119M.e,t/It.p t.t•MIT1'1't I'V!tt ., ...,, ' , ' •. , . ' -11Icont is a corporate( signature of duly out orlzed officer, • ,.. , , . 1 . ,, ,,,e,m,,,,-,,,,,,-1,-”-,,,,tttt,,t 1!,,,,,,,•,,t,,,,- ,,, , , :. ,,,,,, • (Name. and title pf corporate officer) . , • I , , !. , . , • , 1 i i • • „ . _ . , • ,•' Builder s r-ocense NP? e•;ittiteeeetteee/eleee ette•etetteettleet , , .1 ' Big i_ 1 .' . ' numfoer's l-icense No, ,,,,,•,,,I,,,,,,,,,,tt,tt i,,,,,•,,, ,,,,r, , 1 I , , , „,, , ,., Electricians , i_icense Ho, smtit•tlem,/•tr,rnetrteltletml.??11•1 , - . - , . . ' • Other Trade's t_loense No ' ' . . I - -• . '. - • ' ' Amended , _ ,mtim,t,,,,,te.” ,,p.71pitliott/mt!,,,.. :, :. ,.._ _ _ _. , I ,. ri. " H '. 1 • -location pf lond on which frkeposed wilds will‘be'done, Map'Nod 14A-PtIvW101„,,,,,,i..4.0 t',.t i', Lot No. ,184- 1.tFT•••/•••!. .. . Brog.aWEtterS R94,4;.,,,...., ; 4 k - .rig.§satt Point, , ' Street add.Numher.ITT:;"1. lit'ffiriffilltettt‘tif,/,,t1,1;itTrillTlett 'tttilltf!iiiiriflift!. 9”i•-4ti•i•••””t..trIlmi•,--?,•,•*1 ' ITT! ' • . . . ,,,,„.• Municipality „;! , -,.•,,,,,,. ,,„...".:., „'-,.,t•.,,-.1: , J , . "-. ''' ...;...1/ fl ' .',''..*''. •' . . State existing use ancl occupancy ("If,premises and_intended USe and occupancy of proposed construction: . •,.. ; '14.,•,:„.•,-.,:•..: ,•,;'.- ,'„ , •••-••, :•,. ,• , . p,....„,....' - n -11 -1 .1 i • ,. ,., ' ori:Fx4iting use and'occupancy tr,,,,,•fier-rm,q.,;„%dfffihn,f,11/„'„,,,,,,,,•,•••,.. ,..'„ .:.,i-7,,,,,,',• ,,i,•,1•11•,..t.1•••• ••I II.•1 V •i ,,' ,, I ..,,:...,,,, • „„; „I ”, ',; 0: , .,.. ..!'':,,' • q '- ,X-:',16:0„.-..t.lt-4,W' • . , .' ..,. p" qt.. , 1 tc• • ,••• ., ,.•• ..,:,:;:•-• ' t• - " ..!. •••••,-, • " , 1, b,•••!-Intended use and occupancy:, .. ,,,.. ._ . Ole.I. I' it ,, . • • ". ..1!. •Iet • " . ' tIIIIIIIII•e!e•II°.!VII•e!* 11.:::,', - 0 ' ': s. ' ''' " %; ' % ', ' : ": ':. , , , ':i."?4,f.,;.'t1,,:1,11.? .ti'• - '0 ",i' .' '' 1,“, ' I • I , ' I 1 1 r, . .. 1 . , . ,. , .. ,,, .. , ,,' .1,- . , . , ,,,•,,.,,, . 2-,,,).4,-,,,•,.. , .4...'.,,Vz,`;''':1 '.,•',..','"..:',., • 1 , vi',I.k. .. trin.s =k ', -1).'N'-.1 '..„, ,* ' • . -. •. ' ' ) •,4 •,7,4,Thr•-••• i'i Mrikir•• ' •, •''' --•• •• .' . , , t,-,- ,; V, 11 ii',.'4; '-' , • ' ' .0•-.3-.'/If 14:''..24:1',.....g?'M. . :".,:.. • . •t i,' , ;.-.,, I/ :.;4-:,11L-,.P.4.!.j‘ -1.1 , .,; ,1 ,3 r; C-.',..t., 1-'a- ;. ' .0:•••li l'IY4,.!..lis7-.1',0N;;Itiff. ''ir.qPte.;',.11;" , ,- • ' . ,„ -:i; , ,. ,,!1:, i;;!! :'• 4, ;,.0.11. ... . . Alt! 1'','‘ '! -4'!'r•i- l':;r,„') „iqrAi.4.1„ -•-.,'I, . . . r •-. , -;.1.,10%ti t lk.r.'?, 7,1' -‘1,TiliiJ,‘,.:' i.!I.(,11";;-.Peti.1:.: ,,V,k1,404.1k0i7!'11:AltAtitli•CW.;; ,f , . ' , . . .. . , , 4 ..,,- V,i'il,;-!:•,.."-„.:: !..figi4t‘ V41.44.1444:314-groff etrmr.dpo,ON-0, . , , ' . .,. . _ . , . • ,...,•,.„-.,,,.11,,,,,I,,,,on,,,,,,,..- ' . . — — . It. • 7 - t.t. I , . : r _ . . - r ? - - • ,• ,_. 4 • I .•-••. t. . . •••••••• •••••.......... ••••...•-••••••••••4 •14.. , CI .. • LI• i : 1,r, I 1 1 0..•1. ,.....4 1 -; . l 1 . 1 .... I I 4e 1.I...W.1 . •• 't, .I•--• ,.., r-'•. r-.' i- c•••". \ . ,....r'ET2. 41:\;\•,ii=4' . Kt 4., , :.. - .. 1 tr' '•• ,,J •,'•. .\-',!' .....4 - r i a' •.:,'1‘ • C::3 :J.•:, . . • ••.,.._..,....,........_ \ii a 1. - . . " . L -.:... I.? L 1 ' i i I ...... ....... ..... \j....s.1 1 ...% . .—.. as• 1... ...... I ....,.. 1 1...... J rs,-1- ( ,r,, • -, I ,, A , ..Ai ,:. a.-... i••-...;";•,, .,-- .• 1 s.., -- , •-_. l ..... - .: . • . le _-- ..... - __- -- - ' ..-••-$;:.1-- -• . - P.A. • • . C.:.... ••• . .-I; .. . -.----- . •- •14 r— ----.—.—_ ...--1. --t• L, ) -.. •• ,V•.:". 9":-. \ 1 i I 4....• •.../I r 1 , i• .^, .1/41 •Iii ,C.:_..."\. . J .1., \ ••••••••..... • I la j......................................••••••• • 5 I ' '.,.• '.... • . - ss -, a _..,. -.;.,• • '"...,-.1 ', :-: ..i 1.... ::.•,, ..,..•:: , . - .1 -. , , , . ii.. .. , r,... . 1— . --v . •- .1 s 1. ' , ' t 1 r- — • . . ,..... •• . ./ •: •, .1 1,,,•J.1 ' • ... — , . .e...e f 1'',1 ' "•'.':....- '‘. ... ..... ..,1.4 .—.......1.1.•• ••••............... I \\ ..• Ai \ ', ' i i \-..,,-' I.----1 '7 -%• 7 •, i --j . . , I , ..,• . i I I A A / 1 :\ lA.• i ...• I „ I ' I A-"8 —r—s • 7 ` - • i 'r'5• ,; t -5r- r...-') IT, •.:1 1,:-.\`...:11 I., -,:..-.., ,, ..., "-et , :„..,.••., . /.1._ FORM NO. 2 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE SOUTHOLD, R. Y. BUILDING PERMIT - (THIS PERMIT MUST BE KEPT ON THE PREMISES UNTIL FULL COMPLETION OF THE WORK AUTHORIZED) ` , N° 8721 Z Dat/4 / • , Permission is hereby granted to:,/1 off pitf el,r-414,1+10 ‘Itte • - to _ •Or.i rwtott at premises located at 7544" ?„. .-e.t.:aware444)40/ 04041 k.fref. *pro2 ecfre,ie'r ler/ atfory lac-A pursuant to application dated- ?4,, f c..f71) 197‘.., and approved by the Building Inspector. • aira Fee $.K.t,r? 1 , ,d .ete4gttapx Building Inspector • • • r , FORM NO. 4 • I . • TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT ` ' Town Clerk's Office Southold, Certificate' Of _Occupancy ' • No. 1/7103. . . . . Date - A tg: : .1 s. . ., 19?6. . THIq CERTIFIES that the building located at ; raft4 ratexis.141 - Street Map No.Ns s s'.. .pt;r. . Block No. Lot No. 181 - Uwtch oue conforms substantially to the Application for Building Permit,heretofore filed in this office dated . . . . . + n . .@., .19.76. pursuant to which Building Permit No. • -8720- dated 872 -dated f '•41:+13. . . .1 . . ., 1 , .; was issued, and conforms to all of the require- ments of the applicable provisions of the law. The occupancy for which this certificate is issued is . .P 'tote. .(1t}0. f.14/43.Y. 440,1. •; 4.VW).. frd41.j .:Qi -. (PAW.). . . - The certificate is issued to ��, ., t1thc 1 .?j a +a.tio . . . Amon, (owner, lessee or tenant) - of the aforesaid building. Suffolk County, Department of Health Approval fl.*h, • UNDERWRITERS CERTIFICATE,,No.N,l 4 HOUSE NUMBER . . . . . . . 8.0 . . . . Street . .Br,dadwa.bevs. Raad,•. . .Na" ,a• . Pie .Cutchagtie Oetj(LA ft, Building;Inspector • I • e •r • � - . TOWN OF SOUTHOLD PROPERTY RECORD CARD OWNER STREET ��� VILLAGE . G 1 Q/1 n * C-hr �v CJ DIST. SUB. LOT ��I - • i v to SOK) 4--, ,, d W cam P'$-a^ C 4/74C /1 d v£ 7 /V a J'f d u �D/n t-C/( 1! �!-,1 i Zia, FORMER OWNER N- /� E ACR. � I G n� �g,Ats' o- S W TYPE OFIBUILDING. , M. flie4i/eI— A,�'5a14, , RES. ,g/v SEAS. VL. FARM COMM. CB. MISC. Mkt. Value LAND; IMP. TOTAL. DATE REMARKS / � - y gy 4`, �a u/ M,'kir„d` 0//1 �' (�Qd - - me -r�.%a �!�! fir.', ( AN/re' r3d2 00 yd Q0 ✓, V / ��3 (,1 a:r- ..r'a ee Ql ` ' i ' 1 �” 0 c? asp v - 5a �-o ,��- '.- ,- ` -� - y ,� 'a, /kc�d`-Pd`�, Goo ,lbu�> o /�i`�/Q��d��, �/edVe{-, dam'!° Q Pi,rac�lnQ. /s—e1 b 3 7 CIO . ',z o a. / .2/2,5—Po // y ,�/ 4`51,2 9(,Z, it ,'/ct �,��-R.a ��`� C, 49 Od=` i Pr, /S c o d Pa o 5S 60 / V/ x',77 _7//2/76 /3,�v. P--� 87z1 z 73 t11LM C P '.��-Z -71 944/7d -ACJ U1CO� ao o ?i•S ac .,-r U oe aziezAror er. Bea 7 ' AGE BUILDING CONDITION - 3131/00_ L a_lop 3_ & Beaks ti-td-P. -� 7U .r' I ( `�' b .l��wsvr, �w •_- .2i/7i soy NEW - NORMAL BELOW ABOVE _ FARM , Acre Value Per Value - Acre ;R\moi S • Tillable 1 - Tillable 2. - - • Tillable 3 ' Woodland'- (,i, oodland'- Swampland - FRONTAGE ON WATER 76 7't, on La- wd I f; C n v e , Brushland FRONTAGE ON ROAD /,2c. an Ai.-oad t,/a7`ec koa d House Plot DEPTH J /2ff . v " • BULKHEAD Total ^ - ..-- - DOCK • - FORM NO. 2 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE SOUTHOLD, N. Y. BUILDING PERMIT, (THIS PERMIT MUST BE KEPT ON THE PREMISES UNTIL FULL COMPLETION OF THE WORK AUTHORIZED) O Z r' N• 8 21 Date / , 19/ Permission is hereby granted to (;:;:zVeiTie.,w • ,. - ". _� 1 `!•r' _ )1/-(:>• -(: • /i/1; at premises located at "45/4 ' '.." .r.`:�r i �l 'EY!. ✓ zfre. /44.-A 417 "r1)261ar pursuant to application dated .. " _ , 19Za ..., and approved by the Building Inspector. Fee $.e.:^rr' J, a/2,6/7 Ae40(0444. Building Inspector FORM NO. 4 • TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT Town Clerk's Office Southold, N. Y. Certificate Of Occupancy • No. 221103 Date A : . . .18. . ., 1976. . THIS,CERTIFIES that the building located at . . . arasdwa.teStreet Map No.Na as. .!t*. . Block No. Lot No, 181 Cutciwgue conforms substantially to the Application for Building Permit heretofore filed in this office dated July. , .8.., .19,.16. pursuant to which Building Permit No. . .8721 z. dated 4%4_12_, i 76. .; was issued, and conforms to all of the require- ments of the applicable provisions of the law. The occupancy for which this certificate is issued is . . ' #. o . f . -y' .410.344.ng.W. t . .d4 .ti.c . MEMO The certificate is issued to 41,0 .A t4hort4:'.Pjaacaatao . . . :mer (owner, lessee or tenant) of the aforesaid building. Suffolk County Department of Health Approval N.A. _ UNDERWRITERS CERTIFICATE No.)10R HOUSE NUMBER . . . . . . . 8.0 . . . . Street . . Aadvta.ters. Road:. . . PP.t. .Cutohogue 04,K4.A. Building;Inspector d ' �l r/ -`.-: f\ia. rvi .e- 4 cI v-e SS . Q. i.,, __r a-- (:: l ' --e WO .1az.z. 61 i-/-" , ,p , L/ - .((.5-"C:) Ita-s -- /1- .._ / ' 2 )-6 • .I.1...., • - / /_,.., , /11" • -.N.ostea‘...-.A.—.. , , a. ir 6„- - 1z-12-t) , ---61- 71E ati 7.- .........„ 25" Syb cdAs ad C.,t -r1 te -F:. iiivsc. Gv5AARNAci-R /c2 curt-q-14.0 -- . ' ,. , '''' 41? i•-• , - " ' 07,,,r-60 y,,,,,, j__ (e___4_, _ . i . wow 2" 'r 4/4-s3-4./ /4--- - ..____ ._ ___ / odic 1 _- . /,, cz , e- _ 02-/943TY444111-2alia/ /14000"/Aiy ,,/, ___ /(6* .- ./.. ../ ./ n , x ,...10-- V • , q. • ,__ _ ____ --____________-_ s c 1 ^z 1 , , s �`e April 14,2002 'te � �,A To the Southold Town Board of Appeals; �'��� r 6;' `�` 0 Re; the application of Christine and Glenn Dawson for a C of 0 for an accessory cottage at 150 Broadwaters Road, Cutchogue Parcel 1000-104-10-8 We believe the Variance for a C of 0 should not be granted under Article XXIV Section 241 G The two abutting neighbors, Bruno Cipitalli and Bob and Barbara Ringewald can attest to the fact that this cottage was not in use for at least 5 years prior to the Dawsons' purchase. It was in such disrepair that the Real Estate agents had difficulty showing it. As to the information given in the application--here are 3 quotes: QUESTIONAIRE FOR FILING WITH YOUR ZBA APPLICATION question I "Please list present use or operations conducted at this parcel " answer- "single family residential use " "proposed use"-"same" This is clearly not true.There has been a large "FOR RENT" sign on Broadwaters for 2 years. There have been continuous ads running in at least 2 community newspapers- The Suffolk Times and a Garden City paper- The ad advertises 2 cottages, sleeping 14 etc. Clearly this is a business enterprise. IS THIS PROPERTY WITHIN 300 FEET OF A TIDAL WETLAND? answer-"no". The cottage is 58 feet from the high tide mark. AREA VARIANCE REASONS (3) "There will be no change to the neighborhood" There has already been an extremely negative change affecting the quality of life and the ability to enjoy our homes on lovely Broadwaters Cove. Each weekend as many as 5 vans pull in and disgorge several families . We are subjected to boomboxes blaring loud music, barking dogs, roaring dirt bikes (mini motorcycles) and screaming children who use the 2 nearby docks as their own- despite the installation of a locked gate on one- they simply climb over it! If there are too many people, they set up tents- all on a lot less that 80 ' wide. Recently there was trouble with the septic system- people just used the outdoors- resulting in festoons of toilet paper on neighbors' docks. The police have been called many times to reduce the noise level. The ad has been pulled for a couple of weeks but, according to the Suffolk Times, is set to run continuously again as of 4/18 unless notified. Obviously the Dawsons intend to run their property as a motel with or without a C of 0. despite the injunction on the application which clearly states "No building shall be occupied or used in whole or in part for any purpose whatever untilk a Certificate of Occupancy shall have been granted by the Building Inspector." We further believe that granting the C of 0 would establish a legal 2-family residence in 1 -family residential zone. We beg you not to grant this variance or any C of 0. - 4 y • T l.'L,.Y 's ♦ , �� :'`‘....,...±,-;*„..'", W,!IL,. 1iRF•t '^i . ' „,.._-..r •••1',- -.-;, -'--..._ ! , .::. IL', ' !.r!' ‘• * JY i ,�6wi.: - )f : ,,p �, t ysa. 11',"4".. ...3",,t . Y: '-. ± fes �fv r:. li .`--iK s'�.. ..:,`W.{ sty 'f - '-41}.4•-•,-. ..-`.'--:.`i.'' 1..3 1i..i. 4�a'Mc - "{ n¢' ' �+"„' ! , �� r " :a �. ' _z - ..-A ..' t y'4—il. ;; •P.sr..,...-,4,*��� .c•a .q` . ' lam•'= , ,,_r"�• s ` y� -' ,, ,e -=j, , r S `.. • - � ?� . ' *: '''-Pam'. ., `0`'a s , ,1 r ,ate'^ ---t .. : , .--:i- ' �,y -rte` 'N. - - , .-- ,e, ;'r -• _ -e•---.-.•Irv: i!$ t. -• 44''' ` `---.4 _ - 1/4 .: 1)71,7!„%-:.-,F':”_,A.'.\. <•• `! r- -, 4,-, "'+ 4 :"� ye`1'.' 11 S 16 tU IL_ l (2-S 2 'At" 1 1 T WM i V' /' ark LI 2 .11 r • am I t f ;y • _1.,,rl�,. 'r fir - - , � - ski _ P - �--' s 6 i i ' 4 -•-• y1 � �', _Kr`. - K "-• Yf+�K _ k,i(t<ED''l 19-I, (4- L. --0(1--i -i1> VI R- l( .� /4-1-1(.3I. C-ELKS 0 / ?R_6 re / t__( n1 G F-O / 3 / f i r 1 11 )1 FORM NO. 3 � '"1 i �-�C� 4 0 EC 19 2001 f ; f)1 l TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT 1 SOUTHOLD,N.Y. NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL DATE: December 14, 2001 TO: Stephen R. Angel A/C G. & C. Dawson 150 Broadwaters Road Cutchogue,NY 11935 Please take notice that your application dated April 6, 2000 ° For a Certificate of Occupancy of a Pre-existing accessory non-conforming cottage at Location of property 150 Broadwaters Road, Cutchogue County Tax Map No. 1000 Section 104 Block 10 Lot 8 Is returned herewith and disapproved on the following grounds Accessory, non-conforming cottage is non-habitable based upon the Building Inspector's housing code inspection report of 4/13/00 and pursuant to Article XXIV 100-241- G which states: • "Whenever a nonconforming use of building or premises has been discontinued for a period of more than two years or has been changed to a higher classification or to a conforming use, anything in this Article to the contrary notwithstanding, the nonconforming use of such building or premises shall no longer be permitted unless a variance therefore shall have been granted by the Board of Appeals." Authorized Signature 1 - - ' ' DI l. 1C3 G W ESSEKS, HEFTER & ANGEL ii 3, .r COUNSELORS AT LAW t ?nryI 108 EAST MAIN STREET P. O. Box 279 BLDG. O`A'T . RIVERHEAD, N.Y. 11901-0279 TOWN . s�� „'f, WILLIAM ". T}iO�,q (631) 369-1700 WATER MILL OFFICE MARCIA Z. HEFTER MONTAUK HIGHWAY STEPHEN R.ANGEL TELECOPIER NUMBER (631) 369-2065 P. O. BOX 570 JANE ANN R KRATZ WATER MILL, N.Y 11976 JOHN M WAGNER (631) 726-6633 WILLIAM POWER MALONEY CARMELA M. DI TALIA December 11, 2001 ANTHONY C. PASCA NICA B. STRUNK John M. Boufis, Building Inspector Town of Southold 53095 Main Road P. O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Re: Application of Glenn and Christine Dawson for certificate of occupancy SCTM No. 1000-104-10-08 Dear Mr. Boufis: Enclosed please find a copy of your undated letter which we received on 10/25/01, which states "You have the option to appeal this decision through the Zoning Board of Appeals." We filed an application to the Zoning Board of Appeals on 12/5/01. Today, we received a reply from the Board of Appeals. This reply seeks official action, a C.O., or a notice of disapproval in order to entertain the appeal. Pursuant to Section 100-271a of Southold's Zoning Code, the Zoning Board hearc and decides appeals from "any order. requirement. decision or determination made by the Building Inspector." Kindly issue appropriate official action as contemplated by the Zoning Code as soon as possible so that we may submit it to the Board of Appeals. ESSEKS, HEFTER & ANGEL COUNSELORS AT LAW December 11, 2001 Page 2 On behalf of applicants, we reserve all rights, including the right to bring an appropriate proceeding to compel the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Building Department to process this application as required by law. R q.ectfuil5ur A c SRA:mb E4 R. ANGEL Enc. cc : Zoning Board of Appeals, Town of Southold Via Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested Mr. & Mrs. Glenn Dawson CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED /0 0 0 /64. a - TOWN OF SOUTHOLD PROPERTY RECORD CARD /� OWNER STREET /5 Q VILLAGE DIST. SUB. LOT */(7/ ` .x t )a u 5()}1 r 0 � �e!l 4 P t-3 l e t/74c d c y "-- 6 / ► O f f a v 1`D/fri 74- FORMER OWNER N E ACR. / �- I TYPE OF BUILDING weiri Ver.' l4 t-i' a�DesuO RES. "1/6) SEAS. VL. FARM COMM. CB. MISC. Mkt. Value LAND IMP. TOTAL DATE REMARKS/z 6.7 252 d P X11 rd ee. aAlu �M,', t . n ... Jd . �A, .. I.fyr Wed v. 0 3� ® Li Yd 6 94 '° 7� f/2,01, ' �h c�1r} a Q e At,W1-ed M, (Jdo44bU e 7L0 114 /Qrett/i;r fYedV'e 1 R C7 .3.5-6 C 6-.0 J C ////,/, ;< ‘//9/0,1-4Al, „/�v0�d nf0JJr v�e d ve r td; P�'�'aca h o. 5-6 3 7 oo .4�,2 00 / 2/25d�0 //�� de�4���"P� r yeZ9( ., ,�vf�/a/ a� Kofi/i �� `.1 ,C, T-60 Sc o o Slavf /2. � - Ft _ ? ,� v / V' /77 7/ /� /3L o. CZ, 7�/ z 8 / p c K t . c%I `h 6/7 is,/0 oo o ac a /Iuk2L.sv 7�f AGE BUILDING CONDITION 3/3'/oO- Lo3- Gihtoaks f � ,6atos,y► co-r= 287, 57v NEW NORMAL BELOW ABOVE FARM Acre Value Per Value \ w Acre Tillable 1 Tillable 2 fz; Tillable 3 Woodland Swampland FRONTAGE ON WATER 76 yr4 f 1-u, b,r , d I.vd : tett G A 4T Brushland FRONTAGE ON ROAD /,27 i ,s y--a d 6�0 House Plot DEPTH LS-Y.2 f1L f-• v� BULKHEAD .rA'a Total "` f-` __ DOCK F:' ---- ------------- w emmumak 414... n ► _ - . • - , . . 't',• , ,' e : .; . . ., -- r� .� ,; , COLOR `. -s d 5 Rosi' ,. ` tea. • ,- 1, 1% �.5 ,1 ;1:1., l, �;r� ,�{ rt 1.! t » iti17 X ,fes �f- Mil1 j TRIM Go as /ar 1 i£,* III Li ri tee , .. - : I lig" J6vZ� 4 O. _ /c j ";;k. 1 "' 4 1/ /S1z3 I a LI /may 43 - 3i- i M. Bldg.g ,,./, t• 2. ,,•' r. 33 { - Foundation e , Bath / Dinette ` f'r"/ �D Extension ,� Z k =GAO y'f(o Z ,5 c: ci asement �,, Floors K. Extensiojn] - y / _ ,/ Ext. Walls / Interior Finish '.JY..-,,./ LR. i ' T/�I //� • i�/ .-� '- i,„....,../.. (1 A.L1.,/ .. „. :. - turd ' Y,; ExtensionPy Q � _,/ r,- y 7a Fire Place 914 Heat DR. Type Roof4-,s '-�a,, Rooms 1st Floor BR. Porch / v x / - / C a /00 /6 a �vRecreation Room Rooms 2nd Floor FIN. B. 9)ece /$ x2,3 - / /5 7 .ZS /d 3 D mer *;, V ;i; B�y g r/� / 28 1 Driveway w'. Z r I& /o,K3 =22-6 j il a //2- ' Patio - Total 37 kg i k /a o o - /O _ 1,1 - e TOWN OF SOUTHOLD PROPERTY RECORD CARD / _ 6n = QWN3 ER STREET / VILLAGE DIST. SUB. LOT Ale®d / 'Q , . (re/b i va , e V L /3 --a 1 Lv a P 1-.1U C I/iC /4 e v v 7 A coY vI PI--,0", FORMER OWNER �� �� b °�" 74- . � Zhc. �1 N E ACR. / , JI. �°iSQcz- -oI 4: A'.4.2';" . S W TYPE OF BUILDING ' RES. . SEAS. VL. FARM COMM. CB. MISC. Mkt. Value o'iw LAND IMP. TOTAL DATE REMARKS �� y� , //.Z/�y By �e¢� pay +Mi'U*crl� �rno�(��-rrJ fnt,1�rl ', adicu Q d , /. ..021/(1 / /h .1 -J-/z, C� 6 a , i-ef.id 32 d Q ydOQ � � ��� �y � lkc`�d�-Pa`��j, G Fav;�� �o �,�a� �, � N-aVQl-; ,_. 1 ‘ 0 0 3 So a 5o 0 c //2/2dO .,// '.�•6.�s' �//9���'fa /oi, z%l�ro 1f�d mio,r, a/24 ve t-- �� s td `Pr'?'&ca,y Q. /S-41 6 d ?QO 44"-,2Oo ///X7 iej4j/fir,*529t�Z, ev��// a 4a 1/'` e)/7, .f.-C, i Gd=s' dPO o / Vii/77 7//2./7c 64D./Pc,� 87zi z 80/L b p4:cx E �r-1944/7 racid/d .' d'/OGO //'sCeca.rr 0 o _raj AGE BUILDING CONDITION , .t; NEW NEW NORMAL BELOW ABOVE FARM Acre Value Per Value n e L_I Z0),c �� 3s\--)- c/S - AcreTillable 1 I. Si c�7) C k-.. i.,\,,,, ,,6_,L4 \ ,„ Tillable 2 '�1 Tillable 3 G,�16 vi . _ (5, P al1 ,i Woodland GokutS< 51 _ Swampland ?' FRONTAGE ON WATER 76 7E7, 6 n 1-"u a d Lv d ¢°N �aa, u Brushland , ,—,Q*\\J -IS FRONTAGE ON ROAD /2‘ / 6 n /y,,5d ci Ga,,,..,,/,.,,t,, kv a c House Plot DEPTH `f-?/2 J'iL 11 +o ,,, , � � BULKHEAD 4., Total " 'in* �`" DOCK -- kt: . 7MIEN...,1, ‘.‘‘. filt _ '''•--,.. .• .-, ' , ..1,,,, , t 'H %eil :, :.11r , -- / / . .• .. 16'. •-ii,,I ,,,, •• --- , , • --.1,1.,,,J ..,,, Vii, ii --.• . - Ji.1. :(... * ' • • %.....If•• . ''.-140.73f11,11P, . _ . rz- to, -, -----,, ,-...„ ...tri::::!*:,:4i.:X::+ iii:v....,..' *:"-”,.. 4 •• .7 r-rog, ii.tivo6r., . ,,•::',1/4:0F4 COLOR 1 ..0..s:- ..,7- •,',',J,; -1....--- Firs 1._ •71 , ,_. ,''''''.: A, l' ,i: C't nitior -R„ _ ,, , , Pi •. ----,f-e•-e,..4, j /.71/(4-1 i i :1.?1,:gji • t .„ ;..•'.1 ',: ...'t --, As, • - -.• •4 ..1 .1. ill pi 111 [ j ii ti... TRIM I-1 ' , 6.. I a: .-.••, - ....__ -t. 1,111i • , i! I r--,•,.„ ,, , Li . . iti -9/t/ ii 1",,-24 - -L — ik A4 Y 1 ' t" ii.!•''G -:_-__- _. , . _ _ - '4, ,-.... g, - NI 3 0 4 1 • .. 4, -147 1 10' • , t , 7 gr.k „it • - , ' , /K-(2.3 I f i ; •it/ I ... / -/C' I o k 4 - I , /6„. 4 /0 IT c e ,-- - . 1. 3 • A- ,A 1 ti . ---- . ! _ I .=1 M. Bldg. Foundation Bath / Dinette ..,. 0/ 33 4' ' Extension Floors ,. 1 c 1 .1 22 v 3.-c, : 6(3, tb7 95”6 z a.....••'' .. v 9 d Ise m e nt '744, K. — ..0 Extensio,41: /4 )i,2.4./, 3 g. Ext. Walls /.........-c -- . Interior Finish ./ LR. ,.. 7 ..... 111, Extension LI .-1--;_v br 7 .) " Fire Place 114) Heat it .. DR. — 2 i Type Roof5-,.; ,-, ,L Rooms 1st Floor BR. .--:1 1-^1 t /-, • - / ) PorcN4/ / 0 X //o •-. / C 0 ecreation Room Rooms 2nd Floor FIN. B. 713"Ir Il x 2..3 =- //5/ 7 ,2s Vmer B Driveway 17131-51Y / 2 f") Ged4treCte.1 _. , 1 /6 3 2-6 j il 4 _ — Patio O. B. . Total 3 7 ci' / :4 k t -.... \-.... c 'a ,......V ! ..''' I '' b m 6 e _ TOWN OF SOUTHOLD PROPERTY RECORD CARD ii - 8 OWNER STREET /53 VILLAGE DIST. SUB. LOT /V G I en rl 4 Chi-1.511W— ; , - h . h- - • L au)SOY A-6 ei IA, i-e�-.A 441 e//lc i4 v47 v 7 Ad.,ss a a A t7 to/e/i /q--4 ,...4±.L FORMER OWNER N E ACR. / I I �, tU 1'S • S W TYPE OF BUILDING RES. "/O SEAS. VL; FARM COMM. CB. MISC. Mkt. Value LAND IMP. TOTAL DATE REMARKS //2 ‘5/ B d ! L , q i/ E � LA, '��r . t � �1 �./e! +2 i �A�c/[_u Li t ,, O (yQd 32_ 46 Y6d(� ":1-i,97/ , �.i3O'' 'y /h ar-,-ra q e, Atc 1,—• , Goodl, re Ito 1✓`.Ydt-,, :i e,a, r I � 00 3S'ou 6"0v o ,// ,,,�� .V/9/�c.rJa //d, y124.-1# %v0, amo,r, Pkedvef-- YU Pc'raca4o- /s Q 6 3 7 6o �4"02.Ob 2/2J/?O 1/1/7 0/ 124.—r `y29o, etwid 4 75 tt, Z.,C, Qd '. 0S c 00 ,3c(76 0 SS. CO / /11/77 7//2/70 /QLD. Pee -87v z a o,L4 cK T c . IV 9'/7i0,' /I"1v;060 ?,'se.a.n a 71-o Gel zva.i 'gce,,,8() e (7 AGE BUILDING CONDITION 313100- LIa opdtt3- 6eAboaks -P bait)56A _ 27 21- NEW NORMAL BELOW ABOVE FARM Acre Value Per Value Acre 1 Tillable 1 Tillable 23 Tillable 3 Woodland y7/ = S'54) • Swampland FRONTAGE ON WATER 76 vrf-, 64 L,-a, I iii-a-/�testi'' C d 1.., , 3rushland FRONTAGE ON ROAD /,2," d o 3..,0 a 044 G,Se pi , leo a d House Plot DEPTH Lf--1/2-,P: A2yeaa. __ ;.., emmh, BULKHEAD rotar'= `' '"t ._ __ DOCK .- •••101.7 u,......, I ''- '!..gft&"-..,- ::„,'...i;i'f.•••i .''gk br,,;,-,::k'.i:,"I'11 .--.`'-:-j • -. ..i...-- Itrie.:4;4' H al'AP!....- Ai. l'.14 f . ..,;-•`•••l'. •Vre-',. .: • ;''':4'i..'i" ,--;,!4-,,,i..`1 :":*I. .5c1Z,'17.4 %.;':•-'4 . ---Alik (I* 1 .,i' ••••:''-.. !,' '''!-c"..;:"-±F.5... !itiadr.4...- i•-'- -j' rit %Pe'A7 \ . . . _ t.,.:_;-:::,;k',';' .fr-.'- .::.-:'74.-•'',# ---' -4,7. A'''' — •,-;.--,e• --' _i,e, -.. 114Nri!;1.1 COLOR . ,,,, — -----.., , .. •„. . f',-.7fi. , 'S ' i:4.1•11:14:: , . .'.:.; 0 il , - „..._ .. . ... — a 2?-20-://- ; , ....--....... ••,-. .... .-.,,,,,,, i f I , . — -,..•• ,, I .... _ . . .._ . ,..• , 49, ' , / TRIM . i - - •- _.... _ - . ; i - If 141 7 l / GdA471A7 — A ,i De C K.<-1' ' 4 i. to t Oa f 73 1 k -I/ 0 Pelti<-11 ' - ., __ --- '•• • I! • , • • Liee4, '\ M. Bldg. A,, 2. .41.: /3 Foundation 4 ja Bath / Dinette Extension 22_ v 3;,t, ::4 4 0 9?6 z - -,s1 1,,- ?411Floors K.asement '74.4, • ti,,,,,.....,,i, _ ..----_, -4-' - ExtensioN, x 2...,/., Ext. Walls ,./ ,..," , Interior Finish LR.toof ,,,/ 914 Extension p x 4// g t / 4/f ...-r5'SP 9 2.. '7/1/Fire Place Heat '•••••, ' DR. ," Type Roof741)/14‘ Rooms 1st Floor BR. , 0 „..a.. 1...e. e:--./ : Porcl ,// / 0 X /6 "---- / ‘ 6 /60 /4, z) "r‘creation Room Rooms 2nd Floor FIN. B. r3ece i'g x 2,3 = • // f 7 /2-5- ye] 3 Vmer v , Driveway FB .,z-.,...„.7,. ., E../ _ _ ,,..,,, ' Z: Gekeecte.s. il L-1 # " // 1-- Patio O. B. '1 . _. Total . . ,...„ _... .,,, UILDING PEPARTHENT41111 ' TOWN OF SOUTHOLD _ HOUSING CODE INSPECTION REPORT LOCATION:0 400e44.4V25;;; number & street) .(municipal' y SUBDIVISION MAP NO. LOT (s) NAME OF OWNER (s) ,R. C •; OCCUPANCY �A- • (type) (owner-tenant) i . :_ ADMITTED BY: n.- • 4 ACCODIPANIED BY: KEY AVAILABLE SUFF. CO. TAX HAP NO./ V— /(7 / 7_. / SOURCE OF REQUEST: /I'/ L.�L A11.4.1c5.22"- �1 ��° //mac DATE: y4/44;) -'�` DWELLING: TYPE OF CONSTRUCTIONibi /(j)( ''; o f) STORIES / EXITS r /J FOUNDATION di & // CELLAR CRAWL SPACE it• `® TOTAL ROOMS: 1ST FLR. 171 2ND FLR. 3RD FLR. BATHROOM (s) TOILET ROOM (s) UTILITY ROOM ---- PORCH TYPE DECK, TYPE PATIO, TYPE ..----- BREEZEWAY FIREPLACE GARAGE DOMESTIC HOTWATER , Rited0 TYPE HEATER AIRCONDITIONING TYPE HEAT Sys itWARM AIR L.0"....-- HOTWATER OTHER: ACCESSORY STRUCTURES: GARAGE, TYPE OF CONST. STORAGE, TYPE�jC9NST. SWIMMING POOL , GUEST, TYPE CONST./l 0wr. 4 .,� OTHER: ,. VIOLATIONS: CHAPTER 45 N.YT7�1TE UNIFORM FIRE PRE ON & BUILDING CODE LOCAT P. .;' DESCRIPTION • 4- Z �) \ ART. SEC. PS6 '' ' `yrs - ` AID f k �1v ,. .) 9 Lokoz.t.frt . 4041 (4t1A=4,44-ti-tr /z-d, ) \ ' ,,,tr - , 0 4 }4 44% ___.--r4rZe.,- --0P__•_.,29/,..-.g- i Gly.. \.41J _1......r..-- ..---e.,..- 4/0-" . • 0,,,04/ , / �`�J1'� J i / _ ..- S ' REMARKS: A INSPECTED BY: 1/43 DATE ON INSPECTION ` , � `: ,. 04. TIME START )14 :17-END /i ,S a CHRISTINEBL`pA ON. . - ,• -- 11 3710T .ST.' _,,x ,:' rf .�. 1 i li CARLE:PL'-'ACE �Y 115 - _ - _ - ioei2yo+. N 14' - - x DATE` .. ';I PAY TO �/^i'I � - , .._,. _- ,_ $ , I APR '"'6 ORDER O 12j ,, ;, :': "----,,,,--''-1-' -- ,- } AP�1` ' II MNl��yy�p D _ Incwaoa li ll� ,(�,y7 d ,�„�' _ - • •y••• o�9lI on EaQ •••••.�•,,,._. ` HUNTINOTON OFPV ioi4r ",11iii��cp'_ -----.a.<. 7-,, ,� - .. ' _ •,<. ) • bmitted to the building' � - - # - HUNTINGTON,NEW YORK 11743' '' _:''' / Po >v-;,.1 (J��rye :e.',,P-- SV_ ', _ _ �' + :ldiugs property lines, '- 1*p,?4OO LO88-1;',9,,?;OO.,Sg 'I' ` - _ _..ratiii „ . ;�,` gage-disposal(S-9 form) . ' 'S 2 ;3 4j . OHARIAND . , „ ' i , _ > ___ w Jerwriters. 4. Sworn statement rromr piumt, L'�« o,.,....� . ,' .- ...` `-`'' ''' Ped in system contains less than 2/10 of 1% lead. 5. Commercial building, industrial building, multiple residences and similar buildings and installations, a certificate of Code Compliance from architect or engineer responsible for the building. %.. 6. Submit Planning Board Approval of completed site plan requirements. B. For existing buildings (prior to April 9, 1957) non-conforming uses, or buildings and '-'pre-existing" land uses: 1. Accurate survey of property showing all property lines, streets, building and unusual natural or topographic features. 2. A properly completed application and a consent to ,inspect signed by the applicant. If a Certificate of Occupancy is denied, the Building Inspector shall state the . - . _ therefor in writing to the applicant. C. Fees 1. Certificate of Occupancy - New dwelling $25.00, Additions to dwelling $25.00, Alterations to dwelling $25.00, Swimming pool $25.00, Accessory building $25.00, Additions to accessory building $25.00. Businesses $50.00. _ 2. Certificate of Occupancy on Pre-existing Building - $100.00 3. Copy of Certificate of Occupancy - .2 4. Updated Certificate of Occupancy - $50.00 5. Temporary Certificate of Occupancy - Residential $15.00, Commercial $15.00 Date e_a_ 3 , ZOO New Construction Old Or Pre-existing Building V Location of Property ISO AeO 1 Dwiri` .S NSA) 196r AIV House No. Street Hamlet Onwer or Owners of Property L6i/�N <H-se-cST N-e DIN'S SO Ai County Tax Map No 1000, Section —113-1 Block /6 Lot OE Subdivision 1W Filed Map Lot Permit No Date Of Permit Applicant ulth Dept. Approval Underwriters Approval 'ng Board Approval :or: Temporary' Certificate Final Certicate c .,ubmit ted L • OFFICE OF BOARD OF APPEAl_s Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road Southold, NY 11971 765-1809 tel. 765-9064 ZBA fax. ` REPLY FORM Dated: /02/7/0 I TO: !!!J e va /6$__-/0— CC°./vatt)..i4D0 ( ) Your application is incomplete for the reasons noted below. ( ) It is requested that the following be forwarded as soon as possible(within about 7 days, if feasible). The advertising deadline is 22 days before the meeting date and the information is necessary for review and advertising purposes. You may forward the information by fax at 765- . 9064, however, please send the original by mail. Thank you. (4 The appeal was not filed within 60 days of the decision of the Building Inspector. ix Missing information -please see missing information checked below. Please submit all the documentation,together with information noted below. If you have any questions, please call us at 765-1809. Thank you. • Information requeste,d: JpQ Notice of Disapproval issued by the Building Inspector after his/h r review of this particular project maps b., ( ) Check payable to the Town of Southold totaling $ ( ) Signature and notary public information are needed. ( ) An original and six prints of the map were not included. (Preparer's name and date of preparation to be shown.) ( ) Setbacks must be shown for the subject building to all property lines, with preparer's name. ( ) Six(6)set's of a diagram showing the doors, number of stories, and average height (from natural grade). ( ) Ownership Search back to April 23, 1957 for the subject parcel and all adjoining parcels, certified by a title insurance company, and insuring the Town for$25,000. ( ) Copies of all current deeds and tax bills of the parcels back to ('/(), Other: -tea' /� bum -e ,%Aa.0-a-) !a� /Jt e 7 P (J x�- a<2J a_et, C,0 ja,suitAce 0.0 z- OFFICE OF ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 53095 Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Email: Linda.Kowalski@TownofSouthold.ny.us or Paula.Quintieri@TownofSouthold.ny.us (631) 765-1809 fax (631) 765-9064 ()1/216/ lQ =co z„,( a _ �� OFFICE OF BOARD OF APPALS Southold s Southold Tows I • 53095 Main R. Southold,NY 11971 765-1809 tel. 765-9064 ZBA fax. REPLY FORM Dated: 67-NCI TO: A.,arzf ) L(y , / — CC°.£CtttJ.Ld7t ) (be) Your application is incomplete for the reasons noted below. ( ) It is requested that the following be forwarded as soon as possible(within about 7 days, if feasible). The advertising deadline is 22 days before the meeting date and the information is necessary for review and advertising purposes. You may forward the information by fax at 765- 9064,however,please send the original by mail. Thank you. ( 4 The appeal was not filed within 60 days of the decision of the Building Inspector. Ix Missing information-please see missing information checked below. Please submit all the documentation,together with information noted below. If you have any questions,please call us at 765-1809. Thank you. Information requested: IX) Notice of Disapproval issued by the Building Inspector after his/her review of this particular project maps .04. .,L- ( ) Check payable to the Town of Southold totaling$ ( ) Signature and notary public information are needed. ( ) An original and six prints of the map were not included. (Preparer's name and date of preparation to be shown.) ( ) Setbacks must be shown for the subject building to all property lines,with preparer's name. ( ) Six(6)set's of a diagram showing the doors,number of stories,and average height (from natural grade). ( ) Ownership Search back to April 23, 1957 for the subject parcel and all adjoining parcels,certified by a title insurance company,and insuring the Town for$25,000. ( ) Copies of all current deeds and tax bills of the parcels back to (\4)Other: Atu GGn-da d fD %i) 1n1,6/1-? 'tom CI" C Lu ii' ja e ) I-c;> /!1.1 60;0-1a-Q a e oxo C,©. i 0AJ 141/0( - i:�40-al /c.'o "` >ddl ei (.f~7 l 2/Lai/o/ — a1 &e , — c,19- - - Q a aCsj C�v . -)ta-e-e) - 'r CLQ- ID3. ESSEKS, HEFTER & ANGEL COUNSELORS AT LAW 106 EAST MAIN STREET P. O Box 279 RIVERHEAD, N.Y. 11901-0279 WILLIAM W. ESSEKS (631) 369-1700 WATER MILL OFFICE MARCIA Z. HEFTER MONTAUK HIGHWAY STEPHEN R ANGEL TELECOPIER NUMBER (631)369-2065 P. 0 Box 570 JANE ANN R. KRATZ WATER MILL, N Y. 11976 JOHN M. WAGNER (631) 726-6633 WILLIAM POWER MALONEY CARMELA M. DI TALIA December 5, 2001 ANTHONY C PASCA NICA B. STRUNK XL/CZ:UP/Vie° 7 v/I�JStI� A/���j�)�� �i""_ Zoning Board of Appeals, Town of Southold dffiie 53095 Main Road ,v ' '�'' i C/QI--- P. P. O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 1,4-141.4_ Re: Application of Glenn and Christine Dawson - SCTM No. 1000-104-10-08 jaG Dear Members of the Zoning Board of Appeals: We are the attorneys for Glenn and Christine Dawson. We enclose seven sets of the following documents in connection with an application to reverse the Building Inspector's undated decision received 10/25/01, or, alternatively, grant applicants a variance; applicants seek a certificate of occupancy for two single family residential structures on the lot: 1 . undated notice of disapproval received 10/25/01; 2. application; 3. environmental assessment form; 4. zoning board of appeals questionnaire; 5. survey. In addition, we also enclose our check, made payable to the Town of Southold, in the sum of$400.00. Please note that I was advised that this was the proper amount in a telephone conversation with the Zoning Board staff. pectfully yours, bet SRA:mb EP 11EN R. ANG L Enc. cc : Mr. & Mrs. Glenn Dawson ` /� , 3- ,�•,o\Og11FF0(,��o,` %.\ Town Hall,53095 Main Roadal $` Fax(631)765-1823 P.O.Box 1179 ifi . , Telephone(631)765-1802 Southold,New York 11971-0959 `_dot 4 4%,1I BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Stephen R. Angel, Atty C/o Esseks, Hefter & Angel, Attys P.O. Box 279 Riverhead, N.Y. 11901 Re: Premises @ 150 Broadwaters Rd., Cutchogue, N.Y. Owners: Glenn & Christine Dawson Suff. Co. Tax Map #1000-104-10-8 Dear Mr. Angel: In reference to your letter dated October 1, 2001, please be advised that in accordance with the Building Inspectors review on April 13, 2000, a Pre- Existing Certificate of Occupancy will be issued for the principal dwelling and a non-habitable accessory building. You have the option to appeal this decision through the Zoning Board of Appeals. Very truly yours, SOUTHOLD TOWN BUILDING DEPT. V ohn M. Boufis, fr Building Inspector JMB:gar ESSEKS, HEFTER & ANGEL ORIGINAL COUNSELORS AT LAW 108 EAST MAIN STREET P 0 Box 279 RIVERHEAD, N.Y. 11901-0279 WILLIAM W ESSEKS (631) 369-1700 WATER MILL OFFICE MARCIA Z. HEFTER MONTAUK HIGHWAY STEPHEN R.ANGEL TELECOPIER NUMBER(631)369-2065 P Q BOX 570 JANE ANN R. KRATZ WATER MILL, N Y. 11976 JOHN M.WAGNER (631) 726-6633 WILLIAM POWER MALONEY CARMELA M. DI TALIA December 5, 2001 ANTHONY C. PASCA NICA B STRUNK Zoning Board of Appeals, Town of Southold 53095 Main Road P. O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Re: Application of Glenn and Christine Dawson - SCTM No. 1000-104-10-08 Dear Members of the Zoning Board of Appeals: We are the attorneys for Glenn and Christine Dawson. We enclose seven sets of the following documents in connection with an application to reverse the Building Inspector's undated decision received 10/25/01, or, alternatively, grant applicants a variance; applicants seek a certificate of occupancy for two single family residential structures on the lot: 1. undated notice of disapproval received 10/25/01; 2. application; 3. environmental assessment form; 4. zoning board of appeals questionnaire; 5. survey. In addition, we also enclose our check, made payable to the Town of Southold, in the sum of$400.00. Please note that I was advised that this was the proper amount in a telephone conversation with the Zoning Board staff. e pectfully yours, "-U # SRA:mb EP EN R. ANG' Enc. cc : Mr. & Mrs. Glenn Dawson • "_ f t 1 y • 14.16.4 wan—Text 12 . PROJECT 1.0.NUMBER 617.21 ! Appendix C • SEaf State Environmental Quality Review SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM For UNLISTED ACTIONS Only PART I—PROJECT INFORMATION (To be completed by Applicant or Project sponsor) 1 1. APPLICANT/SPONSOR • Christine Dawson and Glenn Dawson 2. PrtficatE Certificate of occupancy for cottage 1 3. PROJECT LOCATION: - Municipality Southold County Suffolk 4. PRECISE LOCATION(Street address and road Intersections,prominent landmarks,etc.,or provide maps ..] 150 Broadwaters Raod, Cutchogue, New York 11935 . I • 1 _ S. IS PROPOSED ACTION: 0 New 0 Expansion 0 Modification/alteration .! 6. DESCRIBE PROJECT BRIEFLY: To obtain certificate of occupancy recognizing that existing cottage can be used as a single family residence. Project does not entail any alteration of the property, T. AMOUNT OF LAND AFFECTED: N/A Initially acres acres Ultimately acres 6. WILL PROPOSED ACTION COMPLY WITH EXISTING ZONING OR OTHER EXISTING LAND USE RESTRICTIONS? ®Yea 0 No If No,describe briefly It is applicants' position that the existing cottage is a legal non-conforming structure that can be occupied as a single family residence under the applicable zoning provisions. 9. WHAT IS PRESENT LAND USE IN VICINITY OF PROJECT? ®Residential 0 Industrial 0 Commercial 0 Agriculture ure 0 Park/Forest/Open space 0 Other 10. DOES ACTION INVOLVE A PERMIT APPROVAL OR FUNDING.NOW OR ULTIMATELY FROM ANY OTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY(FEDERAL STATEOROR LOCAL)? 0 Yes I No If yes,list agency(s)and permit/approvals • • 11. COES ANY ASPECTfr�� OF THE ACTI.,4 HAVE A CURRENTLY VAUD PERMIT OR APPROVAL? ®Yea 0 Ne If yet,list agency name and permlUapproval • Upon information and belief, the Town of Southold Building Department will issue a certificate of occupancy for the other single family residence on the property and for the cottage, but wishes to limit the cottage certificate of occupancy to a "non-habit- t2. AS A RESULT OF PROPOSED ACTION WILL EXISTING PERMIT/APPROVAL REQUIRE MODIFICATION? ®Yes 0 N able struc=u> e." I CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE r� Applicant/sponsor c Christ' e Dawson 1±2E.11121_____- (me: Signature: '°" - • If the action is in the Coastal Area. and you are a state agency, complete the Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this assessment • OVER 1 . —L r • • 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: (Separate sheet may be attached. ) None 1\3 B. Is the subject premises listed on the real estate market for sale or being shown to prospective buyers? { } Yes { x } No. (If Yes, please attach copy of "conditions" of sale. ) C. Are there any proposals to change or alter land contours? - { } Yes- {x} No D. 1. Are there any areas which contain wetland grasses? N/A 2. Are the wetland areas shown on the map snhm;tted with this application? N/A 3 . Is the property buLkheaded between the wetlands area and the upland building area? N/A 4. If your property contains wetlands or pond areas, have you contacted the Office of the Town Trustees for its determination of jurisdiction? N/A E. Is there a depression or sloping elevation near the area of proposed construction at or below five feet above mean sea level? N/A (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? Nowo5 If none exist, please state "none." G. Do you have any construction taking place at this time concerning your premises? No 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? No If yes, please explain where or submit copies ' of deeds. I. Please list present use or operations conducted at this parcel single family residential us'e and proposed use same L 400P Authorized Signature and Date Christine Dawson 3/87, I0/90Ik APPLICANT TRANSACTIONAL DISCLOSURE FORM 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: Christine Dawson (Last name , first name , middle 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 g Change of zone Approval of plat Exemption from plat or official map Other X (If "Other, " name the activity. ) Interpretation and reversal of Building inspector's decision 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 X 1 1 1 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 of 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) ; B) 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 applicants or D) the actual applicant . DESCRIPTION OF RELATIONSHIP Submitted th ' . of ��U d -� IK 2001 Signature ( / J Print name Christine Dawson ' V ' r .. .3 k Vi�ss: `.y 'nd �c'._FM - ,7' , r L+._aSr { A '4 it ,-'se'—':Kl'r __ ____ r ice Use Only: Fee$ 17, ;' '•! *IP, ' -'2 I Assigned No ®�, TOWN OF SOU OLD, NEW YORK 7 APPEAL FROM DECISION OF BUILDING INSPECTO: -DATE OF BUILDING INSPECTOR'S DECISION APP'ALED: Undated decision received 10/25/01, co. - taIhe( TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS: )14We) .. ' •....'- =.-..- i i . wa..P.4ww .n. (Appellant) of 37 10th Street, Carle Place, NY 11514 (Tel # 516 333-7815 ) HEREBY APPEAL THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DATED 10/25/01 WHEREBY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENIED AN APPLICATION DATED4/6/00 and FOR: ( ) Permit to Build 10/14/00 ( ) Permit for Occupancy _ ( ) Permit to Use ( ) Permit for As-Built (X) Other: Certificate of occupancy for two single family residential structures 1. Location of Property 150 Broadwaters Road, Cutchogue, NY 11935 Zone R40 District 1000 Section.10 Block 10 Lot(s)..h Current Owner Christine Dawson and Glenn Dawson 2. Provision of the Zoning Ordinance Appealed. (Indicate Article, Section, Subsection -and paragraph of Zoning Ordnance by numbers. Do not quote the law.) Article xxiv Section 100-241 Sub-Section G , 3. Type of Appeal. Appeal is made herewith for: (x ) A Variance to the Zoning Ordinance or Zoning Map ( ) A Variance due to lack of access as required by New York Town L• 7 Chap. 62, Cons. Laws Art. 16, Section 280-A. (x) Interpretation of Article XXIV Section 100-Z41G and Section I0-242A (x) Reversal or Other' Reversal of Building Inspectors update decision received 10/25/0 , c opy..agupxed 4. Previous Appeal. A previous appeal WA*pro a � (has not) been made .•' . -__. -_ �. is 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): I AREA VARIANCE REASONS: (1) An undesirable .,mange will not be produced in the CHARACTER of the nei hborhoo or a detriment to n. .rby properties, if granted, because: The structure in question is exist ng. By granting the relief requested in this application, there will be no change in the character of the neighborhood. — (2) The benefit sougni by the applicant CANNOT be achieved by some method feasible • for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance, because: The only way in which rel of can be granted other than a variance is by interpretation of Article XXIV Sections 100-241G and 242A and reversal of the Building Inspector's decision in this case. (3) The amount of relief rer a ested is not substantial because: There will be no change to the property or neighborhood. — (4) The variance will NOT have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions In a neighborhood or district because: There will ha nn ;,,,,,o„t ., result of granting th i c p1 -- .-.., 1.—_____ , ___ APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS _ ,�„' ,,,,,, �i.�®� �0a=1. Southold Town Hall ,I Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman ', . ®may 53095 Main Road , James Dinizio,Jr. %� P.O. Box y ' i Lydia A.Tortora ,� Southold,New York 11971-09591179 Lora . Collins ‘‘‘.„12_....44;e ��d�� ZBA Fax(631) 765-9064 J George Horning � it ��®.�� Telephone(631)765-1809 \\b BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD January 10, 2002 By Fax Transmission 369-2065 Stephen R. Angel, Esq. Esseks, Hefter & Angel 108 East Main Street Riverhead, NY 11901 Re: Appeal by Christine and Glenn Dawson (104-10-8 at Cutchogue) Dear Mr. Angel: As a follow-up to our telephone conversation, please confirm the action document that is the basis of the above Appeal together with a brief description of the action being sought. If you wish, you may send a letter (instead of a new Appeal form), and your letter would be attached to the Appeal Form, as an amendment. This information is needed for advertising and other review purposes. , Please feel free to call if you have any questions. Thank you. Sincerely yours, erard '. GoehrV' Chairman OFFICE OF BOARD OF APPEA Southold Town Ha,. - 53095 Main Road Southold, NY 11971 765-1809 tel. 765-9064 ZBA fax. REPLY FORM • Dated: /a-`7/b I TO: 4c,2 l L,GJ e(2776/1 f 2 ;�. /6$-/®- �' (e.zazi..4.cmo (�) Your applicationtis incomplete for the reasons noted below. ( ) It is requested that the following be forwarded as soon as possible(within about 7 days, if feasible). The advertising deadline is 22 days before the meeting date and the information is necessary for review and advertising purposes. You may forward the information by fax at 765- 9064, however, please send the original by mail. Thank you. Q The appeal was not filed within 60 days of the decision of the Building Inspector. 94 Missing information-please see missing information checked below. Please submit all the documentation,together with information noted below. If you have any questions, please call us at 765-1809. Thank you. Information requested: _X Notice of Disapproval issued by the Building Inspector after his/h r review of this particular project map 64-, ( ) Check payable to the Town of Southold totaling $ ( ) Signature and notary public information are needed. ( ) An original and six prints of the map were not included. (Preparer's name and date of preparation to be shown.) ( ) Setbacks must be shown for the subject building to all property lines,with preparer's name. ( ) Six(6)set's of a diagram showing the doors, number of stories, and average height (from natural grade). ( ) Ownership Search back to April 23, 1957 for the subject parcel and all adjoining parcels, certified by a title insurance company, and insuring the Town for$25,000. ( ) Copies of all current deeds and tax bills of the parcels back to (Y Other: &i Lees— ,a/ �o cCa�t� ��tt.�11���L n g " ao. ,LaeLLi_tet) /71.41--t" /I P (fes—roc e- �J , a x) 61_, C 4. 4414- -td) 9-3 0,3. ESSEKS, HEFTER & COUNSELORS AT LAW IOB EAST MAIN STREET P 0 Box 279 RIVERHEAD, N Y. 1 1 901-02 79 WILLIAM W ESSEKS (631)369-1700 WATER MILL OFFICE MARCIA Z HEFTER MONTAUK HIGHWAY STEPHEN R ANGEL TELECOPIER NUMBER(631)369-2065 P.0 Box 570 JANE ANN R KRATZ WATER MILL, N Y 11976 JOHN M.WAGNER (6,31)726-6633 WILLIAM POWER MALONEY CARMELA M DI TALIA December 5, 2001 ANTHONY C PASCA NICA B STRUNK Zzit - 2'A- AsAgeo Zoning Board of Appeals, Town of Southold 53095 Main Road �30f' rN. A r/0i P. O. Box 1179 %�� Southold, NY 11971 -c _ f` .9 Re: Application of Glenn and Christine Dawson - SCTM No. 1000-104-10-08 . - . Dear Members of the Zoning Board of Appeals: We are the attorneys for Glenn and Christine Dawson. We enclose seven sets of the following documents in connection with an application to reverse the Building Inspector's undated decision received 10/25/01, or, alternatively, grant applicants a variance; applicants seek a certificate of occupancy for two single family residential structures on the lot: 1. undated notice of disapproval received 10/25/01; 2. application; 3. environmental assessment form; 4. zoning board of appeals questionnaire; 5. survey. In addition, we also enclose our check, made payable to the Town of Southold, in the sum of$400.00. Please note that I was advised that this was the proper amount in a telephone conversation with the Zoning Board staff. se•pectfully y urs, • SRA:mb EP :IEN R. ANG L Enc. cc : Mr. & Mrs. Glenn Dawson ESSEKS, HEFTER & ANGEL COUNSELORS AT LAW ' 108 EAST MAIN STREET P 0. Box 279 RIVERHEAD, N.Y. 11901-0B79 WILLIAM W ESSEKS (631) 369-1700 WATER MILL OFFICE MARCIA Z HEFTER MONTAUK HIGHWAY STEPHEN R.ANGEL TELECOPIER NUMBER (631) 369-2065 P. 0. Box 570 JANE ANN R. KRAT2 3 WATER MILL, N.Y. 11976 JOHN M.WAGNER O` (631) 726-6633 WILLIAM POWER MALONEY r l I CARMELA M. DI TALIA I by - December 11, 2001 ANTHONY C. PASCA iyl NICA B. STRUNK - John M. Boufis, Building Inspector Town of Southold 53095 Main Road P. 0. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Re: Application of Glenn and Christine Dawson for certificate of occupancy SCTM No. 1000-104-10-08 Dear Mr. Boufis: Enclosed please find a copy of your undated letter which we received on 10/25/01, which states "You have the option to appeal this decision'through the Zoning Board of Appeals." We filed an application to the Zoning Board of Appeals on 12/5/01. Today, we received a reply from the Board of Appeals. This reply seeks official action, a C.O., or a notice of disapproval in order to entertain the appeal. Pursuant to Section 100-271a of Southold's Zoning Code, the Zoning Board hears and decides, appeals from "any order, requirement, decision or determination made by the Building Inspector." Kindly issue appropriate official action as contemplated by the Zoning Code as soon as possible so that we may submit it to the Board of Appeals. ; I r • • ESSEKS, HEFTER & ANGEL COUNSELORS AT LAW December 11, 2001 Page 2 On behalf of applicants, we reserve all rights, including the right to bring an appropriate proceeding to compel the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Building Department to process this application as required by law. R ectfully your SRA:mb J E R. ANGEL Enc. cc : Zoning Board of Appeals, Town of Southold Via Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested Mr. & Mrs. Glenn Dawson CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED Atc /0/940, / FO[,�c =moo �4 Town Hall,53095 Main Road : 4. 1� Fax(631)765-1823 P.O.Box 1179 `� ifilot Fax (631)765-1802 Southold,New York 11971-0959 _ •Q( •�a�10 BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Stephen R. Angel, Atty (/\ C/o Esseks, Hefter & Angel, Attys P.O. Box 279 Riverhead, N.Y. 11901 Re: Premises @ 150 Broadwaters Rd., Cutchogue, N.Y. Owners: Glenn & Christine Dawson Suff. Co. Tax Map #1000-104-10-8 Dear Mr. Angel: In reference to your letter dated October 1, 2001, please be advised that in accordance with the Building Inspectors review on April 13, 2000, a Pre- Existing Certificate of Occupancy will be issued for the principal dwelling and a non-habitable accessory building. You have the option to appeal this decision through the Zoning Board of Appeals. Very truly yours, SOUTHOLD TOWN BUILDING DEPT. 91 ohn M. Boufis, Building Inspector JMB:gar 1 ���/ viii��--• ,411* 411110 • 0 Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Fax(516)765-1823 P.O. Box 1179 ":-: • e �` Telephone (516) 765-1802 • 1� Southold, New York 11971 : ,�. '.:• �acS 41 • OFFICE OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR TOWN OF SOUTHOLD NOTICE TO APPLICANT A decision rendered by the Building Department may be appealed to the Zoning Board of Appeals. Should you require information on how to apply, please contact the ZBA via telephone at 765-1809 or you may go to the ZBA office at Town Hall during normal working hours. • ...., J . ,: „, _ ,, t) c • ' ESSEKS, HEFTER & ANGEL ;,�� �� COUNSELORS AT LAW 2 2 ' 'I 108 EAST MAIN STREET P. 0. Box 279 .ts TJ4 BLDG F�,Tt� ' RIVERHEAD, N.Y. 11901-0279 WILLIAM T, TOWN +F SOOLD .#1 (631) 369-1700 WATER MILL OFFICE MARCIA Z. HEFTER MONTAUK HIGHWAY TELECOPIER NUMBER (631) 369-2065 STEPHEN R.ANGEL P. 0. Box 570 JANE ANN R KRATZ WATER MILL, N.Y. 1 1976 JOHN M.WAGNER (631) 726-6633 WILLIAM POWER MALONEY CARMELA M. Di TALIA December 11, 2001 ANTHONY C. PASCA NICA B. STRUNK John M. Boufis, Building Inspector Town of Southold 53095 Main Road P. O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Re: Application of Glenn and Christine Dawson for certificate of occupancy SCTM No. 1000-104-10-08 Dear Mr. Boufis: Enclosed please find a copy of your undated letter which we received on 10/25/01, which states "You have the option to appeal this decision through the Zoning Board of Appeals." We filed an application to the Zoning Board of Appeals on 12/5/01. Today, we received a reply from the Board of Appeals. This reply seeks official action, a C.O., or a notice of disapproval in order to entertain the appeal. Pursuant to Section 100-271a of Southold's Zoning Code, the Zoning Board hears and decides appeals from "any order, requirement. decision or determination made by the Building Inspector." Kindly issue appropriate official action as contemplated by the Zoning Code as soon as possible so that we may submit it to the Board of Appeals. 0 ESSEKS, HEFTER & ANGEL COUNSELORS AT LAW December 11, 2001 Page 2 On behalf of applicants, we reserve all rights, including the right to bring an appropriate proceeding to compel the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Building Department to process this application as required by law. R' i ectfully your SRA:mb E R. ANGEL Enc. cc : Zoning Board of Appeals, Town of Southold Via Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested Mr. & Mrs. Glenn Dawson CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED • ESSEKS, HEFTER & ANGEL COUNSELORS AT LAW 108 EAST MAIN STREET P. 0. Box 279 RIVERHEAD, N.Y. 11901-0279 WILLIAM W. ESSEKS (631)369-1700 WATER MILL OFFICE MARCIA Z. HEFTER MONTAUK HIGHWAY STEPHEN R.ANGEL TELECOPIER NUMBER (631)369-2065 P. 0. Box 670 JANE ANN R. KRATZ WATER MILL, N.Y. 11976 JOHN M.WAGNER (631) 726-6633 WILLIAM POWER MALONEY CARMELA M. DI TALIA January 11, 2002 ANTHONY C. PASCA NICA B. STRUNK Zoning Board of Appeals, Town of Southold // . rj J /i��l 53095 Main Road /b/11 ' COQ 11 P. O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Re: Application of Glenn and Christine Dawson - SCTM No. 1000-104-10-08 Dear Members of the Zoning Board of Appeals: We filed the above-captioned application on 12/5/01. We were advised by your staff that you wanted official action from the Building Department before you would act on the application. I enclose an original Notice of Disapproval dated 12/14/01 from the Town of Southold Building Department, together with six additional copies. Would you please add this Notice of Disapproval to the previously filed papers and advise me when you expect the application to appear on the Board's agenda. Respectfully yours, p4G Gr., SRA:mb SPHiFN R. AN Enc. cc : Mr. & Mrs. Glenn Dawson �/,ilii�'• i APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS �IIofS�FFO(� o ��0 COG Southold Town Hall • ray` t `� 53095 Main Road Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman o = ; P.O.Box 1179 James Dinizio,Jr. 1 1,% Southold,New York 11971 Lydia A.To lies y � ZBA Fax(516) 765-9064 Lora S. Collins = �� �C1 � �`a,,i Telephone(516)765-1809 George Horning •„, sogg BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD INTER-DEPARTMENTAL MEMO TO: Elizabeth A. Neville Town Clerk FROM: Jerry Goehringer ZBA Chairman DATE: RE: Filing of Application # - The above application is transmitted for filing under the above assigned number pursuant to the Board's Resolution adopted which calendared the public hearing. Thank you. Enclosures APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS • ®SUFF�(�►C Southold Town Hall Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman 'I. Gy 53095 Main Road James Dinizio, Jr. ; c P.O. Box 1179 Lydia A. Tortora ,* Southold,New York 11971-0959 Lora S. Collins ���� ZBA Fax(631)765-9064 George Horning ; '�JQ *' O�• Telephone(631) 765-1809 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MEMO TO: Greg Yakaboski, Town Attorney FROM: ZBA DATE: January 15, 2002 SUBJ: Dawson Appeal Request (Assigned File#5068) Stephen R. Angel, Esq. submitted an application for review on December 5, 2001. The application was not filed because the appeal of an "undated letter," and a form letter was forwarded to Mr. Angel. The ZBA staff called him on December 14, 2001, to explain the defect and Mr. Angel said that there was no reason to call the Building Department because they were refusing to issue a Notice of Disapproval. He said he requested it on several attempts. On December 14th we asked Mr. Angel to call Plans Reviewer, Pat Conklin, since today Ms. Conklin indicated that a Notice of Disapproval was issued. We heard no word from Mr. Angel since December 14, 2001. We sent another letter by fax to Mr. Angel asking that he confirm the "action document that is the basis of the above Appeal" together with a brief description of the action being sought This information is needed for advertising and other review purposes. Yesterday Mr. Angel submitted the attached reply. In reading the reply, there is no indication that he is appealing the Notice of Disapproval, only that we should "add it" to the papers. We have added it to the papers, however the question about the action and nature of the appeal is still unclear for filing and advertising purposes. May we ask your review of the documentation submitted and your opinion as to whether or not the documentation is appealing a Notice of Disapproval dated December 14, 2001? Although the papers have not been filed as an official appeal, pending a determination on the question of a filing deck, a File Number has been assigned, paid by the $400 check, pursuant to preliminary review/filing procedures. Thank you. did , • ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS HEARING TRANSCRIPTS SPECIAL MEETING THURSDAY,JUNE 6,2002 PRESENT WERE: Gerard P. Goehringer,Chairman Member,Lydia A.Tortora Member,Ruth D. Oliva Member,Vincent Orlando Secretary,Linda Kowalski AB SENT: Member George Horning PUBLIC HEARINGS 7.12 p.m. Appl.No 5068 -Glenn and Christine Dawson, 150 Broadwaters Road,Cutchogue: 104-10-8. Chairman Goehringer reopened the hearing and asked the attorney for the applicants to speak. Stephen Angel, Esq: For the record I am Stephen Angel, representing the applicant. The firm I am with Esseks,Hefter and Angel, 108 East Main Street,Riverhead,NY. I would like to start out by recapping,but even before I recap,I would like to hand up one of the things that was asked for last time,was a copy of our clients deed. In the interim I sent the board letter with additional legal authority for the proposition I advanced. In reading the minutes I had advanced on numerous occasions before you. And that proposition was that the cottage was not utilized in a nonconforming manner. It is really a nonconforming structure with a conforming use. The legal principles to determine whether it would continue or are not the ones that you apply to a nonconforming use. I do not want to belabor that position. I am sure you are well aware I articulated that at the last hearing. What I did prepare was copies of the three additional cases that I sighted in that letter. I would like to hand them up to the Board. For the record one case is a case involving, a case by the New York State Court of Appeals decided in 1966.The Court of Appeals is the highest court.That is the matter of the Haufiiian case. That is against the Zoning Board of the Incorporated Village of Brookville. The second case is the matter of Jones vs. Planning Board in the Town of Marlboro. That is a , much more recent case, 1994.Then there is another pretty old case Grueling vs. Simpson,which was a 1956 Supreme Court Nassau County Case. When we were here last time I should mention that our client attempted to send notes to the Gellbacks,but was unsuccessful. Her mail was returned unopened. We have not been able to contact them.As you know from my forceful position it is my opinion that that type of use is not necessary to issue this case in our favor. Last time we were here there was alot of community opposition which came as quite a surprise to us. I would like to just refer to the Board that really this case has to be decided on the merit. I don't believe that that community opposition was probative on any of the issues before you. As you are well aware and havmg a lot of experience in these matters, generalized community opposition can't be the basis for any kind of decision. The decision has to be made on the merits, on the law, in accordance with your rezoning code. I actually went and visited the property in between the meetings. I did have a quick observation and that I would like to turn over to my clients. Down by the water at least on the westerly side, the other lot of joining it on the west has a bunch of improvements of that area. There seems to be a deck,a dock. The deck has some sort of utilities attached to it. There is a whole bunch of boats that are stored down there. Probably 4 or 5 boat trailers. It is a pretty disturbed area right near where the cottage has been located. I thought that was an observation that I should make to the Board. Again, it doesn't really affect my legal theory. I would like to introduce Mrs. Dawson Page 2—Hearing Transcripts Special Meeting of June 6,2002 Southold Town Board of Appeals and I would also like to submit some photos of the lots that appear have two residential structures on them within the area together with a copy of a list of the tax map numbers that Mrs.Dawson prepared. Chairman Goehrmger: Mr. Angel,I just want to say, that a few of us have questions of Mrs.Dawson which we will do after her presentation. Mr. Angel: O.K. Before I relinquish the stage. I should point out that Mrs.Dawson came with a little bit of emotional support tonight. Mrs. Dawson: I want to just start off by saying obviously less time that I was here, I was totally taken back by what had happened here. All the neighbors coming back, no one had come to me and said what is up, this C.O. or what is going on. Any questions about the cottage or about the house too.Not one person had come to me,so I was very surprised to see the 3 neighbors that are recognized plus seven that I never saw in my life, including Vito. The welcommg committee from the president of the Nassau Point Board. That was the first time I ever saw him,when he came here. With that said I am going to tell you about something that had happened when we first moved in 2 years ago. Which is what I think started this whole thing. When I bought the house, so you can get an idea of what is going on,about two weeks after my babysitter of 5 years Valedictorian and just got hockey scholarship to Princeton University asked me if she could us the home for a night after the prom. My husband thought it was a terrible idea. The parents said what are you crazy. I said she has always been there for us, she's responsible girl. She showed us nothing but responsibility. We should be able to trust around this. She says she was being six friends, she brought 14 friends and that is what has started this. When we had come back,they had taken advantage of both neighbors property. They had taken out Mr. Syperellis paddle boat and returned it. They didn't damage anything that we know of on either side. They were 100% disrespectful and we made a mistake. We had actually apologized to the neighbors on many occasions if there was anything we can do, if it was anything broken, it would never happen again. Smce then in the last two years it has never happen again. My own niece asked us to use it . ' for the prom, we said no. Kids that call to rent the house, if there are kids or no one over 30, we say no. That happened two years ago, two weeks after we bought it. I think that is still sitting sore with some people. Some of the things that wanted correct. I felt I was on trial. I felt I wasn't able to defend myself, being the new person in Nassau Point. I would like to the Board to know that I have been here for 30 years. The house that I now own on 150 Broadwaters Road, I had slept in when I was 7 years old. We had rented that house.We have been out here every summer since then. My parents are full time residence here for 15 years. My sister is full time resident here with her kids that go to Mattituck/Cutchogue high school. My brother-in-law and sister have their own business in Town. My reason for buying this house is not to run_ a business. It is to be with my family. My sister live 1/8 of a mile away. My mother lives 1/2 mile away. We all live in Nassau Point. Unfortunately, I have to rent to off set some of the cost at this point. Last year I rented for 5 weeks of the year. This year I have six weeks rented. I know Mr. ...who isn't here rents for 14 weeks. He was not able to be here tonight. He was the one that was say that I was running a business. My intention is not to run a business, it is to try to help myself get by. When they are saying that there is different family's, that is so. This year I have some one coming in for two weeks in July then I go in for a week. Then someone for two weeks. That is it. Three families. It is the families that were back from last year. For all I know, the are great renters. The house was in good shape, my neighbors didn't complain. I just wanted to get that straight. The screaming kids a dog. I am not going to defend that. I have three girls. They are 7,9 and 11. There is also something about roaring dirt bikes. My seven year old and other little girls do not own dirt bikes. That was Mr. Seifert on the other side.We are not this biker group that comes in with my daughters.We don't own any.I just want to reiterate that Mrs. Greenwald said that the house was in horrible irreparable damage for something done to the cottage. I have never fixed up the cottage at all except for paint. Same walls,same floors,same stove,same lamps,same bathroom,same toilets,same sink, same windows. It is not some giant damaged cottage. It is just as it always stood. Again just want to reiterate here that I've been coming out the here for over 30 years.Nassau Point is just as much my home as Page 3—Hearing Transcripts Special Meeting of June 6,2002 Southold Town Board of Appeals it is for the people that have moved'in in the last 4 or 5 years. I don't plan on moving and don't plan on leaving.I look forward to making it my retirement home when it is my time. Chairman:Mrs.Dawson,how many people,when you do rent are you going to be renting to this summer? Mrs.Dawson:It is only rented to one family at a time. Chairman:Is it a large family or is it... Mrs. Dawson: One family I have is a couple and yes his sister and her husband, two sons and the mother. The other thing, with it sleeps 14, the main house sleeps 14. I am not including the cottage on that. When people call me up and I tell the set up, I say the cottage is nice to hang out at. The other thing with the cottage,I have owned it for two years,I had one couple of my friends stay there one night.We are not using it for sleeping and party's there.The second family is a husband and a wife and they have 3 or 4 teenagers. They have their teenage friends out.The last guy is from New Jersey,it is just him and his brother and their family.Two brothers with their kids and their wives. Chairman:Thank you. Is there anybody else like to ask Mrs.Dawson a question. Member Orlando:Long term,you are looking to reside at this property someday? Mrs.Dawson: Absolutely.Long term.Next year I hope I don't have to rent it at all.I am down to five or six weeks.Again that is every other week. Member Tortora: We kind of went down this road the last time you were here. I appreciate letting all these neighbors that you believe have seconded residence,but since you'have set up the last hearmg you have no way of knowing whether they are accessory structures or what the`status is on them. Mrs. Dawson: I hope C.O.'s on all of them. One of them says with the accessory building, reason for says one family habitable structure. To me that is what they where applying for the C.O. for, is for a one family habitable structure.I chose the ones that were not garages for converted. There are a lot of people who have apartments on top of the garage. I chose had fireplaces and front doors. Just like my cottage. My cottage was never a garage.I chose other homes that were never a garage. Member Tortora:We will have to take some time to through this.It is difficult to digest this. Mr. Angel: Can I say something about the C.O.'s that she pulled There are some C.O.'s and some copies of municipal tax cards. What they don't include is the back sides of the ones that Mrs. Dawson obtained. The back side is the side that has the count of the residences and structures on the property. The front only says X. Y. and it is assessed at a certain amount of money. You would have to go back and look at it. It is the back side that is relevant information are whether they are two structures on the property. Member Tortora: I am looking at the deed, I haven't had a chance to look it over but, it says on here said premises being conveyed to the grantor, deed from Anthony Pisacano of 9/26/78. Now in 1969 Mr. Pisacano owned the main house. Mr.Angel: Member Tortora: Correct.At that time he applied for a Building Permit for the road side house. Page 4—Hearing Transcripts Special Meeting of June 6,2002 Southold Town Board of Appeals Mr. Angel:The one in 78 was from Pisacano to Gelbwaks,I believe.Pisacano acquired the property earlier. I actually happened information if you want to pull it. Member Tortora:Are there two lots here? Mr.Angel:No,one lot.It has always been one lot as far as I know.It is all done by one deed. Member Tortora:This is described in land that Pisacano owned it in 69. Mrs.Dawson:That is when we rented it from him. Mr. Angle: We believed he owned it until he sold it to the Gelbwaks in 1978. I believe I got a copy of an old title report that maybe will be able to determine when he purchased it. If that is of interest to you. Member Tortora: I was Just curious and I wondered why, getting to the issue and I did reads through the case, some have some relevance as to the issue of whether it is a lawful nonconforming use or not. I do know whether it is or not frankly. As to whether it's an area variance or use variance or whether it's nonconforming. One of the things I did want to ask you was,you have a C O. for the cottage on the water.I noticed that on the C.O. and on the map that was submitted it appears that the map was sliced in half. Mr. Piscano name is missing on the map and the survey. Not only his name, it clearly looks like it has been altered. Out of curiosity a pulled up the other building permit today in the building department files. To my surprise there is another map in the Building Department file that shows the other building. It appears that what happened was in 1969 Mr. Pisacano went to the Building Department with half a map showing one building on this lot when m fact there were two. He applied for a building permit. Was granted a building permit based on that map and then was later in 1969 issued a C.O. for the main house as a single family dwelling based on half of a map. Which was tampered, which did not show the cottage. In 1976 there is a repeat story of the same thing. In 1976 he went to the Building Department with the same survey only he chopped off the other end this time so that only half. Only the water front cottage showed and not the house showed. Even on the map indicates where the purposed new deck is. He gets a building permit for the new deck and turns around and gets a C.O. for single family dwelling. In both instances, the Building Department was not apparently aware.There were two dwellings on the lot.There is nothing in the Building Department file that indicates as complete map was ever submitted to them. So as to whether there is a legitimate C.O. on the water front cottage,you can look at the map yourself. Mr.Angel: I looked at the file and didn't form the same conclusions that you did as far as I can tell from the file, there are from very few pieces of paper. They are all Xerox copies where the...the 1976 C.O. for the cottage, really was not a C.O. for the cottage itself. It was for in addition. They put a deck on the cottage. That was the application and it was granted. The only reference that I found in the file to the cottage, and one would assume from that,that it existed in 1976. One would assume it existed many years before that.If you look at it, it looks like it has been built a long time ago. From the tax card, it appears that it has been there a long time. The town treated it as a legal use back in 1976 by allowing a particular deck and granting that Building Department application and that modified C.O. When it comes to house, I don't really know when it was built. I would have to look a that application. Is that the application for the house as a new structure?Was that application... Member Tortora: It is identical to the application that was made for the cottage. Mr. Angel: I don't believe that one is for the house as a new structure. It doesn't say might that. It was for an addition. So both were existing structures. I think both were well known to the Town. Both had been there for many years. These are not new structures. Page 5—Hearing Transcripts Special Meeting of June 6,2002 Southold Town Board of Appeals Member Tortora: I am not questioning whether these structures are the old structures. Historically in the Town of Southold, we can go into Building Department and virtually pull hundreds of files. Whenever there are two structures on a lot, the Building Department will issue a building permit for one as a single- family house and the other as an accessory structure. In all the years have been on the board, I have never seen in the Building Department issue to separate C.O.s for two separate dwellings. In this case you have to maps. The two maps have been sliced m half.Based upon which the C.O.'s were granted. Mr. Angel: I here what you are saying and you are making a conclusion from a limited file m the Building Department. I can't make any conclusion. All I know is that I looked at the documents. All the building department had, may have access to files I don't have, but the files that I look that were just Xerox copies, for Xerox copies of portions that were put together surveys. Not even a put together the survey,just a bad Xerox. Notwithstandmg what you conclude from the file, all I submitted it for was to show along with the tax assessors card, is that these where structures that where recognized by the town and were the subject of permits. Duly issued back decades ago by the Building Department. To go back to and try to reconstruct whether Mr. Piscano made a proper application or didn't make a proper application, I think is virtually impossible. I just don't even know how you would do that,unless there were some better set of records or somebody with a longer institutional memory. Member Tortora: If you would look at this,very clearly you would see. And you compare this to your own survey, you will see that his name missing on this even if it is a poor copy. You will see that the date is missing. You will see that the lot lines don't even line up. Yes it is a poor copy,but it is fairly clear to see that it has been cut. Mr. Angel: But you can conclude from that of the Building Department I didn't know that there was two houses on that. Nor can you conclude that he would impact this application anyway because everybody • acknowledges that the houses were there. Probably since prior to Zoning. These applications didn't have to do this construction of the residents themselves. They had to do only with minor additions. I believe decks in both cases. Member Tortora: There is no dispute in the both were there. As to whether it is prior to Zoning, I don't know. What is in contest here is whether there are two legal single family dwellings on one lot. It is your contention that there is. I am saying that this draws that m to question. I am saying it is very obvious that it draws it into question to me. Mr. Angel: O.K. As you know very well, I can respectfully disagree with you. And I do. The ultimate issue here is not the C.O.'s, it is the existing buildings and the building inspectors conclusion that the use of the cottage as a single family residence or ...I think to be honest with you the use in this case is as a single family residence accessory cottage to the main one.I am not taking the position that it was a separate use on a separate lot. That would be inconsistent with the way that the Dawson's use it. The precise issue before you is whether he can make the conclusion that he made about the abandonment on the facts and law as presented.I say he did. Member Tortora: That is correct. We can look at that. We can also reverse, modify or make off what the Building Department made. That very well may be the case. That is why I am asking about this. As to the non-conformity.I don't know.You are saying now that you don't necessarily view it as a separate dwelling? Mr. Angel: Well it is a separate dwelling,but it was not a separate dwelling built to sold separately.It was a separate dwelling that was over flow for the main house. I think that it was used as a separate dwelling by the same people who used the property. Page 6—Hearing Transcnpts Special Meeting of June 6,2002 Southold Town Board of Appeals Member Tortora: Than why not except it. This is the issue we have gone to right from the get go. Why not except the Building Departments initial ruling when he said to you, "I will issue a C.O. for one of the dwellings any other will be accessory."Why not except that? Mr. Angel: It was per what he wanted. It was an accessory as a storage building. That is not what it is. We would except a C.O. as an accessory cottage, the way it is. We would accept such a C.O. We would not except a C.O. to make it something that it was never. It was never a storage building. It was never a garage. It was a cottage. Member Tortora: O.K.Lets come back. Mr. Angel: We would except this. We are not seeking the maximum that we could seek under the law, which is full C.O. for both units so we would come to Planning Board the next day and try to do a subdivision. What we are seeking is a C.O. that covers both structures as they are currently potentially usable. Which is as an accessory cottage and as a single-family residence. The Building inspector did not offer it. What the Building inspector wanted was that the client remove the stove and make it into a storage building. It isn't a storage building, it is a cottage. So if that is an admission on my part that we would take less then what you understand our position to be,so be it.I take that risk. Chairman:Mrs.Dawson you wanted to say something? Mrs. Dawson: I just want to mention with this survey, for some reason I thought that I had a larger one and thought it was cut in half, because it was one of those original survey's this big. Did you put them together and copy them like this or is this the way you had it. Member Tortora:This came right out of the file as well... • Mrs. Dawson: I got one from Mr. Gelbwaks, it might be the giant one. The reason it might be cut in half is because they didn't shrink them down 30 years ago or whenever that was done. I ended up getting myself my own survey because that was such a bad copy. It might have been cut in half and just copied because it didn't fit into the copy machine. Mrs.Kowalski: Can you get us a copy of it. Mrs.Dawson: If I have it I certainly can. I told my closing attorney to send me a package. Member Tortora:Believe it or not the 1969 survey is much clearer than the survey for the cottage. Mrs.Dawson: I never got just what you have. Member Tortora: It is in the Building Department file and it is now m our file. O.K. I don't have any other questions at this time. Chairman: Ma'am I need you to use the mic,please. Mrs.Hawthorne-Cincotta:My name is Nancy Hawthorne-Cincotta. Chairman: Would you raise your right hand? Do solemnly swear the information that your about to give us the is the truth to the best of your knowledge? Mrs.Hawthorne-Cincotta: Absolutely. Page 7—Hearing Transcripts Special Meeting of June 6,2002 Southold Town Board of Appeals Chairman:Thank you. Mrs. Hawthorne-Cincotta. I do have a question and please forgive my ignorance, I am learning about this process.I come more as a resident of Southold then a resident of Nassau Point.I believe my question to be an objective one. Since it is well publicized that the philosophy of Southold Town is towards preservation and towards the prevention of building unnecessarily when other structures exist. Would not make sense to take advantage of the rentals. Rather then take some open space and mar it with a building that is not currently in existence now,wouldn't make sense to utilize existing structures? And applying and permitting C.O.'s in order to do so?In the name of preservation. Chairman: The Code clearing states that, the precedent is to do away of nonconforming use. I have to tell you that some of them are pretty neat little places. We have this weighing aspect that we deal with all the time when people are looking to deal with these nonconforming things. Before tonight I was unaware that the Dawsons had 14 beds in their main house. I thought was total with cottage. That is all I can really say to you is we are dealing with older buildings at this point. The application before us is a very interesting one and we're still taking testimony on it. I don't know if I can actually comment not exactly what you're stating that this time. Mrs. Hawthorne-Cincotta: I just would like to state that as a resident of Cutchogue and one who is in favor of preservation,I think it is a fine idea to use whatever creative,within confines of the law,mechanisms we have to make use of existing structures in lieu of building new ones. Thank you. Chairman: Sir? Mr. Chester:My name is Bob Chester. I am Christine Dawsons'father. I live on 2745 Vaston Road where I have for 15 years.To re-iterate some of what Christine said. We have been here for over thirty years on and off. We are not new comers. I just mainly come here,we didn't expect last week. Christine didn't expect to get blind sided by a bunch of neighbors that didn't have courtesy to come m and complain what they thought was a difficulty with her property. They didn't address issues at all with her. They thought it was better to come here without any preparation then some could talk to her and vent. She is not here to try and make a slumlord, as you can obviously see. She is her to be near her family. She is her to use this as a permanent residence as soon as she can. In the mean time as you know it is a rather expensive situation buying a new home, fixing it up and doing what has to be done to make it attractive to them. It is better then the garbage that was there when she moved there. By painting it and cleaning it up and taking care of it. There were some comments made last week that I had the chance today to read the minutes of last months meeting, for instance, Mr. Cippiletti, is talking about drastically down zoning the area. Every Saturday night people move out and every Sunday morning people move in and there are 7 cars m the driveway.That is nonsense because she only had it for 5 weeks last year. One of the neighbors of Mrs. Ringwald was complaining about my daughter making this a financial up,something that she can make some money on,turning it into a motel.As Christine has mentioned she rents her place for 14 weeks,my daughter rents it for 5. So obviously she is not doing it for an investment purpose. She is trying to get some income back so she can fix up the place and live here and us it herself permanently. These things have to be taken into consideration. Ken Seafert, last week when I read the minutes, said he wanted to buy the house itself, but didn't because he thought there would be difficulty with the C.O. Why would he want to buy the house if he has a house next door if he wasn't going to rent it out and use it as a financial gain in a rental basis. I just really feel that it is unfair and I fmd that I resented that she is not her to improve the property. She cares for it and she has been here a lot longer than the people that are complaining about it.Thank You. Chairman:Thank you.Mr. Cipetelli how are you tonight. Page 8—Hearing Transcripts Special Meeting of June 6,2002 Southold Town Board of Appeals Mr. Cipetelli: Last time my appearance didn't go on the record properly. For the record Robert Cipetelli. My mailing address is 175-16 Liberty Ave. Jamaica,NY. 11433. My office telephone number is 718-725- 1133. First I am a little surprised at the length of tonight's proceedings. I guess I was misconceived. This Board said on May 16th, date last month. I was under the impression that the Board had a few questions of Mr.Angel to provide some documents. One of those being verification from the prior owner and something like a deed and maybe a couple of other pieces of paper.The 16th came and went and I didn't get anything. I got something a few days later. In that submission they admitted not being able to get the verification from the prior owner. I think right from there that should close this hearing tonight because what we're talking about is the interruption in use, that this property was not continue to be used. We didn't think they would find that there was C. O. the cottage which wasn't duly executed at that time. The use had ceased. That shouldn't even be in issue. They can prove continuous use. Last time we had a meeting, in good faith there was an outpouring of the local neighbors that will testify. If this board written verifications from them, can obtain them. I have everybody's address and telephone number. I can get in touch with everybody. There was live testimony on all of those facts of thought that would be enough. Now I just won a stop and I just to say I want it on the record in from the whole Southold community that the communication with the Dawsons will be welcome and wonderful. That is what that community is about, getting to know each other and enjoying each other's company. That is a sideline. One other thing I want to say is I don't think Mrs. Dawson Father was sworn in.Because a few comments I don't believe are very... Chairman:That is a good point; I didn't swear him in and I apologize. Mr. Cipitelli: If the newly introduced material tonight are going to be reviewed by the board, I respectfully object in using them to make a determination. Because of that may 16th deadline. I wasn't supplied with any paper is. I thought that is what may 16th was for, so I can get it and come here tonight and respond back. • Chairman: The hearing is still open tonight. So you obliged at any time to come in and review the record. And to draw any conclusions that you want and submit any papers you want or any documents that you want up until the period and time that we actually physically closed the hearing. We remain close this hearing to verbatim testimony tonight,and then close as a matter of right on the June 20th calendar; or we may not. Mr. Cipitelli: With that I did prepare written response to tonight with some other things I've been saying.if I may elect to approach and hand out. I believe all of the case law that has been presented by Mr Angel is on ...odd points as far as area variances are concerned. (the previous sentence was in audible). I still have to believe that this is a use problem. These variance situations that we are dealing with and none of the case law that he presented addresses used variances. A couple of them distinguish a very briefly from what the case is beside themselves. In all those situations where they do discuss use variances, the result is going to turn out in the denial in this case because the standards are much higher.When a 10 on such as the town of Southold specifically has a zoning ordinance that says one single-family dwelling on each parcel. It is really one single-family dwelling on each parcel.Not an accessory use cottage. I don't know how that is going to fit into the zoning code are not. I did a little research on my own and I found a case.Again I would like to approach the board in hand us out to you. That does deal specifically with use. Not only does it deal specifically with use,it goes on further to say when a situation is self created by the petitioner, they have no right for remedy to correct that situation. Inside the case when they discuss what a self situation is, it says specifically when a purchaser of land purchases and the situation is there,even when the real-estate out right lied to the purchaser, it is still their obligation. the situation itself created. It ends with the case at that juncture. the case goes on to further explain and gets more into detail about not only when a situation itself created,but the power that and appeals Bd. such as yourself has in dealing with that situation. The remedy for a landowner in that case is not in front of an appeals Bd.The remedy would be getting involved with the Legislature in changing the zoning code. This is not a problem that is only specific to the Dawsons,this is a settled zoning code that applies to every resident. This is a general research and on everybody uniformly. u G Page 9—Heanng Transcripts Special Meeting of June 6,2002 Southold Town Board of Appeals There is no relief here for the Dawsons specifically. Their situation is not unique to themselves. The only means that they have available to them would be to change the zoning laws themselves. I respectfully submit that case to you. You can look at it and reviewer yourself. You have explained to me that the case is still open. Based on some of the new testimony that I have heard tonight I would have to venture to invite everybody to come out and take a look and come over to my fathers house and look over a few, if you so choose. I don't where 14 beds fit in that cottage. I believe pictures were presented last time.Not the cottage the main house. It was very clear last time to us that this hearing was over the cottage and not over the house itself. 14 beds in that house. There is something wrong with that picture. It is very disturbing for me to hear that right off the record. The other thing that I would like to address tonight is the ongoing situation that has been the subject of all of this. If your decision is reserved tonight,was the ramifications for any of their neighbors as forces situation being ongoing. I don't spend a board's time specifically responding to what was said from Mrs. Dawson's father. As clearly not the case. It is further than that. Families that come here, might be rented to just one but they are bringing a heck of a lot more people with them than there immediate families. I would like some guidance from this board,what would be the next step as far as enforcement or at least a hold on what the property use is at this point. It doesn't seem like every time a neighbor or myself comes appear to town everybody, shrugs their shoulders and says well there's nothing we can do about it. Chairman: I have discussed this with the Building Inspector. I have discussed it with the Code Enforcement Officer. I have also discussed it with the Code Committee, the Chairman.As the only thing I can tell you at this point. It is on going generic investigation. I use the word generic to mean that it is not only on the Dawsons residence, it's other residents. I will let you now. It is not that I don't believe you. I believe everybody. That is one of the reasons why a lot of us are very interested in this job. That is what we are supposed to do. I can't give you a remedy at this time. I don't know how this Board is going vote. I will tell you this that we received significant testimony on this Both written and oral. You might want a review the ' file. You may want to respond to something that is in the file. Mr. Angel might want to respond to something that has just been given. It is my suggestion is that we close the hearing tonight to verbatim testimony. We ask you to submit your opinions, by the next meeting. So on June 20th we can close the hearing to everything.Then we have 62 days after that to make a decision. Mr. Cipitelli: If I may I agree with Mr. Angel that this decision should be based on the law and what is best for the Town and this shouldn't be made into a character of facts. I apologize if Mrs. Dawson feels in her character was attacked at any point. It is clear that that happen again tonight, but in the other direction. That is okay. I just put it out there that every neighbor that I am standing here tonight speaking for, still want to be neighborly interaction and behavior amongst each other. That is all I have to say. Chairman: Thank you.I don't have any particular problems in not closing it.I think the point is that we have to review all this and then come back and set a date. Member Tortora: After we have reviewed everything that has been submitted,if we have any questions and it is closed then it is closed. Mr. Angel: Can I make a suggestion? why don't you carry over to the 20th,not for testimony. Review what you got than. Then either make a decision that night or the one keeping open or close it. Chairman:Leave it open until the 20th. Mr.Angel:Leave it open until the 20th but don't ask people to come back.Just make their submissions. Page 10—Hearing Transcripts Special Meeting of June 6,2002 Southold Town Board of Appeals Member Tortora: In all likelihood we would hope to close it. On the other hand if after reviewing all the submissions tonight we do have questions, it would be a shame to have the verbatim portion of the hearing closed. Chairman: Lets do it this way, for everybody purpose as Mr. Angel has suggested. at that particular time if we so choose to continue the hearing, we will continue to the special meeting in July. Having said David July special meeting? Member Tortora: Why don't we see what happens. Chairman: Are you aware Mr. Angel, if we where to put this on for further testimony on the June 20th, that we will be into the wee hours. Member Tortora: It will be the 21st.when the hearing starts. Chairman: O.K. We will come to that in a minute this ince lady in the back would like to speak.Would you raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear the information that we are about to receive is the truth to the best of your knowledge? Ms. Arpara: Diane Arpara. I am Christine's sister. I live at 1900 ...Road in Cutchogue, where I have lived for over 10 years,since 1989.Full time with my family,my husband and 3 children.They go to school here. We have a local business. We are active in the community. I know what it is like to be both a Summer person and a full time person here. I live in Nassau Point myself because it is a very nice quiet area most of the year. In the Summer all the area changes in Southold Town. Full timers and Summer people start doing some entertaining and everything. I think it may ruffle some people's feathers when they are living next to a house that had been relatively quiet for awhile. Then in the summertime they have younger people. It even _ ' happen to me when I moved into my own house that were owned by retired people and came in with three little kids. The man next-door had to get used to baseball's coming over the fence. You can no more get rid of summer people enjoying this beautiful area than you can clear the main road of traffic on a weekend in July.I don't have any legal back round or anything. Some of the things that people said about my family was pretty offensive. You can see both houses very clearly from the cause way. I have monitored the house in my sisters absents to make sure that everything is o.k. over there. It always has been. I think most of the renters are pretty much on the quiet side. Mainly using it to sleep.We live so close to the beach. There are many other things to enjoy. People question the number of beds in the house. It is set up for a family. So that someone can come spend the day at the beach and then get a bunch of children in a room and have them sleep over with their cousins and their friends. I just think that the use of the house and the cottage as how it was designed. I don't think any big changes are being requested here. I don't think that what they have asked for is unreasonable in any way.I don't think that anyone in the area has anything to worry about. They have done nothing but improve the house. Both properties inside and out to make it look more attractive and come out here to enjoy Cutchogue and the Southold area for what it is.Thank you. Chairman: Thank you. O.K.Hearing no further comment,I make a motion continuing the hearing until June 20th at which point we will make a decision on when we will close it. SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION -7-2-3—0 2--- * * ** * * rparedAy /7`ib0 hi-e-e'')/y PUBLIC HEARING: ... i,., Tapp /`�fLl 18:10 P.M.Appl.No.5084-640 Church St.LLC. "F Chairman: It appears through conversation with Mr.McCarthy yesterday,by telephone,that we have found that there are further things that need to be denied in this application by the Building Inspector. .... , , • ...r '445 '• 4 ' Viirliripti#PVI'ZW7. , ''‘' ". ''l'' • ' 4. if44:Ikv:40'46'' '. ' •''',. tpi7. 4'---:,4`,$'ri ‘. •„,...smosit..,....,-- i.,,,,04.*,,,,,,, :-, - 4,- . ..-. .4,0•07 * - ., - 11‘0,40. k4 '.4' ., 4154; ' 1 .' • .-:'•11.1.5"-. .41C.tit, ,k.',4'."'l ' 't. .:; '''.. -if .' ' '.d, ie. .."0'.- 4- --22..... , 40117114 Ai - ; ,,g,-,..- , •• ,-....4-0,-, -we:. ._ . .. ..,._.. ,A .... . , • - , 4 , s,r,„. , 1,, - -.,‘,.v.....-A. ..• — - . . ...r. , •-?...... A rtz-... ..,„„ ...t. „,, '..,. 4.- - .... ..-.,,....-.,...s •• . . ' < •, -,,, • # ,..< 41), . ‘.9.t# 04,d• ,,,,..,,.. ,. .. '- . .,...„ c, ' ,-,)'4.1Ir-'' . ". : ,. . •,.4.4 "Vi , 417. ''' '': . ... ;:t ' ';” '...:.C., ' - ' ,,- ':, ', ' - • .. ,i,,," 414, . .,'' ,. - „-", - -4^; ' ' .. '•1 / ,- . - 45is, ' N, V-4 .., , ..=. , 1,. - . • , ,,,-,...i- -;: -,,,.•...,..,*-- iir , t -A444, .4'4 41.wilt6,„1. "r•, ,"A, , -;,_,:- .. , . , -.". `•,:-".. ..-..,, "'" :=;\,-'A.0, ' .R* A c 7 V 04,*A .4#r'" _ n _ . or ... , 1 VII I i 111 Li i 1 Pit , 4-:. :At -1 I 1,„ . ...:,,. ..,„ -- . ,,, ......." , ,, ......, -,--- , , • . . IllS. ': W.'',Y14. 4,7,41., . . - • WE� l a14" • 1 . �,' ,¢r. ►�i�+ to?;• _•r,'Nolo?'' : ori. r ,j� �. -4 , tl--4--- : -,-- 4,4„....,,,...7,7,.......,-......... 4:.., ,s-,.-, 4."4":• -- t„ *4 ; -., . .7" M , "'-..tilb -.."*.. #.••••--i•-, : ' • ,r ' .f..,114 rig:..,..aLltip, •• • 7,4r. Am 1 .4'1--•:,,. ,- .-" • ,7.ik,41,«*71-', -:74.1,...;;1.1 .. -- ' ". `.`‘' 4\-• . -;.•:4;-..-4Y ..' r... ' ', • -'°'.''•141,11c-':--. . •.'.;`,"-• --, - _ . , • --.%, . ,-""---.-.."-1 • - ..... .•-1,•,-,.: , \ •--.4-•.. -, ,.. -- .. -.. _ A 4 s ....4, .,,f.., s•:=.,,,,.‘ .,1.:.., , , . ' 4,..., ,• ,- _ ,.;•., - -,.., ... • „ .! *I' •'": *-4-------' , alb* , , .,NI;C', ,, -.7')-- .,,tk .ii.i,‘ ,. • 4.. 114r....; .' n {. .'1 "'" ' -4, .*•:,• - ..., ' '' • .,z'.' 4 • • . L ....'\,•,7:3,1: . •7)," ,1,- - ;.,4.-i.,,,,----,. --,-- -,-----, 4....,.. - . '''4 l';:" '-...".i t i , %.'-' '• ' . % e''',..,"?•• ..% . -..,.;,,,,r....--• -; -.'".•,- 4- ;.:••--,.-, , ,, ' ••'? ;!...4.'-',;', ;,..;'tlkAi• ' • ..., -,. ..,;„, „•-s ' 4 a•- . : - e•••‘..-r r iv i .:' .. , ..;,.1* , , ,..,....."4-._.„,-?!._, , ,• •,,.._ __ " \ — --- '' , ,,. -.4..,,,. , „ _ . - 1 ' -,.. , ' •..:,-,,_;*; --„ ,..:paer.-..--'. ,.. . . _ . ...... - ,...=•, ...,,.. ....,...--..,- ---3...----:., . -. -..--._,!•,---,:,...,;-.. •:.,..,--.....,..---4-_—..,:44;.., . -, :•:-.7'.,...,,-- -W.. i - . ,. -tiok --• / - -.. - ' •---- , ..-_. ,....:.--: - - ,, ---. . - ,-' --..,,,,,..--. -..-.,..wr,,,- -...- .- . ._,., . .. .... ... 0 -.4„.1..-z4i4-No.--'-... ,:- - .\ . •. .. ..„......, ..,„. "--.:.,---..7---. ,,----,:::,.1.,.....--,-','-. -4-' -- -,• • • = ..... _ • -• ...., ". 4.1 . . . _-, .,...,:,; .,,,,,-;.,:-•-5,-;•t•,......:-.t.,------- n i? tA #4 „� C:r Pry " �4, ! , . • '4 ,.P !., -�' n^ max ^ a �� 4 kt, �i vet 1 • 1.-:71' ,..• ;\.•_;.,.,„:„..•..- f,,--,4"- A,. ,c,,,,.:'.4'.,„:V4S..iS*1.: r,:,o-,r,.•„• .'A-,—,t,t.".,.'-.,1,.-.,.1p-,1:v6t,-,,,^.:.,,,*?..,.:,,.,_, vfiirx,,t--a,,,I,pf.„7..*/.:_:4".,,P,-.•-4I_.,1„,4A,-74,t.r.'-,..4,.'...,.e_.:...-:4--0--,4-4,-""-.z4;__'.'-,'.,,,,7',,:-„.-,:,;-,. 1 10-..-0k,-• -471 . t. . - ..44*,,,,-trt- 110„.,__.,-;:.1,...„4. . y .... .1.: .7„ .k. '.1 : • '.. .. '-ao ..,,„,., ,,.,.v-. • .. \ `,.1 , _•-'--.,1' •--,:,...*,....4 ,A,, • -.. ;-.... ..,...S-• - .. ip,.., ‘,.--1,....1 --, _:.e,,,......,,,,,-,,,,,,...: :,.... ---../.." • ,i, . - .,,A„..,voilimv;4, ,-,. ...7-4 , .,,.. 'n:.--... ,•,. ,',44 ..'w..----,.4.• '''"X",.., ---''4 -1.'0'4-,\-- • ' . ._,..*.....1,'. .•,. , ,,rs-,,-', .....„.,,..;,,,,!1. - ,..-:"..4t.---`,. , ,..' .., :;.-.**f.: .,•44.4.4._ . , ..' . . . -.. . . • lk. . • • • T':-?....4V.- -4,4 '' •... ',.-'".'''`..- 1 'ity: ...,:: " , , :: '''''k t..."114''. , ', .,, . •-,•i ''',4,341,ii;::,‘• •-, - - : . - -.,. V-,&t,„,----..... .'".*Iff'!"• 4 r,•. -. ;-.. - . ^ .... f,v “. '....._ . - .\' `• ... , .. ,..{.7 .•' - Fe! l , "r:: 'r '' ''. %Mr ,--• -: '“' -. ' T4'.Q'-'1' :--7, -ir-- t iihif,,,,\1 .,--....i-.. - "1., . '').0‘Alictittit '.. - *fts,---L., - , ....-,"'• -- '4.1sr. " mew. Nib.' ... . _ 1,1, ., . ,.: . . . , „..,, .., \ .., ------:„ IR ."47:- '-, '-''''' - .. . 1 •.f'..4 -:-4,e' 4.--,,,...ey . • - ,- Ifft A±., . . . . - .. ' ::-.'..,. , . -,7.. •, ,,,,. , . ..„ 7,,",..etA,,, ..._ 11,4,....... - -- -:' . "'";:- ' '-'11-1114"!<1....-',- ''. -' - ' -- . litly-,.0.1'2 - • - . ,----. t , ,. ... _ - • _- . . .. - -- . . • . - , „ . . .. i f, Ain. 80'....,- ' i , ••••7114,,,e• . it I', . . oclvjr- . •' : ' 4 ,. ANN t''.,.'. . • N 4. _ . •,...,•* ' ei '''''''.. *.O. 4 Vi t. t' \ ,shar wik 4,..._ :. -" --f, .4ig, .... , _ „ .0• • ,b.z. I i - —:: t- 'Ilig016' ; I , ' ' .1;11/4.,i1410;•0,,,,. • . • ""`_ ••,-:,- '•'-',.:''k• ,.' /Afti ... - , ,, ,,$::..;'44, !.,.,;'.' ,,i, 1::: 3- 3:-. 1•.??,-L, , ' , 44,, I' . . ., .— .. "" 7,',,,4,4,,•'•', '.*-.1 1,';.= ' ' ' --1; 44 - .•. 427 . , . ',-- )* ,,,..„ . r .., ,, .,.,,..., : :-. ..„.. .....„ ,.......4 ._ ...,..,-,..A.4, . A v ,,'' I ' ' ' ..„70S, •"-i-^1 Jr .4, , .,., • . • , .. . . . . ...t ! ....• . ..._. •.. - -- .., 4'....."'• ''''TA:4.)i, ..'1,',4 11,...... "( ,, . . ''. •-,.'''..:,.. . i.e.• .,. , r- CZ'. , 1 --'. it ".• fr . . !......, ' -„, , , • 4., . _.. .,,,k. . ''''. •-.4, '4,1!.....%: -1••• •••- . . Y. ilk- )9.47 - • ....c •-•••• 4110•Likilfifr.J. it ':-.7•' - — 'dip- - --'i4.- -'$ _ .. .. • •. , ,• • 1....1. . • '•• ' - • --w....••.‘•• •••• ,.. , , ..• - ' . •••• ..r... "n"--•- . ' ..... . ..., '•J'''''''1.1.--.„ .„,-/ - .--, ,;, .. -- ... ...,. .....-, %le- .!". ' a '''' 1 S.., - lar' '" .‘.. --• '-- ., - AritS- ''''' .,• - , . . ..' . .11 '''•11 ., .,;"4.4," 'A:WIC!1,2_7._ '-; 1... - ' _. ' ' - 'a•' i ' '11-..' '' '41.4i, _, .:'....:- -.4,..., • : r- ... "...)..z.' 0 .. . I.,.' , _ • ..• , . : ' 4. ..."-- . '-,.',. ‘:`-:- -''• .4,4ii . ‘41101.':ii.:.' . i• -,41• ',,./ • .;'10Y., ,s. •- ,A -•+.1411k.,,,,,/ • -at--,- ,- :• IF A., • - - '' • J • • — 1;if 440' ''''" ' • . , II., : . ,. 1")"-• pi $ ir. :•:'' I .4,' • •,..,itp...`. • . - ,.._. / ._. ,,'. ... '.. .! •-'3,:. .-. ,.4 ,-*'' 4 •A..'','" ' _ , :,',....., . • •.t -7.. ,1,' 1 , 01.• • . i . . •,t.,..11R• :.A.1' .. . I, * :„.4ps • .. ' • )....':1 - ' 7 ' 1r .' '' V -„.. -t -; I- / *, F- - _ . . ..-- ',:.- --4',2 f*• lit ' . . , . • '''-' "-Ct--. '''' ::-..'''..'i ii. ':. !I:4 .. . ''' '-•A: ... ,-,c.,..,,-.. • -,r'.? ., 'L , , - %_.• ,„:,..--•,,.-,,,:-Al•A ,...,,,,:1•:$ ,,,,, ......T,-,•-- . --, 7.--*"."/:-",-,,';':t. _,;:t,.-. i Ah•kt. •:-"':;r:-.,:. ....4..:-l'''..-..:.- .4:'.i..,'"...7:17.f.:rf-.';.'- "—,...iieg.„-,----iv 1'.t.'2:....."r." i*.-',1,:,ir".!",•,•.' ,.•..1 .-, .... .,-ae,'•`.r ,•:4''.-4?„,*111r.-. -'' - - ' - ,... • 4 > rf. tql 0011. W' • 5. • } ' Kir. w v+� < '�i1Wr 411/100'1141111111 • .'!' "I'-' ;4',!,- . .... g i...." IC 1 .."41.1ftink''` . III 1 r14k - r r' - �4ti_ ■ ..yrs S 1 OFFICE OF ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS' 53095 Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Email: Linda.Kowalski(&,Town.Southold.ny.us or Paula.Ouintieri(a�Town.Southold.nv.us hitp://southoldtown.northfork.net (631) 765-1809 fax (631) 765-9064 FAX TRANSMISSION FAX# 3 67--a- ATTN: A.,', 1/ 1_ /• , i�' ` 1 . // DATE: t0 / /112002 REF: 3 MESSAGE: a - ' ant CLZA&C , .La-71- + /t--;1Le 49,71,-stk o1 D 0206)- fi e oa.tpo Please feel free to call if you did not receive all sheets. Town Hall hours are between 8 and 4. Thank you. Pages to follow: 5 . -TRANSMISSION VERIFICATION REPORT J \ TIME : 06/18/2002 15:43 DATE,TIME 06/18 15: 40 FAX NO./NAME 17187251144 DURATION 00:02:57 PAGE(S) 05 RESULT OK MODE STANDARD ECM 0/02, Pj?47_i I ,TRANSMISSION VERIFICATION REPOR1 A . i , TIME : 06/16/2002 15:47 DATE,TIME 06/18 15:44 FAX NO. /NAME 3692065 DURATION 00:02:58 PAGE(S) 06 RESULT OK MODE STANDARD ECM ri c� LEGAL NOTICE • f , . - STATE OF NEW YORK) . soupioLD TOWN BOARD OF- SS: � APPEALS . - ' • ) r `I IZSDAVII ,;20, 2o.02;..,j - CO OfSU F*LK) • RUBLICHEARINGS � ,t) ' - 4!' of Mattituck, in said NQfIC-EJ&HEREBY GIVEN,pur- .• ;✓ suant to Section 267 of'the Town I..0. :, county, being dul sworn, says that he/she is Principal and'Chgter'1043-.0oning),Code:of4h N- clerk of THE SUF OLK TIMES,a weekly newspaper,pub- �aig,;c;y�f�'.,,gtithold the'following-appVA _ atons=.willbjeIeardatpublic hearin"s lished at Mattituc , in the Town of Southold, County of `-by,the;SQDTHOLD'TOWri`BOAtfv°•.• Suffolk and State if New York,and that the Notice of which -OH; PPD4LS,at the-Town-I-tall,5-309;5-' Mai gpad;r,Southold Net-;to k;i 97.i;. the annexed is a printed copy, has been regularly pub- =iin Thursday,Tune-20;20b2,attlie_llin s lished in sal• Newspaper `;no ed:,tie'1'pw,-(or as'soon.=therea_f ei-.as-4.1 once each week -rpossiiile - ==t' ', • ; ' `; .-_,4I for weeks successively, commencing ;.;�{ O p.m.:.:A1pp1:No:�.51,35:.,Mioha•p'yj^`I on the �'d a� +r, -r:pb.,.M1R�c day end-',Kathy'Penvolaris,•-Ttiis sa<request of 200 ?iota• ia{c ',0149 Section• 00 244B;;,: -g:?Las*,4;ions,�the Builditig:g�Departme ts, rci 4,;.2002,Notice'of'Disapgr'o/a1^'.to,1._ enciose-an!;',existing orch which,has: `' 'f 4'yard`setliacicof less`than,�35 feet ' Principal pa Clerk ;'F 1; aa,1 0 p ciiig tY 7`I�s's ac tii104 ',MattitucI;.Parcel>-1000-14'0:-•L=20:'' 1:'?ii .ir t25 pm�,A;,i4 No;5132.Jose and.k. Sworn to before e this 3 0'- -•'I.vbrtneeHe an a Lojis'is'Ia'e .- rr% d z: ,r r quest`�,�r�,';� �a_V,ariance'.nder:Sectioii:-1.00'=33,'-base�d' 3 day of /L_:r , 20O - -dti e i tf'De a arirti nl's Mar . :- /�'U CL I. / D ;til Ro kiln g p e ch-'2, lR.(.� 002:3�1oti ar>', -;2 4�'of.Dlsapprova'l;�to,�lgca�eanr, a e `'•accessorygar,ge;ir a__64eaotherthatar'. LAURA E. BONDARCHUK w ;E;#;:and Loy do .of,Pro 22 50 Notary •ublic, State of New York Main-Road;,:7 ,e *-P,arc'el 1:000 8, ;� No 0113 06067958 ;'; Qrkx; Y ;1 ��� ts3`�,,;:;,.4µ,,,,,'.,,. . �„ Qualifi=d in Suffolk County ,r� .„�,�H�,,,,.p �, r'i^L'*7+zr<�fH � ,,” i�-` �46,rn.�- O CJ ai'-''C:3'5}16ini..?App1;:4No 0, I3:0;,:Cl'iffor.'d,� My Co mission Expires Dec.24,2 and`Rtegan'Batuello:Thi's•is'a'reijigesrfog4 aVan.artaeunder:Section 100=33;;based. „'.on,':the-'March--'7, '•2002- Notice:'of itlpisapproy-a1-to;.locate an accesspry i .swimtrung;poolTut;an area.othertliap a ' ,'rear_yard:;Location.-of•Pro err .''. 1725 , P y V^;4.Alvahls ane,Cutchogue parcel_.1,0,00Y' 640 p.m.-App'L No.r,S13 i:',Jii .,C`'' an`d-Margaret '3rggane;;Tliit•is a:requestrt` for-a'Varianceiunder-Section, 00 3 1 ,based n;-the-Butlding,f,Department's„ i i,,-J.4r =o25,2002 Notice-of Disapproval; .for.. Zroi osed:Yeiis.court♦-atless than . ar r f I e.e,gy>artyy'�",4i,44FFwv n0 j't.igkOetty,� -''s,.$71.._,.-Oregonu,r'Road,,; {.C4tchogue Parcel 1000=832,1-34. w : -;c;'�6 50=p'iri Appl:No75133:Peter and, 1 zilary7acq"e`s.s;Tttiis isi'=reclgiiaiest:for ,,a . t "V ianceegif4x ihe;By ,Shedule„and ;Section10Ql ,liasedoiie$u �dtng I 'Departmen,s 4h..2 t2002Notice=o - =Disapproval;whch;;slae ;-tht;a,pool', cgntr.tor usi es use'i ' a ,h n s' its>not,:pgrmrFtgd'-. ;' ,-4 'Hamlet.13, ines one,Distri r,:-s 4` �.t .e-�• ,s.�-. $- -c�+'���,�--71 Also noteallii;t'he disapproval;is;27cade_' ;G;req_t'iiiement''under=the_Bulk Schedule;>of`1 Shi F`^ i _%;20 a,,,,Esq,nft'of lot area>;forr each',usse,-' <f;ands ilotdtontains 21;7;$0'sq.ft`,with, •, wo piincipal;Musess,proposed:,=,Locati'oti,; of,=�Prdpretty: 13000 Route';25 (Mai�r,I -- ',Rohl Mattiurck,`Parcel-'1000 11 tt:- ' - ','."<`1'2=6'f<55lprin App]'Islo.•-5118-.Dorih'a-fq, „Coble"This1•is=a=request for'a 7ariance”i -!;undecr;SectionY1100:244B:based,.onnthe-r Bilild dg,r:Ddpa tiuent's`igw.:h 3;)0022 -N • oticg,;t oV ,isapprovalgcgnceiining,''the' ;;-koeati6:41;�a} e>:3:'addttion-4t1i--in uffi--�` -cientifroiif;;,and,•slde„�yar,"d;;setbacks_;, Location'.;of, Property;:F 6900,;Fair} r ;t''";B,ayvieit"Rpad,''Southold;Parcel00_p-:"! \ i• - --:. 00'4sp:tti;.n.App1:No<SI26,47biinsarid;. i:% :Saari Miller„This„is-.a,request for a j 1=r'• ;�V,arrance„ki;}under°Section 100=30A;13S,i k, /:,based on;4'it1 .Buildin Departn nt;s�.• �W,d• �My/;ar < QO i aiicg=.olr-Disappra�air;.j *sb; con' rrTTNng-1additionssand�alteraftous•for' I�'`�E *.1 _asq,,n1htfisc4elfront:-ya d setbaek',i . 'u'"d`”'':will na conform to-lithe`tcode;:require-e I _:re ner t"< eationofPyro_'pelty:,;1?13213_40#,r ` ane• heli ue Parcel :000- 8=�s~1 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS 'it��OFFOL4' 01fit, CpG Southold Town Hall Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman 1�� : 53095 Main Road - Lydia A. Tortora y Z P.O. Box 1179 �. �*i Southold,New York 11971-0959 George Horning 4 Ruth D. Oliva y 0� ,,I ZBA Fax(631)765-9064 Vincent Orlando --_ * a00' Telephone(631)765-1809 ..... '' http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD May 21, 2002 Stephen R. Angel, Esq. Esseks, Hefter &Angel 108 East Main St. P.O. Box 279 Riverhead, NY 11901-0279 Re: Appl. No. 5068 — Glenn and Christine Dawson Dear Mr. Angel: This will confirm that the above application was calendared by Resolution of the Board to the June 6, 2002 Meeting for additional information (discussed at the April 18, 2002 hearing). The hearing should begin about 7:15 p.m. Thank you. Very truly yours, A/04/6L.jokt_ Li da Kowalski cc: Mr. Bruno Cippitelli/Robert Cippitelli, Esq. i,.'•' '' t , .-.. . ' ' ' .61740, * q 411* ''' ' ' 401114%11' ' ---..,_ e k, .: ..;. , h...11." iti Trir:1:-..14:::' ''.'" ---: r. -. ,ill_ . ,,........„-A . itit /hi iliworrita .......,„ tea , ., - - _ t• , ,, , A . .. , i 1 ..t , . . , „.;."7011 • • • • :+++i ++++++i+++++++++++++ ,*' ++++� • ++ ♦+++++++++'!, ,>++ s++ ••••••++++ t +++ i+++. +++++++++++++++++++++� ;T++++• •++i +++++++++++++++i+++-,_ fir?+++,, •++++ +++++++++++++++++++ ,. ++++ • MIIMIMIll MAIN HOUSE 2 . 4,fli4t,„,„I 7NP4,41‘,.:,,o,,.. ,,,i. , „-„,..,› , , ' i ,, •,:II', ,5,..-,,, . ,.!1,..,,, ' ' . ,:.1,,' ' ,Q,', `,• '04' " I( 1 ...iv ..,. ... „ s.;i ,7, ,,,.. ...„ t , ,�� .......,:,..t.ivi,. ..._„..,,,-„,-; - - .1w.,, irip , ' ..5. '"",,-...-:"":'-f..t.-.:-'4-----,---*.:4--.4.,i!,,_.___ .. .....„,„ :. „. -, 1111, M j I = I i't € f .-, -.. ."- - 0 ., ,, . t e r� �r I it ..____ Lill-- .., _._ t' `i t[ COTTAGE ,......_ 1,4,-,0ii. ,i -.:7,-, •.-:.s.._:-..: -T. l':it.---, ;..,: .._______— i•!7. „A:7-4.„:,,,•01 • h4f., _. _ _.. • -*I , - 'kv .41 , - , _:,•-„i• --, ,4.,,,,•.,, ,, . ..• - , ,40,,„,,, .., ___.,...._____ 1' , - jt . , , -•:•:.,. -•'..*' !''..-,F..1.‘••%'.;',*- ...1._-...... - • . . •..-..,p'-', • • .'.. ' : ,, - ..4 ,- ...,• r-•, - *--"'4.'-',. •. •,,:47,1k k,i,,, '....::::.i.. :-.:..;c:4••).:,-.' :., .. 4,44i. "' ..•44 - ,„ 1 k , ., , .4-•.••;•,..0/P-;',' -•4 4 -'-.'4,i • '... e. . I...e..•.14.r," .. - • -•7.f- . -.-• --.-•. r..1, 's"'''''"..,. _ •-.Ta _ .,"-:•,..,.., . • •-`- . , ' .... ''. -...--.11#"'' -'. ... ...'-. . "'-.'.. , •r...,..-•,..4-‘, _,..... , m•-• . _ ' • - t :-•'.' -- . -- 4 ' a.-• `.- • • •.--• ' .., $' _ 4,,„,. -.---2' ,:.......••' ,.,,s, . ''i- ?'1'.:47;,*.-:ii.1.-. •-',' 4.,,74-•;•-,••r;'..:143'-' '4'4,., , - -V* '`• .;. - r's .., ...... .--,..1-... .... ,.,•'0' --,; 44:4„,,.. i 4 -. -,,,,., . '• i; .... . , zsdi,....4 - ..1 '''''' '''' .6.,:c.'-', .. • ..,, •• '-e - .." *-44'.- - -4 ';/' -4 ••'-2".,;•'''•4 4>,' •' ,,67-', -a .;, rr.L t r jiff %-- ,-- ...'•-•-•••4p • i',_.,e,'\.sz.' .. :\"5•‘'S 4.1;': ''''''‘A-' x...... '...t%", 04."'......, .1t1:04,.. .:•-. ''''''Intr`13V s ' :""`- '''','tit :411)ri...r....... - '''•-• .,• s'-•*,' pro.," ' .„. 4.1'..,"• ." •`17.6.c.: ,.,..,-7.4 i".41, , -; ,,,- _• .---7-',...-,'' .--- .:.-.--,e;-,4.-4----;#-,-... . -,7,_,., .' 0,,!•1. '- .. ......_ ,.. 4 .4 •‘.•'::t. ,-,ar.- •' . • • -sk.' • -• Ay °-41- -- .I.,1-12 -,;'t-• ' - 3$-- ..:*- -1 -.:''• ,... ''-",'.• '. ••,..., • ,,,:i4s, • '' . -egt • ";1. - - , - "" . :.,- - 7 " , p:..'''' .' ..4.''' '--:'.:-;--.1 .!--1`..(' 4.; ;• 140, --,-,!.-s ''' .64. . u_r• , :,.----.."1 ...,;,,,,:' "- . '00-- '''. _ • -. ..--_:.--' ,•-;•:. , . 16, :, f 'a , . , kk - 0 (. - • . fi -i' - • - 1° 3r'Irli. . • :rit , , , . 7.,.. _ MAIN HOUSE-SEPTIC LOCATION (FLAG) - ';' A. , . /i ,-- t.-- ''''' ' " --.• .--.N 4 , • :'ite. --f• I , . ' t ',A 4`1, ' *1 .-"•7 r \ / '' , ' '. . : 41111. -.......,./, ....14, , ,CSS‘ .1 A ii,‘ 4 • ..• _ . .1.. . ... 4 . ... , AP' •— '.0.1 4,.'.;;' ' ' ,;"' " 14. -11116 . #,) •.. ,,, , ,....- . . ____ --- ______--_-- 41,,.. . . _ , ...... ..• 7 !,. . ' • - -- '{' .•: i . --- 1 _. , iv . I, t, i 0 : , • ',[l I, '.I I: ;I, -. . t , ''- _ -...‘ ,., I ' :-:,' ' 1' ' 1 .,,, -,h.— t .4. 1; 't li t,:,vig i', , __, , r I ,I. .' ,r v , 'rol• ..; '• - - . 41P!.43. •c.:'4.6:--; -.1,. - •--•.: -,.!,,‘ . -'-•.-P-.• :';.-.:*-------.14 .-.4_1•.'.' . . ' _-....,..:- - ' i • - ,f.7.. - 'r•-•-••' -''"'"Vit - '..- . -.•- :.-: - 4."' ' -"detetftiflar,----- •'•.'4 -,7- :-'• ', -,-,•,---.._-.• ' . :"."-.-_--''• ..,.!..N., 41... 14;• . . . .. . . . .. ., . _. -1r*--i,.. -;;*-' ' -• -4.04' COTTAGE-SEPTIC LOCATION (FLAG) dk ...., ‘..: k' • a i . i •'. .. ..- ix._ '1 i 1 ............... • , ,,i' t :a ...- 1 i ! , , h 14 • , fAtiii.374 . . L 441D • . ei, .. , ' 'Et!" .. • 'AL, • ' .. , .. --.- .. . ' tr--• ,„ I i . . . , 4,i6‘ ;,-;,4mgm-i4000-0•00.-10.'r,-; tk.. • ,: Iffilist • - • . „.....:._. • - I • •._ MAIN HOUSE-PUMP AND TANK 6 1i . =' ; ir .'"`sr .• 101. VW' ' L. if 1 . Lm "....3,efict I ' .,. r 10 i • ''' I .4`,.. . N......*"..............., , .... . ' I* - le . , . t— . , I /I I . . , COTTAGE-PUMP AND TANK 7 -74.7.-X:t . t ,. ., - .I -- 'i it,,-;177,,,- i4.'1t COTTAGE - PHONE JACK 8i Il ' nowsuriarailigsmamixamagninxisrairini7//14-. ----,..,' an -.31Z r_ -- - _ _ _ -_l I gill • ,ii ___ I* r R . fix: I \. '' •1 _, 1 i I COTTAGE - ELECTRICITY METER -:. - ig! "-- ,* ..0 0 i� __$ +., i -, i w� rt t Rt , ..-1 , : - (1_,, - ! . ► 1 i1H! ., -4,' . -,-,yo ; . 2.,..,.... _„ 1 i s . I V .1 __f Lii 1 .k ,, \w . . Y `" 00 _J il 4 I •I 11,1 9, 10, 11 ,, ,i : COTTAGE - INTERIOR 4 r q . .._ e 1 ----4., -.-- ''.4 I . g - 3) til," - t tr s ' ! t°14:4°11."0.11:#! . . 12 ,......... Ii '1 I- -_ i 111 1 t I k k.... , - COTTAGE lailbi.- -INTERIOR , (PRONE AND 13 KITCHEN) itialto, ,. ' i 1 . , I . - hhe, il . i Fr .:j P. 1 i' - -- • -1 1' !"4,-"`"." 1, W101 i t I A , 1, 7 1 . 1RVIII4VIIIII.1- . 1 I ) I • , . , . ., .- „ . . . ... , . .- . . . . 4:- ... ...-,, ,__-.1.-....z. . . t i k ! mow- ' Iii f r ii \' i;13r,It r r i :gr.,' ,�.�_ ' — 116 411%ibrlilj.:,3 Iv \ COTTAGE - LIVING ROOM N. 1 5 '0,-..•-.,1, '\ t _ yam`, r\• i �� •'i:,..1111-Aelitii',,,,,•,,, 7:.,'f.::,„..,',-- te,t, ,.4r!, 'j , r ir � + axt i • _ 1- / p r � b 1 ` . 1,'',,r,.--'-' � r.`4 t 4:-, '`' t . I y r!. �+!i/b •l 1 •� _, `�jr A `. i'( ' 4 ffr a'. e+v 'IP 7 1�j'. { r .j • / ), ..,� i .r. 777 V � ,R" Ti x • • i.r ixi�' .. ../ ; . ._f i VIEW OF MAIN HOUSE AND COTTAGE LEGAL'NOTICEI .' " 1 --- 6J-12"° Ngri[cEpT,?Viimp:ifigAttriii0-7,'I ktux,tiotille4N,-,Wiiiiiitie:,-Y‘ STATE OF NEVV YORK) )SS: .,,.._,..,,!•,-....,,,,L;1,-f, .-' 'A,"Ap • is [ iiiiPE4t.S:,:t'"-:",:.-''-'' - -;.9'PlIaPPPY ,Applicant ,Jr,°P,C00-- ',''';1•. ,Iiiiiitsiiit killiII,4849.02r-2 :trit'aii.Orti6tad't,litibtia'and,Yalterations,40- COUNDlit-O/F4?UFFV) -• NOTICE itakiy:e IS HEREBY a'svepApg-,,,yx4h:,,,,y11,!•ktei'd,iti#VOi, -..-.... -:—/e,"frAz A44, -.- „,e.... of Mattituck, in said iiiiiiiiki,soi4!j02';:iEfice.'Towri,La* -•:frO"*"ilie-;frOnt:preilerty;iine,'It,.37'5,:- la dii4itei.4017#01ii4.0,9*-,Orr1liC- ::*1:444**Y:'§4gliild:;:r.*?61-104'-' county, being duly sworn, says that he/she is Principal TOwn*SointiOliCilieliilloNyiireappliz; A7,•=27,3.7,'11143:1$1(conahined aSoneSot).: I rk of THE SUFFOLK TIMES,a weekly newspaper,pub- ,. ,-,..,- - -::, cations- JfeUrd:- 'by09,1-ROBB.RT- clerk sbutHo0 .fo,wriSd.iit0).=,-'OF-••-.7§:a{iid-DOXOTHrYOUNet Thi APPiAis atF"'ilier''%wii.14rall;', 3-9§5 ' eiinestY'Kir-iV-Vati':anc-e7uiri ;7Selltits•O'i.; lished at Mattituck, in the Town of Southold, County of MaidkOicl,,844tiad,l,/44161,11197:r,.--.,ifoo=iVa‘4.:i---1a-ji'-'7'..qp004)'g., Suffolk and State of New York,and that the Notice of which . .......spffittiRsdAY.IT -' 'lilt-18'2062; Iii'-6'• ,4Department's'f -Veli'rti ' -'4" 2- ' "• -,,,..; ., ;at , , _...ary , 299 i,gonce pub- times' :fiatedlgOW-(OrfaS-SbOn thereafter 'OffpisapPrOyal:•'!'Appliear#:-prOPOse.4, the annexed is a printed copy, has been regularly as possible): -T.:,'';, ,',1•ik-'''al,,i:',;',,:-'-",`-, • new accessory garage asa 01:.14,F#0 lished in said Newspaper once each week 5:46,-ii.in.zApP)i.,l'No':5i)4 ,,,FOYP_ ,:iknii:ienlargenient•fitiess'thin_tea feet . ' i weeks successively, commencing co-' ` Tor KiN"W4RUSTS'f(Continuation froth- jikmelosetiktliriq,at 62615North January 209 10; Calendar as ;Roid;:r.GireeliPi?it;''i)4cvei0602464-8: on the day -- --'?-',1•05 pm''Appl o -IR. AND requested by aPPINaP9-`: ' ,-7;;' . ._. • : ,• .: . f "7/7/e/G- 204.1--, • 5:45 p.m. 'APO.,NO.'5082],!PAUL _ 1,'ARN0LD:"ThiSiv,a jequest for a 0 AHLERSZ)Z-.1his'W;41'reqiiestiltif‘.-a -Varianeentitier-','SectiOir i0039:0", •-,••3/arfailce•:,eiideviSppfiorP400733,C....anq hased on the Building.;Inspector's ••11:10,t30A:4ptttiiiidn.:.qiit the. Building , •Janattiy„!-14,2902 2,1OltiCeiifpisaiihr:Oaf. -DePartinendJaiiiiiik,'k20‘02,NoticeOf Applicant is'proposing to construct incipal ClerkF4ci a :DiSappitiValAegaiding*pliCantta,:plan , rear deck addition*itk,4Fcilikkjatlei , t616cateiaria.keeSioty.ISIO-rage'biiilding - •than 75 raetTfrorivit wood retaining wall, :6-'Withii setbackielegi","thanqi,:recteet,frOni 'it'216'Bay.Shore TRoad,.Greenport;- Sworn to before me this /5 .the property line: •'1-., 1',4.`,%...-4 I, parcel J ,53-4 3. 5:55,154---:Ap0114,5083;44T1-10-, - 7;10 p;m:;.AP-Pl.No.5093-EDGE- _ day Ous 20 NY,-CARNESL":,This is a;iitiiielt,fot„.a:- y/,4,T„.,F41.lg.A:his is-a request for a , ,.i **TitiWiiirciketaAiiiiiTI00:144`and?.=_Fc. rianceAliAreilSettion 100-231, and 6-1774-606:14,6-nzki-C.- 400;2448'z.'biiaill''frin 'the Buil-dine=;g100,3,1d.4B;',4ased on the. Building : LAURA E. BONDARCHUK Departments January,:-21;,-...,2092,..„,,,,,Wp:dilnynt!fi iAmended Fibinary.,,27,',,,,.: Notary Public, State of New York 4iinondsdlsrmice.Of Disappcovaltegard: .:;902,NotiFp..of DiSapprovCApplieUnt7 I No 01 B06067958 '...in-"iAipli'c'itIaVulfdini...-peititifi'liSplic'a=,.-1,,,'piotiblait-1-.(1),-,after-datk lighting,:a:prO=,--I Qualified in Suffolk County ' Ar-- 41,04,4orlheqas'ppilt,109atipwpf;:v.44,:,loitp4,,1140,:' FAi proposed,accessory My Commission Expfres Dec.24,20.1-',-1 ii0rOya-tikroiis,',41365: 4413ep:01i:f *:6/14t*,ienr,0,,,i6Ourt structure, and,(2).•:,:, '--:-- Road. Southold;i Parcel 1000-93-1-6.2. tennis court fOncing over tkeltaiglit;lim,:, The rafifiiis,Seated in,theT,Npti4;of.Acitation Ofl'Aie7,0-.4:p for an 44esstir.yiry_, :iisjiPpr.041:!!',,,ii:•44.g.k !-.46,,-:41 ,built";_ vale tennis court. Locatipiitafi*dpeEty::,`,.' gz:Owejlingi*) spllino-45-;ffe:5.,arici::2.04;e6A,f4:;•;IIOutbA-ii/WaViddIe. d,OiAeh.pirt; ---;:.flatOhe'af000s;ii-aitiiPti4a*ecit'alZ4ido-p14.104:4Q-td01)-1 6:f4arlIrOfTesS,thatf35 feet,-`,4d4fie:PrO-771?-•::::',";,;'•7425-,4in•Cl'APPI,No. 5094-D0N7:' --.'' .,.. pViet;‘addifioii/altelatiO*incie*,k40-i::1ALD-BPSICARD,_.,•.IThi a is a requestfor,-, degree ot non-CiMforiiiiik,,,•=4'1144 Variance under Section 100-33.based ( 6:00 p.m. -Appl..-NO, 5084.„';,-640-'_•,-•Onfli'eIBlii4.4g445'04q,ors,..F.epplp.ry:,y cifthicg-$s$L-g.,!;,,T#j'ii-iWt-tgsiiiast,,H4002,i45,1ic:641)iOppi.91.41,.regardingrff;:' -foircii-,Yar1ince',.`,..pideiro,sec0,09s;!,1.00 - --itWio'CAticii_i,:2if4ii)015ciedl-aedeiiiirp.161. _1143:k?encia00-:142; _beasecf on the swimming pool structure, at 7,27051....7,1 ljnildihg:-„7.;.-Departmenc,s-4anuaryA7g10 -.1„,, ,,I.Oillette.Drive..;Bast,Marion;'t, Parcel-. .2002„NOtiCe-of Disapproval.,Applicant .1000-38-3-21].. is Ini3O'Siiiit,°:0,_,ns*`Pi(T.,00*.:kliii1OC'4",''-\::'L MAR-7i367iiTILLAiPi,N,6:',2599 ,- •-i REALTYGUS-- located„:ip,::tile-tighop-dvsiriq',, g4e,ii-1, 3,71ils,ii':ii..r0:99p,At forn1•`',': f..•biariet,'-Viti... a_-building frOinage-n-,''Variance finaer,4kti6.4-1!99-;3144:,ka57et-A:, • i•1 (width)foktei-;.th'iii',:sakf4:ippgesii4A,,,ii4_i•-§iiith:4f.sulidirii-'PAi4qp_dip..Mia#Tyv-,••1 `'-leskthatir,19:-feet-fiont the tear Pippotty,24i:',..,7,-1092 NOtia,Of)31SaPir.O'Valt-14i,t4g,j4_ - 'Ime,,at 640 Church Lane, Cutehogue; location of a new dwelling at less than , ,•,1000-96-1-11.1. ., , 40 feet from both front property lines,at rooms,as owner-resident occupying this P.O.Box 117 - 6:15 p.m. Appl. No. 5085 -JOHN 380 Marina Lane,East Marion;'•Parcel dwelling. • - .'z Southold,NY 11971-0959 and CYNTHIA KISTMER. This is a • 1000-35-8-5.14. 8:05 p.m. Appl.No.5068-CHRIS- 2272-1TA4 , - request for a Variance under Section 7:40 p.m, Appl.No.5097,J.AND TINE AND GLENN DAWSON, 100-33, based on the ,Building C.SLECKMAN. This is a request for a regarding a request for a Certificate of Occupancy for two single-family resi- Departnaenes November 20, '2001 Variance under Section 100-242A and dential structures located at 150 Notice of Disapproval regarding appli- 100-244B, based on the Building Broadwaters Road, Cutchogue; Parcel cant's"as built”location of an accesso- Inspector's January 28,2002 Notice-of 1 104-104. A,pplicains:(1)request ry storage building in an area other than Disapprov.al regarding the recOnstruc- an Interpretation of Section 100-241G the required rear yard, at 300 Holden tion of the dwelling with addition(s). and 100-242A of the Zoning Code;and Avenue,Mattituck;.Parcel 1000-110-2- The proposed construction with addi- 9. tion is"as builr at less than 10 feet on ,(2)Appeal for a Variance or other relief, regarding the Building Department's 6:25'p.m. Appl No. 5086-JOHN one side yard and less than the mini- . • Notice of Disapproval dated December AND KATHLEEN AHEARN. This is a muni 25 feet total for both sides,at 150 14, 2001, which states that an request for a Variance under Sections• OakAvenue,Southold; Parce11000-77- Accessory, nonconforming cottage is 100-242A and 100-244B,based on the 2-5. non-habitable based upon the Building Building Department's January 14, _7:50'p.m. Appl. No. 5121 -_CUS- Inspector's Housing Code Inspection 2002 Notice of Disapproval. Applicants TOM DESIGNER HOMES,INC.,This Report of 4/13/00 and pursuant to have requested a building permit for is a request for a Variance under Section Article VCR;Section 100-241G,which construction of a rear deck addition 100-32 based on the Building which does-not meet the side yard Department's March 4,2002 Notice of •states: Whenever a nonconforming use of a requitement of 10 feet on one side and Disapproval, regarding the "as built" ; _building or premise has been discontin- 15 feet on the other side, and which location of a proposed new dwelling,at uedfor a period of more than two(2) •exceeds the 20 percent lot coverage lim- less than 50 feet from a front property years or has been changed to a higher itation of the code. Location, of, line facing a right-of-way,at 4700 Main classification or to a-conforming use, Property: 480 Dawn Drive,Greenport; Road,Greenport; Parcel 1000-35-5-5.1. anything'in this'Aitick to the contrary 1000-35-5-13. . „ 7:55 p.m.Appl.No.5129-ARLENE notwithstanding,the nonconforming use 6:35 p.m. Appl.No. 5087 -JOAN YOUNGMAN., This is a request fora of such building or Premises shall no WOOD. This is a request fora Variance Variance under Section 100-33C,,baied longer be permitted unless a variance under Section 100-244B based on the on the Building Department's February therefor shall have been granted by the Building Department's December 20, 22,'_2002 Notice of Disapproval, • Board of Appeals. 2001 Notice Of Disapproval. Applicant requesting relief from the setbacks 8:4p.m. Appl.No.5077 and 597:- is proposing to construct additions/alter; restricted under ZEA Appeal No.5013 THEcce .. .: :si IS. ations to a nonconforming accessory dated October 25,2001,for an accesso- (Continuation from .--,.. • ch 21,2002 building with a total lot, coverage iy garage building. The"as built"loca- Hearings Calen.•,'or ad.t:•.al infor- exceeding the code limitation of 20 per- tion of the garage building is less than mation •.• •pplicant.) cent. Location of Property: -8910 -10 feet from the ide property line and . - :oard of Appeals will hear all Peconic Bay Boulevard,Laurel; Parcel -less than 20 feet from the front property persons,or their representative,desiring 126-5-5. - . line,at its closest points. Location of to be heard at each hearing,-or desiring 6:45 p.m. Appl.No.5089-GARY - Property: 1010 Salt Marsh Lane, to submit written statements before the •AND JOANNA CAMPO. This is a Peconic;Parcel 1000-68-3-6. conclusion of the hearing. Each-hearing request for a Variance under Section 8:00 p.m.Appl.No,5075-DIANNE will not start earlier than the time desig- 100-244B, based on the Building DANEK. This is a request for a Special nated above. Files.are available for Department's January 31,2002 Notice Exception permit,under Zoning Code review during-regular Town Hall busi- of Disapproval. Applicant is proposing Section 100-31B-14,to establish a Bed ness days(8-3 p.m.). If you have ques- to construct an addition at less than 35 and Breakfast Use as an accessory to the tions,please do not hesitate to call(631) feet from the rear property line,'at 650 applicant-owner's single-family 765-1809. Three'Waters Lane, Orient; 'Parcel dwelling use at 290 Private Road#32, Dated: March 29,2002. 1000-15-6-24. ' ' • also refernui to sag nrotat Pnofi Wow 04/03/2002 17:56 6317659064 ZONINGAPPEALSBOARD : PAGE 03 • • ORIGINAL ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS • • TOWN OF SOUTHOLD:NEW YORK -- -------- .......---------...... ---------__--x In the Matter of the Application of . AFFIDAVIT Christine and Glenn Dawson OF SIGN • (Name of Applicant) POSTING Regarding Posting of Sign upon Applicant's Land Identified as • • 1000- 104 - 10 - 8 • COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) • STATE OF NEW YORK) I, David P. Moore, residing at Orient, • • , New York, being duly sworn, depose and say that: • On the 9th day of April , 2002, 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 re '-fined in place for seven days • • prior to the date of the subject hearing d- }�.-, ea ,�g , .44: shown to be io David P. Ploo`featlJre) Sworn to before me this • • • • 18th day of April , 200'2. ((Ar 6 ) O� MARGARET BIZZOCO I otary Publi 0 No. 01 8146910 Sew York • Qualified in Suffolk County ( Commission Expires May 31.20 *near the entrance or.driveway entrance of my•property, as the area most visible to passersby. APR.19.2702 11:30AM ESSEKS HEFTER ANGEL("114' 11 NO.914 P.1 l Lk: ql I' I rirf.;. `III 1 � I 1 1 1, 1 Esselc} iii': , .AngeI 1,1'n,,;i:'!(, `::vI' Law W 108 Y# y1,i ti: tiliStreet p„,tl}(I; `.I `: i,79 Riverheai,, in!, f`. ,,,I„rk 11901 (631) 369-1700 'I'`4 1f11, 'ne-. 1 (631) 369-2065-Fax No. 1 I . , I ,1 ir ?,,,-,,, 1 Date: April 18, 2002 11,11 ',l To: Linda Kowalski @ South s IfliAgt r,'”,,,r: II;;,. Board of Appeals Fax No,: 765-9064 3; j;�l'��` 'ri I4 i1� re 411 1 `' ; Ilei Esq. From; Margie Bizzoco for S'teph')�Iilii'.;'—$;a_, , S i4!,11 ,> ,I,Re: Glenn and Christine Da rr '1';.':..,`� ;2 Hearing, Appeal #5068 ll<1, liJt., r5�lj 1 m I I tl '1 � Total pages: 2 l' r""Y rla,N,?..,..-.:;.1,,I i IA,,j1 'i i l;. ,'i I,7k Phil.4.'.II Comments: Attached please find cop.11',', 1;, ,,tit of sign posting regarding the above. ' +it Y ";ili, 111 I tI, . n_a1I1I 1 . 1 1, t1I ! I• i,l i10-" ' ,,' I" x71'I , III ' reI. J 'p�� :"e 1 111111 ',:.,1 1 k 15 qt. ll 1� �i �,.n 11 11 �II ��. 11I 11i I�1� '1 fi,l 4 I CON`Pl'i"?�,I�'1,t•kr'y 1 tivc�'T10E iif;1 I �li ' ', The documents accompanying this telecopy trans " 1i +'l'i,t,;r'1,ain information which is confidential and/or legally '1 t `i �p+: entity g y privileged. The information is intended on P 'trdl i�1'. �1, • of individual or maned on this transmission sheet. If you are not the intended re > II i , late herebynotified that an •disclosure, copying, } 1= Y distribution or the tiling of any action in reliance��� I��� ,°¢� '� nts of this telecopied information is strictly prohibited,and that the documents should be ret ,I ,1111',A.1 1:1 .-"`i, firm immediately. In this regard,if you have received this telecopy in en or,please notify us by 1i' ; `P .,,.. mediately. I iM�ii�l ' DATE SENT: April 18, 2002 TIME Siff 1,' INITIALS: M5 11 1 {' 1 1,, a ,illl al a,II : '1 i JI ,r.,:nli 1?„I i4'111'111 I I t� Q 1 f fY�'V I34 tll I� ' OAPR.18.20021711:90AM6317 ;--'`S HEFTER ANGE II ' NO.914 F. %■NFNGAPpEAlrS�"'RD : rr�GE 03 s i I "Il I 11 . frl . II;�I1 . ,( 1 , . 1 rL� II II i 1 i. .-.� w I JI ,,. .1r. I ,I' fY 11 : . 11.1 11 1I' I . ZONING BOARD OF APPEA. I�f E , ' '•'p TOWN OF SOUTHOLD:NE r. H,".':,i,1!j 1. -_e Flatter of the A � licatio' ' '� f, ' • In the pp ,��1�1 I; ., P�l.11 �, AFFIDAVIT Christine and Glenn' Dara •., �AI OF SIGN (Name of Applicant) ; C 111 l POSTING , II ,� • Regarding Posting of Sign up . -1, !I I .. Applicant's Land Identified as'! i1 1 IIF',, . . 1000- 104 - 10 - 8 I ' ' G . COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) �� ii1 ' STATE OF NEW YORK) X11"'1 !rill' 1'a�.. il I II I, David P. Moore, II X111, 1 , I residing at Orient, Il I .Ali ` 7 N , Ne,,� " ' 1 `. c- ng duly sworn, depose and say that: , !.i, 11Y it On the 9th day of �l,l filil,X;1., 1 , 2002, I personally placed the Town's official Poster, with th ''116,-,111111-,-..111 Baring and nature of my application noted thereon, securely upon ji`,. •i ;,, rty, located ten (10) feet or closer from the street or right-of-way (dri rtwf ;t` I,.l ;44, nce) -facing the street or facing each U ,�+11 n�r1;+ I street or right-of-way entrap i ' 1;; , 1 ! t IlIl�, ISI I hereby confirm that t �; Ni ,l. ..ii has ret,-fined in place for seven days . prior to the date of the subje.�; l•IiI""'. a = t� ea 'rg:47,..•14,,s] shown to be 11 ir I III ' Signature) Il ral i I David P. moo e ' li ' � • Sworn to before me this 1I.:1, !it'lilt 1 IIT'• I 18th day of April , 200.2 iNI I1' ' I 1I '11,1 'f, / ) a I 11 '= -tate of New York 1 -otary Pubii I Ij1 �jf�i1,V '1. 01aI4691045 t I la', I,, , ' •• in Suffolk Counts 6i0, 1 , �-2%,,,1 Expires May 31,2 .� *near the entrance or.drivew 4 t)''' ' ,..1e of my properly, as the area most visible ' to passersby, �f'� i;1, I, j � • .1I ,Ill l a4 ll 1: • • utI ' fl L,1111. ' i1 '�1 111 11i . • . .4'., 111 ,, I i NFI i • 1, 'p , II II 141 "1JI11 APR.17.2002 10:36AM ESSEKS HEFTER ANGEL NO.863 P.1 L, I ,I I Essek , left 'r'&Angel Att rIneys at Law 108 ast M in Street P d , Bo I 279 Riverbed , NeWlY'ork 11901 (631) 369-1700 ! ' ! (631) 369.2065-Fax No. I PAX Wit SKEET Date: April 17, 2002 To: Linda Kowalski @ South ll Zo frig Board of Appeals Fax No.: 765-9064 I i From: Margie Bizzoco for Stepp i� R. igel, Esq. Re: Glenn and Christine 1Daw tin 4/ 18102 Hearing, Appeal #5068 Total pages: 5 Comments: Attached please find afl`i4avit or Mailings w/white receipts (and green receipts received so far) ' tirsua i ti to your instructions of 4/3/02. it � I � I I CONFI ENTTA i NOTICE Ii 1 The documents accompanying this telecopy trans i siva .oitain information which is confidential and/or legally privileged. The information is intended on y for til! use of the individual or entity named on this transmission sheet. If you are not the intended r ci ient, 'au are hereby notified that any disclosure,copying, distribution or the taking of any action in relianc4 on the 'ontents of this telecopied information is strictly prohibited,and that the documents should be ret reed to his firm immediately. In this regard,if you have received this telecopy in error,please notify us b;tGlepho t e;immediately. I DATE SENT: Apgril 17, 2002 TIME ENT: INITIALS: M15 0APR.17.20e2171e_36Art317LESSEKS HEFTER ANGEL' ii QNINGAPPEALSBOARD : NO.883 P.2GE 04 ii' . ZONING BOARD OF A,. r ;A • TOWN OF SOUTHOLD:NEC • III�� -r- ---x In the Matter of the Applicat lofi , • A►FFIDAVIT Christine and Glenn Dawsi�n , OF (Name of Applicants) MAILINGS CTM Parcel#1000- 104 I -8 ti V y,rr_.rr � V�/ COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) . i STATE OF NEW YORK) , ' . 1, Margaret Bizzoc ,, I residing at Ronkonkoma, , N w 4ofboing duly sworn, depose and say that: On the 9th day 'f:. A ii , 2002, I personally mailed i ,,Ri e. head , New York, by CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIP ,lgQ IU , STED, a true copy of the attached Legal ' Notice in prepaid envelop add = sed to current owners shown on the current • assessment roll verified fro thei ftciai records on file with the (x) Assessors, or ( ) County Real Propert 'Of 1c,- ' • , for every property which abuts and i actor! ,, public or private street, or vehicular right-of- way of record, surrounding thelao ��I cant's property, in an official depository under the exclusive care an e��°slo. of the United States Postal Service • within the State of New 0; . aI , , � 4- ° (Signature) , H 1 digaret •1 z co Sworn to before me this 1 1 -1 ; ' ' day of April , 20 1;1 ,2. i• Q. ' LA6tattotY ! ,(• otary Pubic) �•e,474 •instal PLEASE list, on the back of I�184 idavit or on a sheet of paper, the lot numbers • next to the owner names ra. l acii. asses for which notices were mailed. Thank you. ,, , a Ili ' . I 'i I I ' i l • ryI I 0 RPR 10:37RM ESSEKS HEFTER ANGEL ; 1 NO�.883 F.3 . 1I .1 d 1 ,, .1 1 .1 Bruno Cippitelli ' I `' it ! 17 Kings Lane New Hyde Park, NY 11040 11 1000-104-10-7 I .! !I Return Receipt No. 7099 3220 0003 7 §3'!40 .!1 ; J 1 Robert and Barbara Ringewald i, 1 i 2150 Nassau Point Road ; Cutchogue, NY 11935 1 1000-104-10-9 Return Receipt No. 7099 3220 0003 70!814.§ Iul Kenneth and Deborah Seiferth 1' .1 140 Whitehall Boulevard II Garden City, NY 11530 H i i ' 1I 1000-104-10-10 11 ,1k Return Receipt No. 7099 3220 0003 74311,4§! 5 Robert J. and Linda L. Gallagher !1 '1 " Ij 137 Meadowbrook Road 1.1 II I' Garden City, NY 11530 1, 1 ' 1000-104-12-8.2 11 !I Return Receipt No, 7099 3220 0003 7 814§ 1 li Charles F. Maguire and Wife I: 11 , P. 0. Box 1027 1! ii Cutchogue, NY 11935 '; H', '1 1000-104-12-14,1 1 1 Return Receipt No. 7099 3220 0003 7 8 e:i4 9 y l . P 11 i 1 II . IIS � ; 11 'i li 11 1 II I• ' 1, it 1. � I it I 'I1il ii I I' Ill, II li ' APR.17.2002 10:37AM ESSEKS HEFTER RNGEL I ' NO.683 P.4 , - U.S r'os1iit Set,vIce - ' 'I' r' I ,IJi.ECI-MAIL`RECEIPT , . SENDE'R'•COMP1t6TE THIS S C,-NON' . ` `/ C`Q /t , • is}liG.M'l:rr1 Only,;No lnsirr',irl, r c',rc•'c-,cijc- Pict✓!: E ON ; ETF i'rir pr (r,i7l,;er IVC . A Complete items 1,2,and 3.Ale°completes A. R R. dyed Y -e pNl(1 faddy) ': •of D. very hent 4 If Rea4rictod Delivery is desired. ) ,.- ' o e R Print your name and address on the reverse �� • 1, • so that we can return the card to you. C. S nature I • ■ Attach this card to the back of the rna0plsoa, X / i ` i.,KAcent postoao e 4 1 Q I 0 or on the front If space permits. 1 1 I 0 Addressee 1. Article Addressed to; 0 Is delivery adeps :dlpf, -',from item 1? 0 Yea Certified Fee ' If YES,enter Postmark Q e daily' ad, :ea below. ❑No n Receipt Fee � Here 1 ment Required) Iu ii I rd Delivery Fee + ' / , n , ;I I most Required) ^-rw/ydiA ^ {� •��1� (, I 'I�, °eteoo a Foes /p�`�'('J�/y�•Gk..�: ��.�LPC f �- //ocIo 3. ervIce 1ypfi ,I ,. 4 • (f POS t.ii SSisf Nlcu, IM Certified Mal Q[ . e Mall '"IVIED MAIL, RECEIPT` 0 Registered i'I Rer Receipt for Merchandise ' ' ®Insured Mall CF+ D� rest/L Ma11"DulIV Nu inscganoe.i vi,tt.r,gc Piovlc _ _ 4. Rebtrletotl Dell 1 0 Yes r�,I r,;;. `. 2. Art e N •er gopy from service label) I If o etaiaL a _. PS Form 3811,July 1999 A Domestic Return Receipt I I i 102595•OO•M-Oa Poe,ge $ /""r"" `I " Certified Fee _ I �� �1 I /� A_..� ^- vn Roelof Foo Post e rA 15//0 9� -ae,4.)(-4/ & /' f a` ` 3, ervice Type ; I 1 mens Required) were ette-Ott rCA -J J /i / 5r Certified ail I ■ 9 • Malt---Merck ndle "a ;,•• . . —_ --- +_p e9 I to R" I n Receipt for Me►chandlee _.....— _ •- - - ' - s 'TI,FIE,p MAiL, IRECEiI>r rlrovi.I=rg,THrs. 'f is 1101,1 r•r!`OLLI,VJ_' , is e'Ui N1,.u1.!(Juuly. No ((Hiur,an,:b C, r,r,l,i t'r,.,:r SENDER: COMpc,ETC THIS bE( r1ON ,, , ,. a Complete items 1,2,and 5.Also complete A. Received by(Pie : P Mnt eify) B. Date of Delivery item 4If Restricted Delivery is desired. ' I I 41; I t��-1®_p� ,,Sonet° ',, , a Print your name and address on the reverse I 1, ' so that we can return the card to you. C. to - ` Agent `�- - ® Attach this card to the back of the rnailpiece, or n the front If spa°e permits. ! ,' C7 Adaressoa Postage D. le delivery a•• '• •d fereri item 19 0 Yes �/(�I 1. Icle Addressed to; a f YES,enter dell p: >sbd>r .�elovv: 0 No Certltred Fee a.,44,1) 1.00.1-6.4.0.1 (44. 1 W I i 'I m Receipt Fee 04 Postmark _/-, �(J 1 morn Required) Here NO I ' rd Delivery Fee v W mom Required) 41-A-4-44.. h/5-bo 1'.. .�„ retaoo a Fooe / 3. S Nlce Type ! I 1 f--_ I Certltled Maid ; DI Ex�,�S,, Mall 'e++ P!int�erl)y (re br cam Iola by manor %I G7 Registered I 1 Re i n -ocelpt for Merchandise yL x,Q G,1L (�tr� 0 Insured Mall ' �:C. ;p. or.Net or D ox o. a A _ b' • 4. Restricted Deilli - lc' pe 0 Yeszr,- -�••••'1•-•r--• e a ' /4-4-d /1 36 2, At/I le Number(coy from service las°v5A010 000.5 15bi757 x400JuIv ,q9.9 • • PS Form 3811,July 1999 Domestic Return Receipt I , J I 102595 ov M•oe52 let Ser v ,,,e' IP I' Ii ? iED MAIL Fit=C•E I sfic It1•III V iii N. ;Tut_0! I)r,,, c:,x�s,.,rrea f'„Yi iil,c: < I R (:n�1,re; I I A,P,.11rli Sri,l`r,r ' �, - - 1t 1 1 1I � f1+1 Peata6e Si Li Cartmed Fee I I rk' lflmk Mara i etuRin Fee 175 (EndorsementR gquired) p RoQideted Delivery Poo r3 (nd01Bement Requiter$ ' © Tod postage&Feels 1 ' f1.1 rti N pe(plow® flu Greeny) fb co-ipfeod by aarf i 1, • I a, pi pe {'`iPO or 4.)(yt�ar'': ) i ,i ^ -..11:-.%:;11-„oma11°-......-1-----777.. f IK 211) APR.17.20O2 10:38AM ESSEKS HEFTER ANGEL II, NO 883 P.5 I 1 I . . ., I' � . CE EDMAII- REC'EiPT ' , ' I, Lila) rf,u OrnIf Nc'bIi14.a•Ne (,u1,cl fik P1uviclq, I' [i- ® • l I C, .. L ••• , r ENDER &4IIIPLETE THIS sECrrp'II +:unu,,,e'r:r1rlo,,�SfruLny r)v lltl ri4trrt • , / a .. 1/1111111111 Peetaeo I Complete items 1,2,and 3.Also complete A. Received/�by�(Please f41i S. 0 e of Delivery : 1 ref It Item 4 if Restricted Delivery Is desired. 11Lt�p�.5 4' -, r d , Certified Pea `'t d{'( w Print our name and address on the reverse poet It so th t we can return the card to you. C.Signature PO m Receipt Kee He • Atte this card to the back of the mall leve, x �'�gul ©Agent mvnt Required) p1./ . tri a Dvuve Fee or the front if space permits. I �Il Cl Addressee N - D. Is delivery address"ke; r•. 14,lttm 1? 00 Yes_ ment ftequlretll I. Article Addressed to if YES,enter dellve�'s �1•e el w No Meso a Fen P(kiZA,w., PGli l l.q,•e 4.4%,011)49 i , I woe pre,.3 earry (71�be complefod y me er — o I, 1,1141 /� , JI,.Q1E� P•o. /JG /Dar/ .pr No.; rPOBox Ns. ..,.... i ; I �I Service Type Mei! 1; Ire ro f,tl q t Q t'�. S. Type � ., � •,�,7„g I u �liul�II .-00,,. • I•c a , •' Se Rc c..r r'tol;.Nistruc(i 0 Registered 'U'; aur I'ae alp for Merchandise 0 Insured Met ,} D — 4. Restricted Deliveryll , , ' ' 13 yes Article Number(Copy from service label) { '709 9 j Otga1 11 1115 S Form 3811,.July 1999 Domestic Return Receipt 102595.00-M•o95 I ' , II i I, I. I i I 1 � I �I ! , ' . ; ' II , r .1 II: , ,I I I Vi , TRANSMITTAL MEMO TO: ZBA Chairman and Members FROM: ZBA Office Staff DATE: I/6702- SUBJECT:- Update With reference to the above application, please find attached the following new information added to the official ZBA office file: c • Comments: Number of Pages Attached: L TrMemo.doc , 3 ;• ! . , . • - -,,,,) / he ,z - oppd ,-.- f7 $' Armen!.1 CI . ?)/Z / -:: i i Ai b A6pCiig as i .101-U/4 i'.' P/ Sr/. / ,iic// z: EZ x gj )11D (rAiWi 'NIJ JO% puz SLUOCid J-I001 U01.1.139.10,1, e ..1 ' tiFP/ 9 ., / -; 1/ x" c•2 / / 7p# .---lod )„, ...-•; r-.-67 21-',2-0-' '218 Joolj 4S[ SLU0011 f r•Vr7A 4' / i , 4001 adA± i . # , 9,1f, (146; r a 0 ,.i• c,,, . a 408H , aocid 84!/1 cz / ' a-, ere' ,17 / k I ' uo!sue.4x3 . ......- f '231 t71 1711:4 PHp LISJoa4u1 ' ,..?' ' ,/-)'-'''' si tom .4x3 ,. .7 -S 2 =/.-c %/-c x ' "t to!st_33 j•-•,--•••-•4,-.7..1 N voolj • d-417 4U9LUOSIf 67 e I/7 -C 946 ), (9°)P.: , .c. A -er gp / UOISU94X3 04.13U!CI / LODE] c',."r'r 41 uo!4opunoj .7 E.S''' : 14 7 X ,A i I# 'BPIEI 'IN -,„ -1-i `O/"/4-7, " 4 -61 I t _ r6 /1 Q2Q )/(gli -----„,-- x)ou wrot :, ,r,/ N -u--•• 7fr levi444 - -. . ,-. , •- . . . ...... 4 4'1 A ( Qi-la 2--C - ..4 . \-----L/--,--,,vi , - 64* .-----. , •=g, /-- "—.'-'' ... ..1.-- . I . 11 :. . -v.2 0%1. t.r.s.„.. ,...i c....,:. Id 1 kr X/7/ V krE-7--"Plio • 0_0011.11116, .,92,i • . c..... 4" ki • ,:.. L• -` -- .,0-„,-34.0 'if,40.,,,- . tE.4.*:;t4i>. %:1-7.V.i:; :•:1,:,:rr•si? i:.::•:4.. - 21010D -144. .A, ••6.,..*,:. ,;•• s• i A,.-:a,f1';:'-{W.-.'4.,',04-i':••-.'•'' - ";..4,U;ii! ' ."i#4491,'',71;!;•?''..,,,-;••••,;' ;..i,,,r,, • t44-f.ir_i - vii-,:,-: -1," Asivii •.,:iiy,o. „ r :,,t,, .........., ' "1 .-0-:-.- .,,,:,===.1,,r1-... ,-----, .„--, —--. , )1-----0='-lik,..-- .... ., _ _.. I 0,024j _........ . 11 , • . 4 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY CHECKLIST FOR NEW PROJECTS LABEL APPL# ,� ASSESSORS CARD (7 COPIES) NAME ,,I11, ;�, ✓ CTY. TAX MAP (7 COPIES + 1) CTM# p - INDEX CARD (ATTACH OLD) TOWN ..—A-1..04/;,, LIST ALPHA BOOK RESEARCH ALPHA COPY PRIORS SIX COPIES EP= INSPECTION PACKETS COMPLETE • REF: UPDATED NEW INFORMATION L/c Z, S � h..- 4 a( Lal-zf � -a . OFFICE OF `A J ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 Email: Linda.Kowalskia,Town.Southold.nv.us or Paula.Quintieri aATown.Southold.nv.us (631) 765-1809 fax (631) 765-9064 x69- „,2oS April 3, 2002 ,� � £-b Re: Chapter 58 - Public Notice for Thursday, April 18, 2002 Hearing d. 5-fi e Dear S�erM m: 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 the above sketch or survey showing the new construction area, or details of your request, by Wedneday, April 10th, 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 needed). There is no cost for a poster without a stand. Please post the Town's official poster/sign no later than April llth. 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 available for the additional 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 April 16th, please either fax or deliver to our office your Affidavit of Mailing (form enclosed) with parcel numbers noted for each, and return it with the white receipts postmarked by the Post Office. The original Affidavit is due not later than the date of the hearing. Also, when the green signature cards are returned to you by the Post Office, please mail or deliver them to us before the hearing, if possible. If any signature card is not returned, please advise the Board at the hearing. These will be kept in the permanent record as proof of all Notices. By April 18th, and after the signs have been in place for seven (7) days, please submit your signed Affidavit of Posting to our office. A copy may be faxed to us, with the original furnished during the hearing. If you do not meet the deadlines stated in this letter, please contact us promptly. Thank you for your cooperation. Very truly yours, Enclosures Zoning Appeals Board and Staff P.S. Please pick up the poster sign between Monday and Wednesday, April 9th-11th between 8-12, or 1:30-4. Thank you. ®�®S11FF0(�� ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE ��1 At° ct1 Town Hall, 53095 Main Road TOWN CLERK ® P.O. Box 1179 New York 11971 REGISTRAR,OF VITAL STATISTICS r Southold Fax(631) 765-6145 MARRIAGE OFFICER " �� RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER =,�®� a��®r'ir Telephone (631) 765-1800 FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER rrrsoutholdtown.northfork.net 000OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD TO: Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals FROM: Elizabeth A. Neville, Southold Town Clerk DATED: January 24, 2002 RE: Zoning Appeal No. 5068 Transmitted herewith is a receipt for assignment of a project number for Zoning Appeal No. 5068—C. & G.Dawson (by Esseks) Town Of Southold P.O Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 * * * RECEIPT * * * Date: 01/16/02 Receipt#: 15105 Transaction(s): Subtotal 1 Application Fees $200.00 Check#: 1510 Total Paid: $200.00 Name: Esseks, Hefter&Angel P O Box 279 Riverhead N, Y 11901 Clerk ID: LINDAC Internal ID:47405 • DEPARTMENTAL MEMO TO: Town Clerk's Office FROM: Jerry Goehringer, ZBA Chairman DATE: SOul- 15 200 Z _ SUBJECT: Assignment of Project Number of'J . au(5 / r- Pro ) According to the ZBA adopted rules of procedure, please assign Number SO 7g to the above-referenced new submission. While the documentation may not be in complete form, it is assigned a number for the purpose of commencing reviews. The documentation has not as of today been accepted as a complete file by the assigned member. oo _ A $ ODD, check is attached (which is required by your office for assignment of a project number). This number was assigned by our office on !/i r/o 2, . (Projects are assigned chronologically.) Thank you. Attachment • Page 11,April 18,2002 — ZBA Public Hearing Tianscript Town of Southold , ' REVEREND: The con_' •-ation and any Baptist have the right to vote, and pithey vote, the majority always rule .;,And the majority of the rule of the churc✓ o keep it there, they keep it active for restos.t on or whatever, then they will keep�i. Its up to the congregation of the church. 'When e go, wherever we go, "always up to the r congregation. And that's how we live, th� jority always rul because it's a people church, not one person, it's a people church. W atever tlieople want that's what we decide to do. So there is a possibility. CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much. A is `"t we'll see you, ack on May 2nd. We want to thank everybody for their courtesy. and we'll see everybody back at 7:15 on May 2"d. I'll offer that as a resolution. EE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION (to be inserted ) 8:37 p.m. Appl. No. 5068 — CHRISTINE AND GLENN DAWSON. Regarding a request for Certificate of Occupancy for two single-family residential structures located at 150 Broadwaters Road, Cutchogue; 1000-104-10-8. Applicants: (1) request an Interpretation of Section 100-241G and 100-242A of the Zoning Code; and (2) Appeal for a Variance or other relief, regarding the Building Department's Notice of Disapproval dated December 14, 2001, which states that an Accessory, nonconforming cottage is non- habitable based upon the Building Inspector's Housing Code Inspection Report of 4/13/00 and pursuant to Article XXIV, Section 100-241G, which states: Whenever a nonconforming use of a building or premises has been discontinued for a period of more than two (2) years or has been changed to a higher classification or to a conforming use, anything in this Article to the contrary notwithstanding, the nonconforming use of such building or premises shall no longer be permitted unless a variance therefore shall have been granted by the Board of Appeals. CHAIRMAN: The second to the last hearing of the evening is 5068, Christine and Glenn Dawson. (muffled) during this application, some of which may or may not effect you in your presentation, I doubt it will effect you in your presentation, I think it's an overall, overview of the entire hearing; and that is that what is before us tonight is the use of this cottage it is not the use of the remaining portion of this property. We are dealing specifically about this cottage and only about this cottage. That is the cottage, which is closest to the creek and the Building Inspectors Determination of that, is that correct? STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: Correct. CHAIRMAN: So I am not taking any other testimony tonight on anything other than what's germane to this cottage. And I'm just making that as a general statement. `• . 1. Page 12,April 18,2002 ZBA Public Healing Tianscnpt Town of Southold . STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: As you see that I'm trying to sort through what I'm going to say tonight. But I think that I fall within your heading. I think everything that I have prepared tonight relates solely to the cottage. CHAIRMAN: We're ready sir. STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: Did you read the public hearing or mention it? You opened up the hearing already? CHAIRMAN: Well I really didn't but I have to tell you that after, this is the 18th or the 19th; we're going to say that this hearing is open. STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: May I hand up the original affidavits, which I believed we faxed to you beforehand. As you correctly pointed out this concerned cottage at the property currently owned by the Dawsons, the main reason we're here is an Interpretation of the Building Inspector's determination that somehow the use of the cottage was abandoned under Section 100-241G of your Code. I will explain to you how I don't think that that's applicable, but, initially I would like to hand up a letter from the people who sold the property to Mr. and Mrs. Dawson and that's Marion and Gerald Geldwax, who no longer live in the area, attesting to the fact that the property was used. This letter was written back in November 2000 when the Building Inspector made that initial determination. This has been in the pipeline for a while if you recall the Building Inspector didn't write a letter, and then he wrote a letter and didn't put the date on it: It took a while to get to the point where we procedurally had the proper application. So this is the first document, and because I was here just recently, I brought six copies of everything five for each of you and Mr. Chairman you don't have to give away your copies. CHAIRMAN: That's wonderful, thank you sir. STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: Now I would point;out that to follow the Building Inspector's Interpretation here and, to in effect convert the cottage into a storage building you're really making it more unusual than it is right now. What we have here is really a cottage, a single-family home and it's been treated as a single-family home by the Town and I really don't understand the nature of is Determination. I don't believe the concept of abandonment of use to a structure such as a house or a cottage which is in a residential neighborhood is an appropriate concept. You can't abandon a non-conforming use in this case, because the use of the cottage was not non-conforming, the use of the cottage for residential purposes and residential purposes are permitted in this particular district. The non-conformity in this case is not the use, the non-conformity is the structure and that's not governed as you will see through my presentation not governed Section 241 G of your Code, but rather by 242 or if anything not at all. Now I wanted to establish what we have here and so Mrs. Dawson took a series of photographs of the property, which are labeled, and I believe I also have six sets of these and I'll explain them briefly and what they show. What you have before you on the first sheet is a picture of the main house, which is closer to the road on top, and a picture of the cottage on the bottom. What I'd like you • Page 13,April 18,2002 - ZBA Public Hearing Tianscnpt Town of Southold to look at on the main house is you'll see that there's a crawl space that's open on the bottom of the main house and also, if you look at the cottage there's a shed door on the left hand side of the cottage as you look at the photograph. The reason those particular items are important will come out later on in these photographs, each one of these structures, each one of these residential structures is a fully self-contained unit. They have their own wells, their own pumps, their own electric service, and their own septic systems. And we have photographs later on in this packet of the pump and well tank for the house, that's in the crawl space shown, and the pump and well tank and the hot water heater for the cottage, which is in that, shed area at the back of the garage. On the next page, Mrs. Dawson put a little American Flag, next to the separate septic systems for each one of the resident structures. You will see one for the main house and one for the cottage, they have separate septic systems. The next page shows the well tank and pump for the main house on top, and the pump well tank and hot water heater just on the left side of the cottage. The next thing is the phone jack for the cottage, the phone jack's been there a long time, and also the cottage's electric meter, which is a bit of an antique. We tried to sell it, we were going to sell it after this hearing since it has value for us to show it's been there, but you will notice that the electric meter is an old fashioned electric meter and there's a separate electric service to this particular cottage. The next page shows the interior of the next three pages, shows photographs of the interior of the cottage showing another plumbing system, the rooms inside, the old telephone that's still there and that's hooked up to the outside line, the old appliances in the kitchen and the last one is one of the interior rooms and of course the deck of the main house looking down to the cottage in the back. It's our position that what you have here clearly are two separate residential structures each one a self-contained house the usual construction as houses. In fact, from what I understand from Mrs. Dawson, the cottage may have been the first structure on the property the house came second. I would also point out that I pulled from the Town of Southold's Tax Records the property record card and I have copies of that also. And if you look on the back page of the property record card, and I won't bore you with the calculations but you'll see number one and number two to certain improvements as they make the calculations. Let me hand them up. CHAIRMAN: I thought I was missing something, I thought that was on the back of the pictures and I didn't know what you were referring to. STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: I should have handed it up first, not talking about it. This is the Assessor's Card I believe that's maintained by the Town, it's not the bill, it's the information that goes to creating the bill it has the land value and the improvement value. If you look at the back of the card, you'll see the calculations were made from both structures to determine the value of the different piece of properties. CHAIRMAN: It has nothing on the back. STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: One of them does. MEMBER TORTORA: We have our own copies in our file. Page 14,Apiil 18,2002 - ZBA Public Hearing Transcript Town of Southold STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: Do you have one there, I just looked at one on the back. CHAIRMAN: Lydia has one. STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: But you'll see the calculations on the copies in the file that they included this particular structure at a residential rate for determining the value of her taxes. The next thing I have, and this is also included in the application are some records from the Building Department showing that the cottage was issued a Certificate of Occupancy at least in 1976, at the time the property was owned by an Anthony Pisacano. Wasn't Anthony the Rocky Point Realtor? CHAIRMAN: I think so. STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: In 1976 Mr. Pisacano made an application to construct a deck on this dwelling and it was indicated as a private dwelling and a Building Permit was issued. We know that by looking at the copy of the survey attached to the Building Permit application, which shows the cottage, located near the water and the proposed deck on it. If you go to the next document you will see the Building Permit that was issued on July 12, 1976 which says specifically construct addition deck to existing one- family dwelling and if you look down it identifies it as dwelling#2 cottage and it's signed by the Building Inspector. And the last document in this little exhibit is a Certificate of Occupancy issued August 18, 1976 for private one family dwelling with addition deck. Now this one doesn't refer to it as the cottage but if you look at the Building Permit number on the Certificate of Occupancy you will see that it matches the Building Permit for the deck on the cottage. There's no doubt that under the tax records and under the building records, the Town acknowledged the cottage as a separate single-family residence. The Building Inspector wrote a report in a conclusion fashion that I've seen taking the position that somehow the use was terminated and therefore the structure should be altered, in fact he asked Mrs. Dawson to remove certain, the stove in the kitchen, to sort of destroy it's habitability. I don't think that there's anything, I can't thing of why he would have done that. There's no evidence, as you look at the structure look at it and visualize it, there's no act on the part of either Mrs. Dawson or her husband or the predecessors to voluntarily abandon this property. Nobody knocked down the doors, nobody removed the electric service, nobody got rid of the stove, kitchen, plumbing appliances, which in my opinion would be the only way that you could voluntarily get rid of what is a legal structure and certainly a conforming use. Again, we're in a residential district and it was used as a residence. I don't believe that there's any indication of any physical alteration of the building that would indicate such a voluntary abandonment. I would also point out, as I mentioned before at this time, that Lilco, now Lipa have always treated the cottage as a separate structure also and they have maintained that meter, the meter works to today. It doesn't have too much usage but it nevertheless is a separate bill and is treated as a separate residential structure. There are two bills that the Dawsons receive one for the front house and one for the rear house. Now we come to, I saved the best for last at least in my opinion because I'm a lawyer. I saved the opinion from the court that's applicable to this particular controversy. My position is that when you have a house that clearly was, it was constructed probably before zoning and was the subject of • • Page 15,April 18,2002 ZBA Public Hearing Tianscript Town of Southold the Certificate of Occupancy issued by the Town in 1976. It clearly looks like a house, as they say looks like a house, walks like a house, and talks like a house, just like a duck. There's no doubt about it you're not talking about a garage that somebody slept in, it was built for that purpose. It's, as I said, located in a residential area where houses are permitted. What's nonconforming about the particular cottage is not its use but its structure. And if you look at your Code, the particular provision that the Building Inspector relied upon that is replicated in the Notice refers to uses, nonconforming uses. Here its not a nonconfolining use, so there's no automatic abandonment. It's a conforming use in a residential neighborhood. What is nonconforming about the cottage is not its use, it's its structure and also it's too close to the next-door neighbor. And if you go down in the Code, the next section, Section 100-242 talks about nonconforming buildings with conforming uses and that's what we have here. It doesn't have an automatic abandonment provision. I don't believe it was abandon anyway as I indicated in that letter. But the whole concept doesn't apply. Now in doing the research for this application I found the case directly in point. It's a Nassau County case, it's a zoning case, its dates from 1961, but it's a recorded opinion and it has been sited by Zoning Treatises and it's the Amzalak case. In the Amzalak case the precise issue that I presented tonight was presented to the court in Nassau, in the Supreme Court in Nassau County. What that was was a lot which had one main house and a three-car, a structure that had a three-car garage on the bottom floor and then a residence type apartment above it, but it was a fairly substantial residence above the three-car garage. They were both located on the same lot. And I guess the owner died or something and the cottage, or garage, or whatever you want to call it, structure with the residence in it was not used for a long period of time and I think that you will read in the case that they assume it was not used for whatever the period was in that Zoning Ordinance. Well the judge said that doesn't apply. What we have here is a nonconforming structure not a nonconforming use. And as a result, there was no abandonment and the attempt of the municipality in that case to declare that the particular garage residence was no longer habitable was not victorious. The judge threw it out. It's on all fours with our case. What we have here is not a nonconforming use but we have a nonconforming structure that was not abandoned, that was maintained and I think that the Building Inspector used the wrong provision to make his initial determination. Now I did apply, excuse me if I seem a little punchy, I had a meeting in Garden City at 4:30 and so I flew in and flew back. CHAIRMAN: We just want to tell you, you went over your 15 minutes already. STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: Oh, is there a limitation on time? CHAIRMAN: There was tonight. STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: We also made an area variance request. It's contained in our application in order to save time, I won't reiterate it. I don't think that there are any changes to the particular, if there are any changes to the community. Mrs. Dawson will tell you that there are lots within the vicinity that have two residential structures on them and, at this point then, I will conclude my presentation but I'd like to call Mrs. Dawson and have her identify some of those documents that we submitted. Page 16,April 18,2002 ZBA Public Hearing Tianscript Town of Southold CHAIRMAN: Mrs. Dawson would you raise your right hand, do you solemnly swear the information you are about to give us is the truth to the best of your knowledge? CHRISTINE DAWSON: Yes. STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: With the Board's indulgence can I ask her a couple of questions? CHAIRMAN: Yes. STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: You're one of the owners of the property right? CHRISTINE DAWSON: Yes. STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: And you saw those photographs that I submitted Mr. Goehringer and the other Members of the Board? CHRISTINE DAWSON: Yes. STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: Who took them? CHRISTINE DAWSON: I did. STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: And you examined the property for, and at the time that you bought it, right? CHRISTINE DAWSON: Yes. STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: Could you describe the cottage for the Board? CHRISTINE DAWSON: It's exactly as it is there, except I painted it, inside and out, and I put a new roof over the old one. Everything else is the same. I left the same stove there, because it works that little Acme stove. It has a little refrigerator/freezer on one side, its got two burners on the top. It's the same toilet; it's the same sink in the bathroom, all the same fixtures that have always been there. Even the same lamps, I just plugged them back in. STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: And when you bought it, was the plumbing working? CHRISTINE DAWSON: It was leaking, so we had to have a plumber go under, there was a little hole and he had to dig out and fix. (more talking—inaudible) STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: (inaudible) Was the electric service hooked up when you bought it. • Page 17,April 18,2002 - ZBA Public Hearing Transcript Town of Southold CHRISTINE DAWSON: Yes. Actually Mr. Geldwax gave us his old Lilco number to call Lilco to have it transferred to our name. And it was the cottage Lilco number and he never had the Lilco number for the main house. He just gave us his old account number for the main house. STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: In the particular vicinity of your property, are there any other properties where there are two residential units? CHAIRMAN: You have to speak a little louder. STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: The question was, in the immediate vicinity of her property, are there any lots that have two residential units on them that she knows of? CHRISTINE DAWSON: There's at least four that I know of, because I have a canoe and I go up and down the cove. So on my same block, on my same side, I can see four. And that's without going all around. MEMBER TORTORA: Are these cottages, are these guesthouses, are these servants quarters, are they libraries, are they accessory garages, what are they? CHRISTINE DAWSON: I'm looking at them from the water, so they look just like mine. They just look a cottage with windows. MEMBER TORTORA: You don't know what they are? CHRISTINE DAWSON: No, I'm not sure. MEMBER TORTORA: You don't know whether it's a dwelling unit, a residence, a library, a guesthouse, servant's quarters or what? CHRISTINE DAWSON: No I don't. MEMBER TOROTRA: Okay that's all. STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: Just to conclude, there's no application to make any alterations to the building, it's to keep it the way it is. I believe the deck's been there since it was approved by the Town in 1976. Thank you. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Angel,just before you sit down. I'm looking at your December 2001 application to Mr. Boufis. What you, in effect, were doing or what precipitated this was looking for a Pre-C.O. on the cottage? What caused this whole thing? STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: I think that was it. I think an application was made for a pre- existing C.O. on the cottage. I don't think that Mrs. Dawson was aware; well she may have been aware. But there is an existing C.O. that is not currently issued. It's the 1976 C.O. Page 18,April 18,2002 ZBA Public Hearing Tianscnpt Town of Southold CHAIRMAN: So that was the C.O. that was relied upon when the Dawson's closed on the property? STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: Right, and she went and asked for a currently Certificate of Occupancy for a Pre-existing Certificate. CHAIRMAN: I was trying to figure out, basically, I probably read this a long time ago. STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: In fact, what it was when I looked at it; they did that before I got involved. I believe that she made an application for a Certificate of Occupancy, for one Certificate of Occupancy to include the house and the cottage. Not for two separate residences, like Mr. Pisacano had, but isn't that correct you are looking for a C.O. for just the house and the cottage, as an accessory cottage use. Which, I mean from looking at the records now that I look at it with hindsight as a zoning lawyer willing to split hairs and take positions, I mean it looks like the prior C.O. was a little broader than that. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Do you have any questions of Mr. Angel? MEMBER TORTORA: Yes. CHAIRMAN: Okay before you sit down Mr. Angel, we need to grill you. We're going to start with Mrs. Tortora. MEMBER TORTORA: You said that you didn't think that the use was nonconforming. How many principle uses can you have on a residential, single residential parcel in the Township of Southold under our Code? STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: In the current Code I would think one. MEMBER TORTORA: How many uses are you suggesting that can be on this property? STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: I think the way I look at it for a nonconforming use and the way Amzlak case looked at it is that what we have here is a nonconforming structure. And what's nonconforming about it under current code is there are two residences on the lot and this residence probably doesn't meet setback requirements. That's the nonconformity. The use of the property is what's permitted in the Code. The Code permits residential use. MEMBER TORTORA: Residential use per lot. You are suggesting two residential uses per lot. I know what you're saying. STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: I'm not suggesting that you approve it. I'm suggesting that it's there and not abandoned. It was there when the Certificate of Occupancy was issued in 1976 and it was there for the tax card. And it's difficult conceptually to deal with, but when you deal with a nonconforming use, the nonconformity doesn't relate to use, that's • Page 19,Apnl 18,2002 ZBA Public Hearing Tiansciipt Town of Southold just relates to density. The use is, if it were a commercial use, I would agree with you. But it's a residential use, which is particularly and specifically permitted in this district. For example, MEMBER TORTORA: So in other words, I get what you're saying. In other words, if I had ten dwelling units on one lot the use would be permitted. STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: Correct. MEMBER TORTORA: It is the area that you're suggesting; it's the area that I've exceeded. STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: Right. MEMBER TORTORA: Okay I understand your theory. STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: And I'll give you an example of that. MEMBER TORTORA: I understand your theory. STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: Let me go one step further and you've probably dealt with it many times. If I were to come before you, let's assume that this issue didn't come up and everybody knew that it had been occupied everyday for 365 days a year with separate families. If I came into your Board I would ask for area variances to split it. That's what happens all the time, you probably deal with those situations where you have two houses on one lot and somebody wants to sell them separately. It's an area variance, not a use variance. MEMBER TORTORA: Yes, but that's the area of the lot. The square footage of the lot. That doesn't deal with the number of units per STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: Yes it does. MEMBER TORTORA: No, it deals with the square footage. If someone comes in for an area variance and his minimum square footage is 40,000 square feet and they request a variance for 20,000 square feet, the area variance is for 20,000 square feet. It is not for the number of dwelling units on that lot. STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: I understand that. MEMBER TORTORA: Its okay. STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: But in this particular situation I could present this case to you by saying, oh, give me a variance. Let me split it off and I'll have two separate lots. It's an area variance situation. If I wanted to put a deli in one of the units, then it would be a use variance situation. Then we would have a nonconforming use. Page 20,Apadl 18,2002 - ZBA Public Hearing Tiansciipt Town of Southold MEMBER TORTORA: So you're suggesting that if I want to have ten dwelling units on my lot, that all I would have to do is come into this Board and meet the common ordinary, garden variety, run of the mill area variance criteria. STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: Well, the answer is yes, I mean if you want to put ten units on one small lot, it would be tough to meet those criteria. But it's not a use variance. If you want to put a residence in a residence district, MEMBER TORTORA: More than one STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: More than one or on a smaller lot, it's an area variance. I'm not saying you'd get it,but it's an area variance. Its not a nonconforming use. MEMBER TORTORA: If you have any other case law other than this, I'd like to see it. This is 1961. As far as the letter that you gave us, I'd like to see a sworn affidavit. This says nothing other than the cousins used it during the summer time. I'd like to see a copy of your deed when you purchased the property and submit that into the record. I personally don't accept your theory. I would like to see, you know, I don't. That's my personal opinion. It does not reflect anyone else on the Board's opinion. As far as the question of abandonment STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: I wouldn't put that under the question of abandonment, I don't think that we have the burden of proof to show that it hasn't been abandoned. I think that there has to be some affirmative proof of abandonment, and I think that the only affinnative proof that would relevant would be some physical alteration to change the use of the building. Not just an allegation that it hasn't been used. That's an impossible burden to meet. In my opinion. MEMBER OLIVA: Mr. Angel, did you say that Mrs. Dawson went into the Building Department to get a C.O. for the cottage? STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: She went to get a currently dated Certificate of Occupancy for the entire property. MEMBER OLIVA: But when she bought the property, isn't it required that you have C.O.'s for both pieces, for both dwellings? STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: I believe that there are C.O.s, one is 1976. I didn't look at the other one. MEMBER OLIVA: Why did she have to go back in again? STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: Excuse me? MEMBER OLIVA: Why did she go back in to get another one? Page 21,April 18,2002 ZBA Public Hearing Tianscript Town of Southold STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: People normally do that. People want currently dated Certificate of Occupancy. We put that in some of our contracts. MEMBER OLIVA: Because it was my understanding that as long as you had a C.O. STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: The prudent thing to do, generally, is to get a currently dated one because that would pick up if there were any alterations. MEMBER OLIVA: But then when they did the title search when she bought the property why didn't they have the previous owners have one brought up to date? STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: Well I didn't represent her on it, and besides, the title search doesn't search for Certificates of Occupancy unless you ask for a municipals and I don't know if she did or not. Generally the title is only concerned with whether the property has good title, not the Certificate of Occupancy. MEMBER OLIVA: I just had an experience with my in-laws that they were going to sell the house and they didn't have a C.O. and they had to go back to the drawing board to get one. STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: That's all from the case, I mean, that is not MEMBER OLIVA: That doesn't mean it was up to date or they haven't done it previously. STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: The truth of the matter is, is that there are lots of contracts and I have not examined her contract. I'm speaking academically. There are many situations and I will attest to that if you want to swear me in, where people buy improved properties without Certificate of Occupancy. Whether it's legal or not, there's no doubt about that. Two, sometimes people require Certificates of Occupancy that are updated in their contracts, sometimes they don't. There's a whole universe of different things that can be done when you buy property. I don't know what was done here. The fact is, is that there was a Certificate of Occupancy back in 1976. I don't know what was done after that. I just, that's the only one that I found when I looked through the file. And I didn't look through her file; I looked through the Town file. MEMBER OLIVA: Okay, thank you. CHAIRMAN: Anybody else? MEMBER ORLLANDO: Yes, one quick question. Did Mrs. Dawson state that they had separate phone numbers, is that correct? The cottage and the main house have separate numbers? Page 22,April 18,2002 ZBA Public Hearing Tianscnpt Town of Southold STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: Well, it did yes. I don't think in the cottage is currently hooked up, is it? CHRISTINE DAWSON: No I didn't hook it up. It would be two phone bills. MEMBER ORLANDO: So you have one phone bill. CHRISTINE DAWSON: I have one phone bill right. CHAIRMAN: Thank you Mrs. Dawson. Is there anybody else that would like to speak in favor of this application? Speaking against the application, I am reflecting the cottage gentlemen and ladies only. Gentleman in the suit? Are you an attorney sir? ROBERT CIPITELLI, ESQ.: Yes, I'm an attorney. My name is Robert Cipitelli and I also happen to the son of Bruno Cipitelli who is a property owner to the west of the lot that we are speaking of MEMBER TORTORA: You have to talk into the microphone please. ROBERT CIPITELLI: I have also prepared a written argument on the subject tonight and I made enough copies for the full Board with an original. If I am permitted I will approach now and pass them out. CHAIRMAN: Surely. ROBERT CIPITELLI, ESQ.: I was under the impression tonight that we also had two issues that were in front of us. One was an Interpretation of the Building Department's denial of the C.O. for the cottage and then, on top of that as Mr. Angel had gone into, that alternatively he had wanted another section of the Code applied to the cottage and then if that wasn't the case, they were seeking a variance in tonight's proceedings. I would like to try to stay in order of the way Mr. Angel had prepared his arguments. But what I'm going to begin is I don't think that there is a question that the cottage was there. I don't think there's a question of how old the cottage is and I don't think there's a question of what went on inside that cottage. The question is, is the use ceased. And the use did indeed cease. I can stand here in front of you and this can be my sworn testimony also, my father bought the property next door in 1996 and from 1996 to the year 2000, there was no activity in that cottage or that house on those premises at all; except we were fortunate enough to get a landscaper to come once in a while and clean things up so it wouldn't grow out of hand. And I believe that there are surrounding neighbors that are here tonight that will each stand up, and that have been there long enough, and give you testimony on that same fact. That's the question in front of us, is whether the use ceased. The use didn't cease whether it stopped being a cottage; of course it stayed a cottage. That wasn't going to change when we discuss use. The use of the cottage ceased, it stopped altogether not just for overnights, not just for summer days, but altogether. I believe the letter that was handed to you by the, I want to say the name correctly, the Geldwax, the property owners prior to the Dawsons only speaks that the nephew had use Page 23,April 18,2002 ZBA Public Hearing Transcript Town of Southold of the house during the summer months, the cottage I'm sorry, during the summer months. It doesn't testify that they actually used it. I understand the aunt saying nobody used it so the letter that was handed to you I just wanted to make that point. Mr. Angel argued that the only problem with this cottage is its setback off the property line. That's not indeed the case and I hope this Board will make that as a final determination. The problem here is the use of the cottage ceased for over two years, the statutory time period. And if we want to discuss what use is the Town's own code, Section 100-31A1 governs permitted uses. The one-family, detached dwellings not to exceed one dwelling on each lot. I think that issue is pretty simple and it's straightforward and the photographs will prove that these are detached dwellings, they're both on the same lot and therefore the use of the cottage can't be proved. Mr. Angel brought up case law on use. I don't know if I just didn't hear it, I didn't hear what the facts specific facts were on that case. I heard something about a garage and an apartment on top of it. I don't believe from what I've heard of that case that we can say that that's directly on point, we can't even say that that's on point, because here we're dealing clearly with two separate dwellings that are detached. That case might have had attached dwellings and therefore would not apply whatsoever to this circumstance. What I'd like to point out now is we're going to, I would like to talk about the granting of the variance or the non-granting of the variance from my point of view. This variance would have a tremendous impact on the neighbors, the health and safety of the neighbors. This is an old structure. There is no proof anywhere in the Building Department's records, anywhere in your Zoning Board file that we've looked at the septic system in this cottage. The septic system designed for whatever kind of use it would have had back in the 70's or 60's when this cottage was constructed clearly is not going to be able to meet the burden that is being placed on it. And when I say being placed on it is because I'm not clear what use they're looking for when they say they want residential one-family use. This property is being used for rental purposes, and I'm not talking about just one family for the season. They're running ads in papers, advertising this CHAIRMAN: If it reflects the cottage, that's all I want. ROBERT CIPITELLI, ESQ.: It does reflect the cottage, the ad states there's two houses on two acres of land sleeps fourteen people. And I can tell you that on many occasions through summer months there are more than fourteen people there. There's seven or eight cars parked on the property throughout the week, and the load on that septic system has got to be incredible. Now this property is located directly on Broadwaters Cove, and this cottage has to be one of the closest structures to Broadwaters Cove. We've seen nothing about wetlands, we've seen nothing from the Trustees and as a matter of fact on the application N/A is indicated on all the answers with questions opposed about wetlands. This will change the character of that community drastically. More and more people are living there full time directly around this house. It's no longer just a temporary vacation community. This community goes to sleep there at night, to wake up to go to work the next day. There have been, under my belief, a couple of occasions when the police have been called to the property for late night parties, for disturbances. If you want to talk about a reflection on the community, this is just absolutely drastic. This, in no way, is going to have a little, slight or no impact on our character. And we're here, Page 24,April 18,2002 ZBA Public Heanng Tianscnpt Town of Southold because we're asking this Board to protect the character of Nassau Point, protect Broadwaters Cove, and our safety, our health, these are all issues that are at risk. It is the rental situation that has occurred there that forced the residents around to lock doors that we normally kept open. Every Sunday afternoon, a new group comes in, every Saturday night the old group leaves. We never know who's coming in next. They have unleashed dogs that are constantly running across the properties and some of the renters had two or three dogs. We've had problems with trespassing, we've had problems with personal property that has been used and left turned upside down without permission. I want to talk about whether this difficulty is self-created or not. The Dawsons purchased the . property only two years ago. They purchased the property, and it's in the Town records, in March I believe it was when the record reflects. Right away the following Monday, it was only two weeks later it was the first report was issued. I find it hard to believe that this property was purchased with no C.O.'s and the last C.O. that was showing record was from the owner that was prior to the owner that the Dawson's were buying the property from. They knew there was a problem they took a gamble anyway. Now the community is standing up and saying hold on a second you can't do this over here. And they're trying to show that is a hardship on themselves and plunked this on the Board and asked for relief. That's not relief I'm sorry. That's punishment on the neighbors and all the residents on Nassau Point. I don't want to use all up the time, I know it's late and I want to hopefully catch the end of the Islander game, but there are a lot of neighbors that would like to say a word or two if this Board would let them. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Cipitelli just before you sit down, are you telling me that at the time that these people were renting these premises they were utilizing the cottage? ROBERT CIPITELLI, ESQ.: Yes, the cottage has been in continuous use. CHAIRMAN: Okay, thank you. We'll take it one at a time. We will swear each person in. The gentleman in the blue shirt was next. Raise your right hand sir; do you solemnly swear the information you are about to tell us is the truth to the best of your knowledge? KEN SEIFERT: I do. CHAIRMAN: Please state your name. KEN SEIFERT: Ken Seifert. CHAIRMAN: How do you do. KEN SEIFERT: Good thank you. I live at 2000 Nassau Point. I'm adjacent to the east of the Dawsons. MEMBER TORTORA: Can you speak up a little please? KEN SEIFERT: Is that better? . a • • Page 25,April 18,2002 ZBA Public Healing Tianscript Town of Southold MEMBER TORTORA: Yes. KEN SEIFERT: I hope part of the Board's been out there to look at the property. I hope that they stop over to see the house, what we're talking about here. I bought that property in 1997. I can attest to the fact that that cottage was not used at all until the Dawsons moved in there. I was going to buy the property that the Dawsons bought, I had an opportunity to buy it, did some research and found the cottage according to Mr. Geldwax, said that it was only used as overflow for the main house. I think that the Building Inspector when I was thinking about buying, told me that there was no C.O., couldn't get a C.O. for having two houses on the property. The intent was if there was a major party in the main house people could sleep to go down to the cottage and have a place to sleep rather than tents, and crash there for the night and go back and go to the main house to resume their entertainment and activities with their friends. I think they're really trying to push this issue right now, what we think would harm the environment, the neighbors, Nassau Point, the whole community. I'm definitely opposed to it, and I hope the Board thinks about it and makes the right decision. Thank you. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Yes. Ma'am would you kindly raise your right hand, do you solemnly swear the information you are about to give us is the truth to the best of your knowledge? BARBARA RINGWALD: I do. CHAIRMAN: Would you state your name? BARBARA RINGWALD: Barbara Ringwald. CHAIRMAN: How do you do? BARBARA RINGWALD: I'm not a lawyer and I hope I can get through this and give you my points I wish to make, because my husband and I live next door and we are not weekenders, we are there all the time. We have become very emotionally upset by what's been going on. CHAIRMAN: This is to the east of the property now? BARBARA RINGWALD: We are to the east. This is a letter signed by ten of the neighbors, some of them are here tonight, and some of them are weekenders and were not able to come. We believe that the variance for a C.O. should not be granted under Section 241G because, as it's been said, it was abandoned unless you perhaps count family raccoons, which took up residence there for a while. It was unused for at least five years prior to the Dawsons purchase. It was in such disrepair that the real estate agents had difficulty showing the property and Mr. Geldwax finally had to put a new deck on the main house. As to the information given in the application, here are three quotes: Questionnaire for filing with your ZBA application; question #5: Please list present uses of both, or operations conducted at this parcel, Answer: Single-family 6 Page 26,Apnl 18,2002 ZBA Public Hearing Transcript Town of Southold residential use. Post use, same. This is clearly not true. There has been a large for rent sign on Broadwaters for two years, 2 x 2 feet. I thought you had to have a permit for that. There have been continuous ads running in at least two community newspapers, I have a copy here. By the way, this is this morning's paper Suffolk Times. The Suffolk Times and the Garden City paper. The ad advertises two cottages sleeping fourteen, etc. Clearly this is business enterprise. The next point, is this property within 300 feet of a tidal wetlands? Answer, no. The cottage is 58 feet from high tide mark and we've been there at some of the very high tides in the fall, and the water has been up to the deck. Area variance, Variance Reasons, #3: There will be no change in the neighborhood. That's been addressed. There's already been an extremely negative change affecting the quality of life and the ability to enjoy our homes on lovely Broadwaters Cove. Each weekend, as many as five vans pull in and disturbs several families. We are subjected to boom boxes, blaring loud music, barking dogs, roaring dirt bikes (mini-motorcycles) and screaming children who use the two nearby docks as their own, despite the fact that we have put up a gate and a padlock on it. They just climb over. This is an insurance problem for us. The lot is less than 80 feet wide. It may be two acres, but it's a very long narrow lot. The police have been called many times for abusive noise level. Recently there was some trouble with the septic system, maybe just not in the bathrooms; people just used the outdoors, resulting in festoons of toilet paper on neighboring docks. The ad has been pulled for a couple of weeks, this was last weekend, but here it is again. According to the Suffolk Times it's set to run continuously. Obviously, the Dawsons intend to run their property as a motel, with or without the C. O. Despite the injunction on the application, which clearly states, no building shall be occupied for use in whole or in part for any purpose whatever until a Certificate of Occupancy shall have been granted by the Building Inspector. We further believe that granting the C.O. would establish a legal two-family residence in a one-family residential area. We beg you not to grant this C. O. And here are the signatures, copies of the ads and picture of the sign. I'm sorry I'm not familiar with, so I didn't make six copies. I'm trying to cut down on paperwork. CHAIRMAN: Is your signature on this? BARBARA RINGWALD: Yes. Mine is, my husband's and several of the neighbors. CHAIRMAN: You're at 2150? BARBARA RINGWALD: Right, 2150. Our sideline goes down on the side; it's kind of an unusual layout. CHAIRMAN: Okay. Next? Anbody? Raise your right hand; do you solemnly swear the information you are about to give us is the truth to the best of your knowledge sir? DOUGLAS KLEIN: Ido. CHAIRMAN: What's your name sir? Page 27,April 18,2002 ZBA Public Heating Transcript Town of Southold DOUGLAS KLEIN: Douglas Klein, 324 Broadwaters. I'm west of them. I just want to testify to accuracy of what you heard here, and possibly to the inaccuracy of the attorney, Angel. The deck has been replaced on the cottage. Thank you. CHAIRMAN: Gentleman in the black shirt do you want to say something? Raise your right hand sir; do you solemnly swear the information you are about to give us is the truth to the best of your knowledge? BRUNO CIPITELLI: I do. CHAIRMAN: What's your name sir? BRUNO CIPITELLI: Bruno Cipitelli. CHAIRMAN: Nice to meet you. BRUNO CIPITELLI: 220 Broadwaters Road. CHAIRMAN: Didn't we have a variance with you? BRUNO CIPITELLI: Yes we did. That's why I'm here, because I get one. CHAIRMAN: Two structures and we attached them. BRUNO CIPITELLI: Right, I made one structure. Whatever my son said and whatever theneighbors are saying, it's what I have to say. So it's no use to go over and over. Okay. CHAIRMAN: We appreciate that. You just want to affirm? BRUNO CIPITELLI: That's it. CHAIRMAN: Okay. BRUNO CIPITELLI: Thank you. CHAIRMAN: Anybody else before we leave this? Sir? Could you raise your right hand, do you solemnly swear the information you are about to give us is the truth to the best of your knowledge? ROB GALLAGHER: I do. My name is Rob Gallagher; I'd just like to back up what everybody's saying. If you could just really be sensitive to my quality of life, that's why I'm out here; it's a great place to live and I just don't want to see it change. Thank you. Page 28,April 18,2002 ZBA Public Hearing Tianscnpt Town of Southold CHAIRMAN: Anybody else? I want to thank everybody's courtesy, it's very nice. Raise your right hand sir? Do you solemnly swear the information you are about to give us is the truth to the best of your knowledge? NEIL MCSHANE: Ido. CHAIRMAN: And your name sir? NEIL MCSHANE: My name is Neil McShane; I'm the President of the Nassau Point Property Owners Association. CHAIRMAN: It's a pleasure to meet you. NEIL MCSHANE: I've spent many, many years in the real estate business, zoning boards, planning boards all being in the State of New Jersey but the principles are the same. My role really is to represent my members and retain their property values. I don't want to deprive anybody of their rights but, if in fact a decision would lead to a two- family zone, I would be violently opposed. I want to make a correction to a statement that Mr. Angel made. The Geldwax's do reside on Nassau Point on Fisherman's Beach so they have a presence. My experience in not only buying but re-financing properties in my thirty-six years, including my own home here, a Certificate of Occupancy is demanded by most and anybody who has an attorney with half a brain . My senses is that the buyers of this property can forward understanding what they had and they bought it as-is and the property is, we just got pumped water on Nassau Point, thank God. We only have one bubble underneath the point that services still half of the population. We're really absolutely concerned about septic systems, and how they impact not only the Broadwaters Cove, but the grounds. It may be a continuation of the process down the road, but look to the Suffolk County Water Authority clearly to give an approval as to whether this property could even be useable its so close to Broadwaters Cove. It is very low. As of right now, (inaudible) noticeable that's impacted one of the abutting property known as through the Suffolk County Water Authority. So it's very, very sensitive land. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Anybody else before we wrap this up? Okay seeing no hands, Mr. Angel anything? Quickly. STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: The record should just be clear that there is a C.O. I gave you a copy of that C.O. I guess at this point, I assume that you are going to put this over for some period of time. I would request that I could provide you with some additional information and deal with some of the comments that we had tonight. CHAIRMAN: All I would like you to do is send your Affidavits to counsel or give them to us and we'll distribute them to counsel. _ t Page 29,April 18,2002 ZBA Public Hearing Transcript Town of Southold STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: If you would have counsel for the opposing party also gives me whatever he submitted. I would be pleased to send a copy of whatever I submitted to Mr. Sickatelli? CHAIRMAN: I think its Cipitelli. ROBERT CIPITELLI, ESQ.: I would like to ask how we're going to proceed then, is this going to be. Is he going to make a reply to my papers, and then will I have time to then answer that back? How are we going to proceed? CHAIRMAN: This leads to MEMBER TORTORA: I would ask for an affidavit from the prior owners, not just a little hand written letter. You don't feel that you have to address the issue of abandonment because you don't feel that the use is nonconforming, and I told you, very candidly, that I don't agree with you. STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: Well, I understand your position. I appreciate your candor, but needless to say I believe in my position, my legal position. I will go out and try to; I have learned something that the Gedlwax are possibly local, so I'll go ask them if they would give that affidavit. Though I don't think that it is absolutely necessary to my position, it's certainly relevant to the position that you understand the law. I would be pleased to give Mr. Cipitelli my card and he can send me what he sent you and I will send him if he does the same, what I gave you tonight. The important thing would be the deed. I have a copy of the unrecorded deed in my file; I'll make a copy of the deed. I think I actually have one somewhere back in the office. MEMBER TORTORA: Is it possible, I don't know the gentleman's name here who said it, but it really did strike me as having just went through a purchase of a home that I think one of the questions that you actually say is what is a C.O. What is a C.O. on the house, on the dwelling, on the premises? That's one of the most common. STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: Well I mean you can all sit here and try to convince me of what's necessary in the legal business but I'm telling you and if you'd like to swear me in with what I said beforehand. CHAIRMAN: I don't have to swear you in because you're an officer of the court. STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: But when people buy businesses, people buy land they go all different ways and I do not know how it was done in this case. I have not examined the contract. I know that there was a C.O. for the cottage in 1976 that's all I know. I have not examined whether there is a C.O. for the house. I haven't looked for the Building Permit on the house and I don't know the nature of the contract at all. • Page 30,April 18,2002 ZBA Public Heanng Tianscnpt Town of Southold MEMBER TORTORA: I don't remember anything, and I am going to be as direct as I can, in the seven years I've sat on this Board I don't remember ever issuing approval for two dwelling units on one lot in the seven years I've sat on this Board. STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: That is not the issue that is before your Board. What's before your Board is whether the cottage has been abandoned as a matter of zoning law. That's the issue. We're not asking you to issue an approval for a new cottage. The issue here is whether it's been abandoned. ROBERT CIPITELLI, ESQ.: If you locate the previous owners if they still live in Nassau point, maybe they could fill out that affidavit for you for the Keyspan/Lipa records. STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: Yes, I'll ask them for everything, absolutely, no problem. CHAIRMAN: Let me try and get some dates down here. Our next Special Meeting is on May 2nd. I would like to have everything from you by May 2nd if I could. If I can't get that from you by May 2nd, I definitely need it by May 16th. STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: Let's do May 16tH CHAIRMAN: May 16th okay. At which point, you'll send a copy to Mr. Cipitelli? STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: Mr. Cipitelli you'll get a copy or thereabouts on May 16th, 17th or 18th. If you don't get a copy, call our office and we'll furnish it. Then you are going to reflect whatever you want to reflect to us prior to the last hearing and we don't have a Special Meeting date for the month of May and when we get that we'll have it on the 16th and it is at that hearing that we will close this record. STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: That's a date that you have not set yet. You'll set it on the 16th? CHAIRMAN: We'll set it on the 16th STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: You want my submissions by the 16th and then CHAIRMAN: And we'll make a demand, in writing, with Mr. Cipitelli. Preferably we'd like to have it in three or four days prior to that Special Meeting date in May. Now the only thing I want to say to you all is that I'm not, based upon the Memorial Day situation, I don't know if we're going to work one out in May. It may be early June, okay. So I'm just telling you that now. So in all true fairness to Mr. Cipitelli, I mean you have thirty days to produce this he may have to have thirty days also or thereabouts. Maybe not thirty days, three weeks or something like that. So this may go into early June. Just so you are aware of that. Is that okay with you? And I do want to thank everybody again for their courtesy. Sir? 4 Page 31,April 18,2002 ZBA Public Hearing Tianscupt Town of Southold UNKNOWN GENTLEMAN: May I ask a question? CHAIRMAN: If you use the microphone sir. I need to take it on the record. UNKNOWN GENTLEMAN: My question is, is this a rent able property until this matter is decided? CHAIRMAN: I can't answer that because I'm not the Code Enforcement Officer. MEMBER TORTORA: You need to talk to the Building Department about that. CHAIRMAN: Could you just state your name for the record, please? LOUIS SULICH: My name is Louis Sulich, I'm a property owner at 580 Broadwaters Road about four houses down from the property. CHAIRMAN: Do you have a spelling in that? LOUIS SULICH: SULIC H. CHAIRMAN: Thank you sir. Hearing no further comment MEMBER HORNING: (inaudible) sited in the Notice of Disapproval (inaudible) CHAIRMAN: That's probably a Building Department record. MEMBER ORLANDO: Mr. Angel one quick question. Is it safe to say that of Mrs. Dawson, this is not her primary residence? STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: I believe that's correct. This is not her primacy residence. CHAIRMAN: All right, we're hearing no further comment I'll make a motion closing, I'm sorry recessing the hearing. STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: In the legal business, they'd say May 16th is the control date. So on May 16th you're going to get one set of documents and you'll be able to set another date. So that's probably what you want to do. Right? CHAIRMAN: I think what we'll say is we are actually going to reconvene this hearing on June 6th. Okay. And I think that's what we'll do. Because that appears to be the Special Meeting date. STEPHEN ANGEL, ESQ.: Is that when we meet on the other matter? CHAIRMAN: No that's June 20th. Don't confuse me Mr. Angel. • Page 32,Apnl 18,2002 ZBA Public Heanng Tianscript Town of Southold SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION * * * 9:50 p.m. Appl. No. 5077 and 5078 — THEODORE LAOUDIS — (Await revised maps for Board review by Friday, April 12th). Continuation from the March 21, 2001 Hearings Calendar.