Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2317 LEGAL NOTICE Notice of Hearings Pursuant to Section 267 of the Town Law and the provisions of the Amended Building Zone Ordinance of the Town of Southold, New York, public bearings will be beld by the Zoning Board of Aopeals at the Town Halls Main Road, Southold, New York on Thursday, August 4~ 1977~ on the following appeals: 7:30 P.Mo (EoDoSoTo) Recessed bearing upon application of Selmut Sass for a variance for approval of building built in violation of the Building and Sousing Codes, east side Beverly Road (Pvt. Rd. ) ~ Southold, New York. i~..~ .~i~i~.~ 7:40 P~M. (E~D.S.To) upon application of Virginia W. Surer, Beachwood Road, Cutchogue~ New York (Abigail Wickham~ Esq.) for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-30, 100-32, and Bulk Schedule for permission to construct accessory building with insufficient setback. Location of property: Beachwood Road, Cutchogue, New York, bounded on the north by now or formerly J. Dean; east by R. Seh; south by Beachwood Road (Pvt. Rd.); west by Creek Road (Pvt. Rd.). 7:50 P.M~ (E.D.S.T.) upon application of James and Deborah Navas, 30 3rd Street, Riverhead, New York (Rudolph Bruer, Esq.) for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article VII, Section 100-70 A (1) for permission to construct dwelling unit in business building. Location of property: North side Main Road, Mattituck, New York, bounded on the north by G. Cullen and W. Krause; east by W. Winiarz; south by Main Road~ west by W. J. Moisa. 8:00 P.M~ (EoD.S.To) upon application of Gilbert and Madeline Michaelis, Main Bayview Road, Southold, New York (Gary Olsen, Esq.) for a variance ~n accordance with the Zoning Ordi- nance, Article III, Section 100~30 and Bulk Schedule for permission to set off existing buildings on undersized lots. Location of property: South side Sumrait Road, Southold, New York; Lots 29, 29A, and 30, Map 2034, Bay Side Terrace. Legal Notice -2- Hearings: August 4, 1977 8:15 P.M. (E.D.S.T.) upon application of William G. Rafferty, 18 Farmview Drive, Dix Hills~ New York (Gary Otsen, Esq.) for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-30 and Bulk Schedule for permission to set off lot with insufficient width and area. Location of property: North side Pinetree Roadt Cutchogue, New York, bounded on the north by ~ickory Acres Subdivision; east by Lo Wahl; south by Pine Tree Road; west by now or formerly S4 Bourguignon. 8:25 P.M. (EoD.S.T.) upon application of VIP Inn, Ltd., 39 Gehring Street~ Com~ack~ New York (Gary Olsen~ Esqo) for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article Section 100-30 and Bulk Schedule for permission to set off existing buildings on undersized lot. Location of property: South side CR27t Southold~ New York, bounded on the north.by CR27 (North Road); east by H. ~ass~ A. Stachtiaris, No Ippolito, F. Bruch, J~ Smuloheski, M. Furner, E. Stewart; south by Mill Creek; west by now or formerly Nassau Steamship Agency. 8:35 P.M. (E.D.S.To) upon application of Lee and Barbara Siros, 3 Lee Lane~ Wilbraham, Massachuttes (Gary Olsent Esqo) for a variance in accordance with the III, Section 100-30 and Bulk Schedule lot with insufficient width and area. Zoning Ordinance, Article for permission to set off Location of property: East side Deer Path, Mattituck~ New York, bounded on the north by Miller Right-of-way; east by D. Trimmer; south by right-of- way, Dickerson and Beier; west by Deer. Path (Pyro Rd.). 8:45 P~M. (E.DoS.To) upon application of George Ahlers, Builder, Inc. a/c Julius Kinczel, 7 2nd Street, New Suffolk, New York for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-32 for permission to construct accessoryl building in front yard area. Location of property: East side Second Street, New Suffolk, New Yorkr bounded on now or formerly Rogers Est.; east by M. Ma~eski; or formerly Zamphiroff; west by Second Street. the north by south by now Legal Notice -3- Hearings: August 4, 1977 8:55 P~M0 (EoD.SoT.) upon application of Tennis Courts Unlimited a/c William LaMorte, North Bayview Road, Southold, New York for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-35 C for permission to construct tennis court with fence exceeding maximum height. Location of property: East side North Road to Bayview, Southold, New York, bounded on the north by Pine Neck Road; east by Southold Bay; south by North Road to Bayview; west by North Road to Bayview. 9:10 P.M. (E.DoS.T~)'upon application of Jean Lohn and B. Loretta Vom Lehn, Minnehaha Boulevard, Southold, New York for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Artiete III, Section 100-30 and 100-32 for permission to construct accessory building on property line. Location of property: East side Minnehaha Boulevard, Southold, New York, bounded on the north by Prieto; east by Corey Creek; south by Vanderbeek; west by Minnehaha Boulevard. 9:20 P.M. (E.D.S.T.) upon application of Valentine Stype a/c Lillian Van Dusen~ 5305 Westpath Way, Washington~ D.C. for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article III~ Section 100-30 and Bulk Schedule for permission to divide prop- erty with insufficient area. Location of property: Dicks Point Road and Holden Avenue, Cutchogue~ New York, bounded on the north by Dicks Point Road; east by Holden Avenue; south by now or formerly E. Mort; west by Haysom, Fox, and May. 9:30 P.M. (E.D.S.T.) upon application, of George Bambrick, 46 Cedars Road, Caldwell, New Jersey for a variance in accord- ante with the Zoning Ordinance, Article III~ Section 100-30 and Bulk Schedule for permission to construct dwelling with insuffi- cient setback and rear yard. Location of property: Lake Drive and Lake Court, Southold, New Yo~k, bounded on the north by Lake Drive; east by Sondericker; south by Sondericker; west by Lake Court. Legal Notice -4- Hearings: August 4, 1977 9:40 P.M. (E.DoS.T.) upon application of Gustav Bartra, 227 Breakwater Road, Mattituck, New York for a variance in ac- cordance with the Zoning Ordinancer Article III, Section 100-30 C and 100-32 A for permission to construct radio and ToV. towers exceeding maximum height. Location of property: Right-of-Way, East side Breakwater Road, Mattituck, New York, bounded on the north by Stupiello and Maione; east by Donald Cooper; south by right-of-way, D. Cooper; west by Cannone. Any person desiring to be heard on the above appeals should appear Dated: at the time and place above July 22~ 1977 specified. BY ORDER OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS PLEASE PUBLISH ONCEr JULY 28~ 1977~ AND FORWARD THIRTEEN (13) AFFIDAVITS OF PUBLICATION TO THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS, MAIN ROAD, SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK. Copies mailed to the following on July 22, 1977: Stanley Corwin a/c Helmut Hass Abigail Wickham, Esq. a/c Virginia Suter Rudolph Bruer~ Esq. a/c James and Deborah Navas Gary O!sen, Esq. a/c Gilbert and Madeline Michaelis William G. Rafferty VIP Innr Ltd. Lee and Barbara Siros George Ahlers a/c Julius Kinczel Tennis Courts Unlimited a/c William LaMorte Jean Lohn and B. Loretta Vom Lehn Valentine Stype a/c Lillian Van Dusen George Bambrick Gustav Bartra LEGAL NOTICE Notice of Hearings Pursuant to Section 267 of the Town Law and theprovisions of the Amended Building Zone Ordinance of the' Town of Southold, New York, public hearings will be held by the Zoning Beard of Appeals at the Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, New York, on Thursday, August 4, 1977, on the foliowi~g appeals: 7:30 P.M. (E.D.S.T.) Recessed hearing upon application of Helmut Hass for a variance for approval of building built in violation of the Building and Housing Codes, east side Beverly Rood (Pvt. Hd.), Southold, New York. 7:40 P.M. (E.D.S.T.) upon application of Virginia W. Suter, Beachwood Road, Cutchogue, New York (Abigail Wickham, Esq.) for a variance in ac- cordance with the Zoning Or- dinance, Article III; Section 100- 30, 100-32, and Bulk Schoduie for permission to construct ac- cessory building with insufficient setback. Location of property: Beachwood Road, Cutchogue, New York, bounded on the north by now or formerly J. Dean; east by R. Seh; south by Beachwood Road (Pvt. Hd.); west by Creek Read (Pvt. Rd.). 7:50 P.M. (E.D.S.T.) upon application of James and Deborah Navas, 30 3rd Street, Riverhead, New York (Rudolph Bruer, Esq.) for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article VII, Section 10070 A (1) for permission to construct dwelling unit in business building. Location of property: North side Main Road, Mattituck, New York, bounded on the north by G. Cuilen and W. Krause; east by W. Winiarz; south by Main Road; west by W.J. Motsa. 8:00 P.M. (E.D.S.T.) upon application of Gilbert and Madeline Michaelis, Main Bayview Rood, Seuthold, New York (Gary Oisen, Esq.) for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-30 and Bulk Schedule for permission to set off existing buildings .on undersized lots. Location of property: South side Summit Rood, Southold, New York; Lots 29, 29A, and 30. Man 2034, Bay Side Terrace. 8:15 P.M. (E.D.S.T.) upon application of William G. Raf- ferty, 10 Farmview Drive, Dix Hills, New York (Gary Olsen, Esq.) for a variance in ac- cordance with the Zoning Or- dinance, Article III, Section 100- 30 and Bulk Schedule for per- mission to set off lot with in- sufficient width and area. Location of property: North side Pinetree Road, Cutchogue, New York, bounded on the north by SUFFOLK, EW YORK, ~ ss: .F.t..C..,...Do. ~t~n.a.tl ........... being duly Sworn, h~. · is Printer and Publisher of the SUFFOLK .VIES, a newspaper published ~'t Greenport, in said hot the notice, of which the annexed is a printed .'n published in the s~fid Suffolk Weekly Times one (1) week, for ........................... weeks ~ommencing on the .... ...~ J~l¥:, ...< 197.7.. ~-~. ~ ......... .~ ..... .~-.~_~ ....... Hickory Acres Subdivision; east by L Wahl; south bY Pine Tree ..... ~ ~ ~ ~ R~; west by new or forr~3~rlX S. ,~ = '~ ........... ~' ~ ~' ~ on. ....... ...... y~~ ~ a,~ c~ ~ the ~ ~- ~b~l~gonp~l~.. v~~ ~e[ ~, ~tic~ HI, ~fi~ 1~ ~ti~ d pr~: ~t side ~ ~ce, ~ficle HI,/ 32 for ~ion to c~t ~ B~e~ ~ld, ~fi~ 1~ ~ B~ ~J a~ b~g in f~nt y~d N~ Y~ ~ on ~e n~ f~ ~on to set df ~fing[ ~. ~tion ~ pr~:~t by ~e~; ~t ~ C~y ~; . buildings on undersiz~ lot. side ~d S~, N~ ~o~, ~ by V~; w~t by New York, bounded on the north by now or formerly Rogers Est.; oost by M. Majeski; senth by now or formerly ?-~mphir~..f; west by Second Street. 8:55 P.M~ (E.D.S.T.) upon application of Tennis Courts Unlimited a-e William L~Mnste, New York for a variance in dinance, Article III, Seetian 1~0- ~5 C for permission to construct tennis court with fence exceeding maximum height. Location of property: E~st sid~ North P,~ad to Bayview, Sonthold, New York, bounded on the north by Pine Neck Road; east by Seuthold Bay; south by North Road to Bayview; west by North Road to Bayview. 9:10 P.M. (E.D,S.T.) upon application of Jean Lohn and Loretia Vom Lehn, Mianehaha Boulevard, Southold, Now York for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance; Article III, Section 100-30 and 100-~2 fur permis?io~ to, ,construct ac- Minnehaha Boalevurd. 9:20 P.M. (E.D.S.T.) upon applicatian of Valentine Stype a-c Lillian Van Dusell, 53/16 Westpath Way, Washingtan, D.C. for a Zoning Or~nce, Article III, Seclian ~0-~0 and Bulk Schedule with insufficient ar~a. Loeatian of property: Dieke Point Road and Holden Avenue, Cutchogue, New York, bounded on the North by Dicks Point Road; east by Holden Avenue; sooth by now or formerly E. Mort; west by Haysna, Fox, and May. 9:30 P.M. (E.D.S.T.) upon application of George B~unbrick, 46 Cedars Rood, Caldwell, New Jersey for a variance in ac- cordanee with the Zoning 0r- dirmnee, Article HI, Seetion !00- 30 and Bulk Schedule for per- mission to construct dwelling with insufficient setback and rear yard. Location of property: Lake Drive and Lake Court. Southold, New York, bounded on the north by Lake Drive; east by Sen- Location of property: South side CR 27, So~theld, New York, bounded on the north by CR 27 (North Road) east by H. Hass, A. Stachtiuris, N. IOO°lito. F. ~t~h J. Smulcheski, M. Fume_r_,, west by now or formerly Na~ Steamship Agency.. ./~ 8:35 P.M. (E.D.S.T.) upon application of Lee and Barbara Sire~, 3 Lee Lane, Wilbraham, Mass., (Gary Olsan, Esq.) for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article HI, Seeiian 100-30 and Bulk Schedule for permission to set off lot with insufficient width and area. Location of property: East side Deer Path, Mattituck, New York, bounded on the north by Miller Right-of-way; east by D. Trimmer; south by right-d-way, Dickerson and Beierl west by Deer Path (Pvt. Rd.). 8:45 P.M. (E.D.S.T.) upon application of George Ahlers, Builder, Inc. a-c- Julius Kinczci, 7 2nd Street, New Suffolk, New York for a variance in ac- daricker; south by Sondericker; west by Lake Court. 9140 P.M. (E.D.S.T.)' upon application of Gustav Bartra, 227 Breakwater Road. Mattitue~ New York for a variance in ac- dirmnee, Article HI, Section 100- 39 C ami 1~0-32 A for permissiue to construnt radio and' T.V. towers exceeding maximum height. Location of property:' Right-d-way, East side Break- water Rood, Mattituek, New York, bounded on the north by Stopiello and Maioue; east by Donald Cooper; south by right-of- way, D. Cooper; west by Can- nane. Any person desiring to be heard on the above appeals should appear at the time and place above specifie~L Dated: July 22, 19/7 BY oRDER OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWNt~OARD OF APPEALS ~TJY2S--2771 LEGAL NOTICE Notice of Hearings Pursuant to Section 267 of the Town Law and the provisions of the Amended Building Zone Ordi- nance of the Town of Southold, New York, public hearings will be held by the Zoning Board of Appeals at the Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, New York on Thursday, August 4, 1977, on the following appeals: 7:30 P.M. (E.D.S.T.) Recessed hearing upo~ application of Hel- mut Hass for a variance for approval of building built in violation of the Building and Housing codes, east side Beverly Road (Pvt. Rd.), Southold, New York. 7:~40 P.M. (E.D.S.T.) upon ap- plication of Virginia W. Suter, Beachwood Road, Cutchogue, New York (Abigail Wickham, Esq.) for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Art- icle III. Section 100-30, 100-32, and Bulk Schedule for permission to construct accessory building with insufficient setback. Loca- tion of property: Beachwood Road, Cutchogue, New York, bounded on the north by now or formerly 3. Dean; east by R. Seh; south by Beachwood Road (Pvt. Rd.); west by Creek Road (Pvt. Rd.). 7:50 P.M. (E.D.S.T.) upon ap- plication of James and Deborah kavas, 30 3rd Street, Riverhead, New York (Rudolph Bruer, Esq.) for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article VII, Section 100-70 A (1) for permission to construct dwelling unit in business building. Loca- tion of property: North side Main Road, Mattituck, New York, bounded on the north by G. Cullen and W. Krause; east by W. Winiarz; south by Main Road; west by W. J. Moisa. 8:00 P.M. (E.D.S.T.) upon ap- plication of Gilbert and Madeline Michaelis, Main Bayview Road, Southold, New York (Gary Olsen, Esq.) for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Art- icle III, Section 100-30 and Bulk Schedule for permission to set off existing buildings on undersized lots. Location of property: South side Summit Road, Southold. New York; Lots 29, 29A, and 30, Map 2034, Bay Side Terrace. 8:15 P.M. (E.D.S.T.) upon ap- plication of William G. Rafferty, 18 Farmview Drive, Dix Hills, New York (Gary Olsen, Esq.) for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article I11, Section 100-30 and Bulk Schedule for permission to set off lot with insufficient width and area. Loca- tion of property: North side Pinetree Road, Cutchogue, New. York, bounded on the north by Hickory Acres Subdivision; east by L. Wahl; south by Pine Tree Rod 'd~est by now or formerly S. (E.D.S.T.) upon ap-~ !~j~/~t~ VIP Inn, Ltd., 3c~I Ge~tT~ Street, Commack, New York (Gary Olsen, Esq.) for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-30 and Bulk Schedule for permission to set off existing buildings on undersized lot. Loca- tion of property: South side CR27, Southold, New York, bounded on the north by CR27 (North Road); east by H. Hass, A. Stachtiaris, N. lppolito, F. Bruch, J. Smul- :heski, M. Furner, E. Stewart; outh by Mill Creek; west by now or formerly Nassau Steamshil~ Agency. 8:35 P.M. (E.D.S.T.) upon ap- pllcation of Lee and Barbara Siros, 3 Lee Lane, Wilbraham. Massachusets (Gary Olsen. Esq.) for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Art- icle III, Section 100-30 and Bulk Schedule for permission to set off lot with insufficient width and area. Location of property: East side Deer Path, Mattituck, New York, bounded on the north by Miller Right-of-way; east by D. Trimmer; south by right-of-way, Dickerson and Beier; west by COUNTY OF SUFFOLK ( ss: STATE OF NEW YORK j Sherley Katz, being duly sworn, soys that she is an Editor, of THE LONG ISLAND TRAVELER-WATCHMAN, a public newspaper printed at Southold, in Suffolk County; and that the notice of which the annexed is o printed copy, has been published in said Long island Traveler-Watch- man once each week for ............. /. ......................... weeks successively, commencing on the ....~.~.. ............................. Sworn to before me this .....~..!/ .............. cloy Or ..... .................. ................. ................................ FORM NO. 3 ?~ TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE SOUTHOLD, N. Y, TOW~ O~ $OUT~OLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE SOUTHOLD, N. Y. ~ed ..~ ....... Z ........... , ~..Z.7 ~,,~at~o, ~o. Z~2 ~provedD, m ed ......... a :~'~ ........ .~Z ........... , 19...~._. Perm,t. N .' .Z .......... ~.: ............. .................................. .............. ............. ............... ....................... --.-.....~ (~ildin~ Inspirer) APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT//~ ~ ~ .../..~.... ............. . 19.Z~..... INSTRUCTIONS Date ..~:~ a. This application must be completely filled in by typewriter or in ink and submitted in triplicate to the Building Inspector,! with 3 set~ of p~ans, 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 o~ areas, and giving a detailed description of layout ofproperty must be drawn 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 o Building Permit to the applicant. Such permit shall be kept on the premises available for inspection throughout the work. · e. NoJbuilding shall be occupied or used in whole or in part for any purpose whatever until a Certificate of Occupancy shall hOVel been granted by the Building Inspector. . APPLICATION IS HEREBY MADE to the Building Department for the issuance of o Building Permit pursuant to the Building ~one Ordinance of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, and other applicable Laws, Ordinances or Regulations, for the construction of buildings, additions or alterations, or for removal or demolition, as herein described. The applicant agrees to comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, building cede, housing cede, and regulations, and to admit authorized inspectors on premises and in buildings for necessary inspections. ~ )/ ' (Signature of applicant, or name, if a corporation) - ............. ...... (Address of applicant) State wheiher applicant is owner, lessee, agent, architect, engineer, general contractor, electrician, plumber or builder. ................ L .................................. ......................................... i .......................................................................... Name of ewner of premises ........................... ?...L).. ........ L~..~....~...).......~...:....~. ............................................................................. If o~pplicaht ~s a corpo, Kate, s, igpature_~of duly authorized officer. .... : ........ ~L~.~T...u..~ ! (Name and/~le of corporate officer) ', Bui d~r s License No ................................. Plumbers License No .................. ..~ .......................... ? Electrician's License No .............. .~ .............................. ? ' . Othe Trade $ I-~eense No ............................................... 1. ko~ation of lend on which proposed work will be done. Map No.: ................ ~ ...................... Lot No ......................... Municipality 2. Stc~te existing use and oc.cupancy of premises and intended use and occupancy of proposed construction: a. Exisiting use and occupancy 3. Nature of work (check which applicable): New Building......--~.. ....... Addifion A~teration ................ Repair ..................Removal .................. Demoiitioc .................... Other Work ................................................ . ~ (Descriotion) 4. Estimated Cost ..... i.L....~.~.o..C~.....~. ................................... Fee .......................................................................................... ~ (to be paid on filing ~h~s 5. if dwelling, number of dwelling units ........................... Number of dweii[ng units on each f'~oor ..... if garage,, number of cars. ...................................................................................................................... . ~ ~ .- . ~.~ ........ 6. If business, commercial or m~xed occupancy, spec.fy nature cna ex~nt o~ each ~pe of use ............................ 7. Dimensions of existing structures, if any: Front ............................ Rear ................................D~p,h Height ...L..~ Number of Stor]~ ...... J Dimensions of same structure with alterations or additions: Front ..... ~ ....................... Rear ..~ .................. uepth ....... ~ .................. Height '~'...:..%r~....,.Number at ~orms .z:'r~:::': ....................... 8. Dimensions of entire new construction: Front ~ .................... ~ ' ................ Rear _2..~ ................... Dept~ Height ...~.~ .......... Number of Stories .....~ ............................................................................................................ 9. Size of lot: Front ..... ~..~.¢.J~.~_...~.~.~.~ ............... Rear .......................................... Depth 10. Date of Purchase ...... ~.~.....~.~.~.~ ...................... Name ~ O ' of ..... ............ ~1. Zone or use district in which premises are situated ........ ............ .~}~ .............................................................. I2. Does proposed constructbn~o!ate any zoning law, ordinance or r~gulet~on: ....... ~.~..~- 13. ~JJl lot be regraded'. ......... ]...~ ........... Will excess lift be removed ~rom premises: ( ) Yes ~ ? ) No 14. Name of Owner of premises ~P ~ ~ Addre~' havana Name of Architect .......... ~..~.~.~. .....................................Address ................................Phone No Name of Contractor ...... .~....~-~...~.~.~.~ ........ Address ................................Phone No PLOT DIAG~M Locate clearly and distinctly ali buildings, whether existing or proposed, ~nd indicate all set-~ck dimensions from prope~ lines. Give street and block number or description according to deed, and show street names and indicate ~hether interior or corner lot. STATE OF NEW YOF~'( .~ Jcc COUNTY OF ...~ .... · z.47-_ ~ /.__-~/? ..... /-~, . , ' .... ~..~.~.J.~......~.~.~..~ ...................... being duly sworn, deposes ~nd says that he is the app~ican~ (Name of individ~l~signing contrac~ He is the .......................... ~ (Contractor, agent, corporate officer, etc.) of said owner or owners, and is duly authorized to perform or have performed the said work and to m~ke and this application; that all statements contained in this application are true to the best of his knowledge and belief; and tha~ the work will be performed in the manner set fo~h in the opplicaHon filed therewith. to before me this .... ........................... NOTARY ~U~LIC, Sfefe of New No. 52-4522026 - Suffc~ Coun~. ~ TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK' APPEAL FROM DECISION OF BUILDING INSPECTOR · TO THE-ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, TOWNZOF SOUTHOLD, Name of A. ppellant Street and Number ................ j.....~oznrn~....qk~- ;. ................ ~.e..~'....~..g.r..k.. ...... HEREBY AI~PEAL~TO Municipality- - Sfo~e "i'HE ZONING BOARD OF APPE,~LS FROM THE DECISiO~ OF THE BUILIJIN'G/INSPECTOR ON APPLICATION FOR PERMIT NO; DATED .........L. . \¥HEREBY THE B.UlJ-DING IF~sPECTOR DENIED TO _ .V. IP~. Lu4% .L~.d, ........................... : ................. : .......... Nome of Applicant for permit of ;~.9...G.e~ia g..S~.;x'.e. ~:~ ............. .C.o~..c.k,, ................... IN..e..V....~..o.~. ................. Street and Number Municipality State PERMIT TO USE ( ) PERMIT FOR OCCUPANCY { x) VARIANCE LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY ..N...q.~.i.h....~..~6..a...d..~-d.~..C...8:r.~..9.~.~..~...~.....d....A:~?..i..c.~r~.~nua~ ' ' StFeet Use District on Zonin~g' Map MOD No. Lot No. 2. PROVISION (S) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE APPEALED (Indicate the Article Section, Sub- sectior cmo Paragraph of the Zoning Ordinance by number. Do not quote the Ordinance.) Article III Section t00-30; Article V Section 100-50 and Bulk Schedule in both instances 3 TYPE OF APPEAL Appeal is made herewith for A VARIANCE to the Zoning Ordinance or Zoning Map ACVAR/ANCE due' to lack of access ~5tate of New York Town Law Chap. 62 Cons. Lows Art. 16 Sec. 280A Subsectiou 3 -~ 4 PRE~IOUS APPEAL A previous appeal ]J~) (has not) been made with respect to this decision of ~he Building Inspector or with 'espect to this property. Such appeal was ( request for a special Dermit ( ) request for a variance and was made n Appeo! No ................................. Dated ...................................................................... { ) REASON FOR APPEAL A Variance to Section 280A Subsection 3 A Variance to the Zoning Ordinance is requested for the reason that (Continue on other side) REASON FOR APPEAL Continued 1. STRICT APPLICATION OF THE ORDINANCE would produce practicai difficulties or unneces- · sary HARDSHIP because the s~bjeet preraises was zoned a light business ~a u~e~ ~ ~ ~otel bus.ess purposes ~d now has been re-zoned to agric~t~ai/residen~ ~d accordingly, the present motel used on a "non~conforz~ug bas{s"o App~cmat seeks to di~de the subject Pre~ses ~%o three parcels with parcel one~o~u~_g~ ~" ~ ~ =~ l~ m~zz=' mote! and park~g ~d na~rmg a ~o~ =_ ea o= 24~ ,u00 square feet more o-~ I~=~ .... parcez Z conta~s and four omit b~ld~g and ~.-o:~d have a ~otal area of appro~ma%e~~ g~ 400 square feet; mud parcel 3 confabs a two tm~ ~u~m~o and wo~d havea ~o~ a~.~==a of appro~a~eiy 17, 000 square fee%~ ~1 ~!~le ~uzzdm~gs' above~ e~e~ ~ ~ ~-~=~ to are- on~ ~ae crease ~he densi%y~ The app~can{ has a.~smh~=~=~ for p~ ~ ~ does no~ ~zsn %0 purchase_~arce! 2 or 3~ iecerd~cgl}5 '::~ - = ~- ~. ~m .... ~ =~-~s~p~"~-~ ~ ¢o the app~can~ and the p. ope~ ~y ~o~d ~e mo~~ ~=~.z~y~=~ ~z~ze~ ~ ~ ~ the ~'~v~ ...... c,~ were gran%ed= Ag=m ~t is respecfful!y s~Dmi~ed ~-~ ~ exzstkng~ non~ confor~g si~a~on ~th e~s~g bu~dmngs and ~he ~=~=~'~v ~-- ~ ~ x= ~ ..... ~ by the gran~ug of the ?~riance~ 2. The hardship created is UNIQUE and is not shared by ali properties elike in the immediate vkinity of this property and in this use district because lhiS is a non-oonfor_~Lng siCua~on, which Was zoned light business and now is zoned ia resident~aio The gran~ng of the Variance wottld not increase the density due to the fact that the buildings are e~sting, 3. The Variance would observe the spirit of the Ordinance and WOULD NOT CHANGE YHE CHARACTER OF T~E DISTRICT because the density wotzld nol be ~creased since~he buz_mmgsU -' ar~e existing and %his is a non-conforming stint, lion. STATE OF NEW YORK ) ) COUNTY OFSUF~OT,~ ) SS Gary Ftanner Olsen= Esq. Sworn to this ........... ~/~.'~. .................... day of ........ .~-Zf ............................... ]9 ~ / . Notary Public ~ 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) N? 10360 Z Permission is hereby granted to: ,~' · ......... ..~/..~ ...... ~~.~..: ......... - - .../:o ....,~..'.~..,.~. c.~/~./.~..z', z~,rz.~_ .':....~,~.,:z~.:~.:' -'" --' .......... : ....... .'::. --....' ,o ....:..c~~...~..:~~~..~.:~..:~~ at premises located et pursuant to application doted ...~-,<~.~...~'....~.. ........................... Building Inspector. ~ / 4-~__~ Fee $. L ~,.,., ............... 19J..7.., and approved by the ~J'~a'f~aing ~ ~ nspector O JUDITH T. TERRY TOV~ C~RK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS Southold, L. I., N. Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1801 July 21, 1977 To: From: Re: to: Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals Judith T. Terry, Town Clerk Application of VIP Inn Ltd. for a variance-Appeal No. 2317 I have on file in my office notification by certified mail Mr. & Mrs. Achilles Stachtiaris, 159 New Hyde Park Rd., Garden City,N.Y. Mr. & Mrs. Jos. Smulcheski, 12 Harvard Lane, Commack, N.Y. Mr. & Mrs. Frederick Bruch, 37 Neptune ~ve., Hampton Bays, N.Y. Mr. & Mrs. Frederick Hribok, 1 Arnold Lane, Commack, N.Y. Mr. & Mrs. Manfred Kurner, 71-39 72nd Pl., Glendale, N.Y. Mr. & Mrs. Edwin Stewart, 8403 Parkish Lane, Indianapolis, Helmut Haas, Box 1115, Peconic, N.Y. Nassau Steamship Agency, Inc., 100 Franklin Ave., Indiana Garden City, N.Y. Town Clerk TOWN CLERK 765-3783 Building Dept. f Planning Bd. 765-2660 Board of Appeals Town Of Southold TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE Main Road Soufhold. N. Y. 11971 Pursuant to the C~eneral Municipal Law, Chapter 24-, of the Consolidated Laws, Article 12-B, Sections 239-1 and m, the ...~oar,4. of..Appeals..: ...... of fha town of Southold, N. Y. hereby refers the following (agency involved) proposed zoning action to the Suffolk County Planning Commission: Icheck one) New and recodffbd zoning ordinance ........... Amendment to the zoning ordinance ............ Zoning changes ........... Special permits ..... X .... Variances VIP Inn, Ltd. 39 Gehring Street Core, ack, NY 11725 (Previously filed under Nicholas Ippolito) Location of affected land: ...... S/S...County...~ad_2?.,...Southolde..NY ..................................... within 500 feet of: (check one or more) ............ Town or village boundary llne .... · X ..... State or county road, parkway or expressway ............ State or county ,park or recreation area ........... Stream, or drainage channel owned by the county or for which the county has established channel lines ............ State or county owned parcel on which a public building is situated Comments: The ~oard granted this ap~lication subject to the condition that the units on Parcels 2 & 3 be converted for use as single family dwellings. Date: AUgUS%..8.,...],97.7 ............ (sig"~obert W. Gillispie, Jr. Chairman Tide Date received by Suffolk County Planning Commission ........................................................ File No ............................... Suffolk County Department of Planning H. Lee Dennison Executive OfficeBuilding Veterans Memorial Highway Hauppauge, l~ew Y6rkl1787 Town of Suuthold Board of Appeals August 16, 1977 Pursuant to the requirements .of Sections 1323 to 1332 of the Suffolk Coumty Charter, the following applications which have been referred to the Suffolk County Planning Commission are considered to be a matter for local determin- ation. A decision of local determination should not be construed as either an approval or a disapproval. Applicant · Muniaipal File Number Jean Lohn William LaMorte George Bambrick VIP Inn Ltd.. James & Deborah Navas 2311 2313 2314 2317 2321 GG!~: fp Very truly yours, Lee E. Koppelman Director of Planning by GARY FLaNNER OLSEN COUNSELLOR AT LAW 0 P. O. BOX 38 · MAIN ROAD · MATTITUCK, LON(3 ISLAND, NEW YORK IIS52 , PHONE SIS 295-45~4 September 21, 1977 Re: Nicholas W. Ippolito, Minor Subdivision-File # 1487 Gentlemen: Please be advised that I would like a clarification of your decision in re the above captioned matter. It would appear that the owner would have the following options: 1. Using or selling the motel as is; 2. Selling individual parcels so that upon selling, an up- zoning action would take place as follows: 1) If front building is sold: a) front building would remain zoned motel;A~...~) ~,~ b) middle and back buildings would convert toe residential immediately and must be sold ~ as such; 2) If front and middle buildings are sold together: ~o a) front and middle buildings remain zoned motel; .~ ,~ ~ b) back building converts to residential immediately and must be sold as such; 3) If back building only is sold: a) back building must be sold as residential; b) front and middle buildings would remain zoned motel; 4) If back and middle buildings are sold together: a) back and middle buildings must be sold as residential; b) front building would remain zoned motel; 5) If middle building only is sold: a) middle building must be sold as residential; b) back building converts to residential; c) front building would remain zoned motel. Nicholas W. Ippolito-Minor Subdivision Page 2 I would appreciate your again reviewing this matter and commenting on the contents of my interpretation. I also believe that your decisionsis misleading, since condition # 2 seems to read that after January 1, 1978, Parcels 2 and 3 can only be used for single-family residential use. As you are aware, it was very clear that Parcels 2 and 3 would only revert to single-family use after Januar/W~f~978 in the event that Parcel 1 was sold. / Very ~ly your7 GFOImrc / Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals Main Road Southold, New York 11971 cc: Nicholas W. Ippolito © 0 Southold Town Board of Appeals srlUTHrlLD, L. I., N.Y. 11971 Telephone 765-2660 APPEAL BOARD MEMBERS Robert ~/. Gillispie, .Jr., Chelrman Robert Bergen Charles Grigonis, Jr. Serge Doyen, Jr. Fred Hulse, Jr. October 4, 1977 Gary Olsen, Esq. P.O. Box 38 Main Road Mattituck, NY 11952 Re: Nicholas W. Ippolito Minor Subdivision, File %1487. Dear Mr. Olsen: A discussion with the Board indicates the following answers to numbered questions raised in your letter of September 21st con- cerning Ippolito motel in Residential area: 1. Yes, the sale would be a continuation of a non-conforming motel use. 2. Sale of individual parcels: 1) If front building is sold: a) Front building would remain as a non-conforming motel use. b) Middle and back buildings would have to convert to residential use either immediately or Mr. Ippolito could continue their current non-conforming use under his own direction for the balance of 1977, after which these structures must be used for single family resi- dential use and conform to the Southold Building Code with respect to minimum floor area. 2) Front and middle buildings sold together: a) Front building may continue as a non-conforming motel use. Middle building may continue as a non-conforming motel use until 1978 after which middle building must be converted to single family residential use. 3) If back building only is sold: a) Back building must be converted for single family residential use after January 1, 1978. b) Front and middle building would remain as a non-conforming motel use until January 1, 1978, after which middle building must be converted to single family residential Page 2 4) 5) use although front building would continue to enjoy non- conforming motel status. If back and middle buildings are sold: a) Back and middle buildings may continue non-conforming motel status until January 1, 1978. b) After January 1, 1978, both buildings must be con- verted to single family residential use. If middle building only is sold: a) Middle building may continue non-conforming motel use until January 1, 1978, after which it must be converted to single family residential use. b) Back building may continue non-conforming motel use until January 1, 1978, after which it must be converted to single family residential use. c) Front building may continue non-conforming motel use. In response to your last paragraph, you are correct: Con- dition 2 would apply only in the event that a sale or transfer of ownership and control of Parcel #1 as noted in the condition occurred this year. If no sale or transfer of ownership occurs this year with respect to all or any part of the premises under discussion, it is certainly not the intention of the Board to impose any new conditions on the current operation. The foregoing applies to the current year. Looking forward to a possible similar application next year, the Board might not be as amenable to prolonging the non-conforming use privileges on Parcels #2 and #3. V~ tru~ly yours,, ~ cR~a~mtanW. Gi lispie, Jr. O'~ RWG:med © MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO THE APPLICATION OF VIP INN LTD. UNDER APPEAL NO. 2317. This memorandum in opposition is submitted by: Frederick J. Tedeschi 403 Main Street Greenport, New York 11944 Attorney for the following adjoining property owners: 1. Mr. & Mrs. Archilles Stachtiaris 2. Fred R. Bruch and Barbara E. Bruch 3. 3oseph Smulcheski and Amelia Smulcheski 4. Fred Hribok and Amelia Hribok 5. Mr. & Mrs. Manfred Kuerner 6. Edwin Stewart and Marie Stewart 7. Nassau Steamship Agency Inc. The Board is respectfully referred to Appeal No. 2254 wherein an application was filed by Nicholas Ippolito covering the instant property dated March 9, 1977 requesting exactly the same variance. Reference is also made to the objections filed therein and the several Petitions signed by property owners and residents opposing the granting of the application. POINT I To grant the instant application would increase the density of each o~ the divided parcels beyond a reasonable amount. At the present time the parcel consists of 18 units (12,4 and 2) located on 51,000 square feet of land (approx.) this would figure out to 2,833 square feet per dwelling unit. However, the applicant proposes to do the following: 1. Create Parcel 1 on the North Road with 24,000 square feet of land with 12 dwelling units. This figures out to 2,000 square feet per dwelling unit. This Parcel the applicant proposes to sell. Thus, the amount of square feet per unit for this parcel is reduced by 833 square feet per unit. Also, there must be provision made to park a mini- mum of 12 automobiles. me Create Parcel 2 with 9,400 square feet of land with 4 dwelling units. This figures out to 2,350 square feet per dwelling unit. Thus the number of square feet per unit is reduced by 483 square feet per unit. 3. Create Parcel 3 with 17,000 square feet of land with 2 dwelling units. It is submitted that much of this parcel is wetland and not usable for parking and/or cesspool requirements. Without the square footage con- tained in,is parcel the entire property is woefully deficient. (Even giving credit for the wetlands in computing the total square footage present.) Reference is made to the Bulk and Parking Schedule which requires a minimum of 40,000 square feet for a single family dwelling and 80,000 square feet for a two family dwelling. In addition, there would not be the required width of 150 feet present. In Parcels 1 and 2, assuming a population of three (3) persons per unit that would put the premises at a level of 666 square feet per person and 783 square feet per person, re- spectively. This, I submit, is extremely poor quality zoning. I respectfully submit that to create three separate parcels as applicant requests would be to increase the density of this area. I am sure we would all agree that the density at present is high enough. POINT II None of the Proposed Parcels can qualify under the provisions of the zoning ordinance an~ the Bui~ and Par~in~ Schedules. It is respectfully submitted that as to lot area, minimum requirements, lot depth, lot width, parking and set back r~stric~ions,.the proposed subdivision is deficient. Actually, what thzs Zonzng Board of Appeals zs asked to approve in this - 2- application is a minor subdivision requiring variances from this Board on practically every requirement of the Zoning Code. POINT III No unnecessar~ hardship has been shown by the applicant sufficient to ~usti~¥ ale~al ~rantin~ of a variance herein. It is submitted to this Board that applicant has not set forth any unnecessary hardship as outlined by the New York State Court of Appeals in the case of Otto v. Steinhilber, 282 NY71,24 NE(2) 851. In that case the Court of Appeals stated: "Before the Board may exercise its discretion and grant a variance upon the~ound of unnecessary hardship, the record must show that (1) the land in question cannot yield a reasonable return if used only for a purpose allowed in that zone; (2) that the plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances and not to the general conditions in the neighborhood which may reflect the unreason- ableness of the zoning ordinance itself; and (3) that the use to be authorized by the variance will not alter the essential character of the locality." In the instant case the applicant has not set forth any hardship other than a statement that "applicant has a pur- chaser for Parcel 1 but the purchaser does not wish to purchase parcel 2 or 3," and that it would be more marketable if the variance were granted. Nowhere is there a name or contract of sale set forth to substantiate that/~roposed purchaser does in fact exist. However, even assuming a purchaser exists (and there is no evidence submitted that he does other than the aforesaid statement), it is submitted that this is no hardship sufficient to justify the granting of a variance as herein re- quested. At best it is a self-imposed hardship. The applicant purchased the property as it is now constituted. He knew what he was buying. Strict application of the ordinance has not and will not deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of his land. To gran~ the variances as requested in the instant application will not be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance, and will not be in the public interest. -3- To grant this application would be to set a ~ dangerous precedent and undoubtedly will open the door for other property owners to reasonably expect similar variances for their properties. I respectfully request that this Board deny the instant application for the reasons hereinab~ve stated. Dated - Greenport, New York August 2, 1977 Respectfully submitted, Frederick J. Tedeschi Attorney at Law 403 Main Street Greenport, New York 11944 516 477-2048 - 4- GARY FLANNER OLSEN COUNSELLO~ AT LAW P. O. BOX 38 · MA~N ROAD · MATTITUCK, LON(3 ISLAND, NEW YORK 11952 · PHONE 516 298-4844 November 30, 1977 Re: Ippolito - Minor Subdivision File # 1487 Dear Mary: I have been requested by Mr. Ippolito to obtain a copy of the Transcript of the Public l{earing in re the above captioned Variance, which was held on August 4, 1977. If there is any charge for the Transcript, please advise me ahead of time. Best regards. Very tru GFO~clr Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Attention: Mary - Secretary Southold Town Board of'Appeals - OUTHOLD, L. I., N.Y. 119'71 Telephone 765-2660 APPEAL BOARD MEAABERS Robert W. Gillispie, Jr., Chairman Robert Bergen Cherles Grigonis, Jr. Serge Doyen, Jr. Fred Hulse, October 4, 1977 Gary Olsen, Esq. P.O. Box 38 Main Road Mattituck, NY 11952 Re: Nicholas W. Ippolito Minor Subdivision, File ~1487. Dear Mr. Olsen: A discussion with the Board indicates the following answers to numbered questions raised in your letter of September 21st con- cerning Ippollto motel in Residential area: Yes, the sale would be a continuation of a non-conforming ~otel use. Sale of individual parcels: 1) If front building is sold: a) Front building would remain as a non-conforming motel use. b) Middle and back buildings would have to convert to residential use either immediately or Mr. Ippolito could continue their current non-conforming use under his own direction for the balance of 1977, after which these structures must be used for single family resi- dential use and conform to the Southold Building Code with respect to minimum floor area. 2) Front and middle buildings sold together: a) Front building may continue as a non-conforming motel use. Middle building may continue as a non-conforming motel use until 1978 after which middle building must be converted to single family residential use. 3) If back building only is sold: a) Back building must be converted for single family residential use after January 1, 1978. b) Front and middle building would remain as a non-conforming motel use until January 1, 1978, after which middle building must be converted to single family residential Page 2 4) 5) use although front building would continue to enjoy non- conforming motel status. If back and middle buildings are sold: a) Back and middle buildings may continue non-conforming motel status until January 1, 1978. b) After January 1, 1978, both buildings must be con- verted to single family residential use. If middle building only is sold: a) Middle building may continue non-conforming motel use until January 1, 1978, after which it must be converted to single family residential use. b) Back building may continue non-conforming motel use until January 1, 1978, after which it must be converted to single family residential use. c) Front building may continue non-conforming motel use. In response to your last paragraph, you are correct: Con- dition 2 would apply only in the event that a sale or transfer of ownership and control of Parcel #1 as noted in the condition occurred this year. If no sale or transfer of ownership occurs this year with respect to all or any part of the premises under discussion, it is certainly not the intention of the Board to impose any new conditions on the current operation. The foregoing applies to the current year. Looking forward to a possible similar application next year, the Board might not be as amenable to prolonging the non-conforming use privileges on Parcels #2 and #3. V~ trq~ly ytour~.,/~/~, RWG:med SOUTHOLD, L. I., N.Y. 119'71 TcJephon¢ ?65-9660 APPEAL BOARD MEMBERS Robert XX/. Gillispie, Jr., Chairmen Robert Bergen Charles Grisonis, Jr. Serge Doyen, Jr. Fred Hulse, Jr. MINUTES Southold Town Board of Appeals April 21, 1977 A regular'meeting of the Southold Town Board of Appeals was held at 7:30 P.M. (E.S.T.), Thursday, April 21, 1977, at the Town office, Main Road, Southold, New York. There were present: Messrs: Robert W. Gillispie, Jr., Chairman; Robert Bergen; Fred Hulse, Jr.; Charles Grigonis, Jr. Also present: Steve Katz, Long Island Traveler-Mattituck Watchman; Sam Campbell, Suffolk Weekly Times. 7:30 P.M. (E.S.T.) - Decision on Appeal No. 2254, ~Nicholas. W. ~Ippolito~ 39 Gehring Street, Commack, New York for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-30;-Article V, Section 100-50, and Bulk Schedule for ~er- mission to divide property with existing buildings. Lo~ation of property: South side North Road (CR27), Southold, New York, bounded on the north by CR27; east by Hass and Carole Road (Pvt. Rd.); south by Mill Creek; west by now or formerly Dover Navigation Corp. THE CHAIRFIAN: In the interim since the last hearings, we have received one letter from a person who I guess is one of the Stewart? FREDERICK TEDESCHI, ESQ.: Yes~ he's One of the owners of the property adjacent to the one involved. THE CHAIRMAN: He says that he has been transferred to Indianapolis and can't make the hearing. (The Chairman read excerpts from the April 15, 1977, letter to the Board from Edwin W. and Marie E. Stewart.) I don't know what this man understood was going to happen, but that is certainly not one of the possibilities._ (The Chairman continued reading the letter.) Southold Town Board of Appeals -2- April 21, 1977 We have received since our first hearing on this on March 31 a letter from the Planning Commission, Suffolk County Planning Commission indicating that they consider this is a decision, a "matter for local determination. A decision of local determination should not be construed as either an approval or disapproval." I'm going to suggest that a decision be made along the following lines. FREDERICK TEDESCHI, ESQ.:. Mr. Chairman? I'd like to be heard in opposition. THE CHAIRMAN: You can, although this is not a continuation of the hearing, this is a postponed decision, but I'll be glad to hear from you. FREDERICK TEDESCHI, ESQ.: I know that. The reason I make my request is because I represent five adjoining property o%~ners, Mr. and Mrs. Bruch, Mr. and Mrs. Smulcheski, Mr. and Mrs. Hribok, Mr. Manfred Kuerner, and Mr. Edwin Stewart and his wife. The reason I'm appearing, primarily, is because I don't think this Board has jurisdiction over this matter. I call your attention to Section 100-125 A of the Zoning Code of the Town of Southold. That states, in essence, in all cases where the Board of Appeals is required to hold a public hearing, in addition to the notice of such hearing required by law, a written notice containing the following information shall be sent to every owner of property adjoining the applicant's property. Now, I have five clients here who own property that abutts onto the applicant's property. Not one of them has received a written notice as required in our Zoning Ordinance. None of them have executed varified waivers. There's no proof in the record other than a notice to a Nassau Steamship Agency, Inc. at Garden City, New York, and another notice to one Helmut Hass at Peconic, New York. Now, the Town Law, State of New York, Section 267, Subdivision 5, says, "A Zoning Board of Appeals may act pursuant to its original jurisdiction only after notice and he~ring" and notice is-such as mandated in our Zoning Code. THE CHAIRMAN: What was that section again, Town Law 267 ... FREDERICK TEDESCHI, ESQ.: Town Law 267, Subdivision 5. The Court of Appeals has spoken on this question. The case of Buffalo Cremation Code vs. March, 249 New York 531, and they hold, in effect, the statutory notice and hearing requirements are man- datory, no option. The Town Enabling Act, that's 267 - 5, provides that notice be mailed to the parties and notice be published in the official newspaper, as you well know. There are som~ cases which hold that failure to notify an owner of land which adjoins is not a fatal defect, but it's clear that where a local ordinance requires such notice, the defect then is fatal. This is our situation. THE CHAIRMAN: Lets see, we've postponed this three weeks, we can'postpone the decision another three weeks and I'll call, Southold Town Board of Appeals -3- April 21, 1977 in order to avoid getting into a lawsuit about this, if possible, I'll call to the attention of the Town Attorney your remarks. I would also ask you to look at the last section of our Zoning Ordi- nance which refers to, "failure to comply with the provisions of this section shall not affect the validity of any action taken by the Board of Appeals." FREDERICK TEDESCHI, ESQ.: I'm familiar with that. THE CHAIRMAN: This notification process was under consideration before we passed this law. It was my opinion, and most of the others who were interested in it, that unless we had this exception, in other words, if somebody made a mistake, and I presume that this is a mistake on the part of the Town Clerk, that it would not affect the validity of our actions here. FREDERICK TEDESCHI, ESQ.: Provided ~here are no objections. THE CHAIRMAN: Because ... you're referring to something else that I don't know about. However, what we'll do is to take this up with, and perhaps you can call Tasker and explain your position, I'll explain it, and we'll postpone it until another meeting. Just for, as a lot of these people are interested here, what I was going to suggest was that this property be permitted to be divided and that a condition be placed on our action that no one of the divided properties can be converted to any other use with- out prior approval of the Board of Appeals. And that the parking lot on the east side of Carrol Avenue continue as the parking lot for the three parcels. That's debatable, whether that should con- tinue as a parking lot for all three parcels, I think there's plenty of room on the other two parcels to provide their own parking. FREDERICK TEDESCHI, ESQ.: We take issue with that. There is not plenty of room there. THE CHAIRMAN: Do you agree or disagree with the motel owner that the motel people have the right to use Carrol Avenue? FREDERICK TEDESCHI: I didn't hear you. THE CHAIRMAN: Do you agree or disagree With the right of the motel people to use Carrol Avenue? FREDERICK TEDESCHI: Yes, I do. They can only use Carrol Avenue down to this point which is the last building on Parcel ~3. Carrol Road there, if I may approach the Board, they can only use 50' of it. From here south is private property belonging to my ~lients. We can fence that off if we so desired. THE CHAI~qAN: Does that show in the title? Southold Town Board of Appeals -4- April 21, 1977 FREDERICK TEDESCHI, ESQ.: It does, I researched this. That's in our deeds, so that actually, Parcel ~3 in no way meets the requirements. Most of this is wetlands anyway, I don't know where they'd put their cesspools, where they'd put %heir parking. ROBERT BERGEN: Where is the parking area now? THE CHAIRMAN: Here. (On map.) FREDERICK TEDESCHI, ESQ.: If I may call the Board's attention, this is 12 units and they're reducing it to 24,000 sq. ft., that's 2,000 sq. ft. a unit. You've got to have a minimum of 12 parking spaces and if they're going to operate it as a motel, the employees have to have a space also. This is going to create extremely high density. THE CHAIRMAN: It's already there. FREDERICK TEDESCHI, ESQ.: But it's there on.51,000 sq. ft., it's not there on 24,000. You're creating density on 24,000 sq. ft., and similarly with the other two, you're going to create four units on 11,000 sq. ft. which is an average of 2,750 sq. ft. My clients have an average of 4,500 sq. ft. for one unit. You're going to give four units On 11,000. I submit that's high density and that's poor zoning. THE CHAIRMAN: I'd like to point out to you, Mr. Tedeschi, that this was over the dead bodies of the people who were interested in the Zoning in the Town of Southold what Hass did to that whole area. FREDERICK TEDESCHI, ESQ,: I understand that. THE CHAIRMAN: This is not our fault or the Planning Board's fault or the Town Board's fault. FREDERICK TEDESCHI, ESQ.: what was done. I'm asking you not to compound THE CHAIRMAN: I'm not sure that it would, but I'll make a motion to postpone the decision on this another three weeks in an effort to arrive at a decision which is just and equitable, and in order to give Mr. Tedeschi a chance to confer with Town Counsel. I'll be glad to be there. FREDERICK TEDESCHI, ESQ.: I'd like tO ask the Chairman, on what basis are you considering this subdivision, it's really a minor subdivision into three parcels. Where is the hardship? TME CHAIRMAN: This is a division of an existing situation. The hardship that was explained to us ~is that the owner of the property would be unable, perhaps, to sell the smaller units in back of the main motel. -That's his~ argument, tn general, we Southold Town Board of Appeals -5- April 21, 1977 agree, we have several of those tonight, in general we agree with dividing the property where there will be no change in the density and where the building's exist. FREDERICK TEDESCHI, ESQ.: That's a self-imposed hardship, he bought it this way. When he bought this property, he knew what he had. THE CHAIRMAN: That's debatable. We've always considered it here to be a hardship to the person trying to sell it. FREDERICK TEDESCHI, ESQ.: Those are not legal grounds for granting a variance. THE CHAIRMAN: We have been supported in that before. On motion by Mr. Gillispie, seconded by Mr. Bergen, it was RESOLVED that the Southold Town Board of Appeals RESERVE DECISION on Appeal No. 2254, Nicholas W. Ippolito, until May 12, 1977, at 7:30 P.M. (E.D.S.T.). Vote of the Board:. Ayes: - Messrs: Grigonis. (After the hearing w~s closed, Mr. Tedeschi Presented a petition with 51 signatures against the variance to the Chairman.) Gillispie, Bergen, Hulse, PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2250 7:50 P.M. (E.S.T.) resumed hearing upon application_of Agway Petroleum Corp, P.O.. Box 705, Pulaski Street, Riverhead, New York for a special ex- ception in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article VII, Section 100-70 B (4) for permission to operate a self-service gasoline station. Location of property: west side Youngs Ave- nue, Southold, New York, bounded on the north by G. Miner and George Ahlers & others; east by Youngs Avenue; south by Goldsmith and Tuthil! and Long Island Railroad; west by George Ahlers & others. THE CHAIRMAN: This is an adjourned hearing on Agway Petroleum Corporation, Application #2250, which was heard on March 10th and which was postponed for six weeks in order to get all the information that we could on this subject. In the ~nterl , we have received minutes and other communications from several town clerks, Suffolk County, Nassau County, and I asked the secretary to summarize as well as she could the arg~unents for and against self-service gas stations. I'll read first her sun%mary' of the statements in favor of self-service gas stations. "A national standard for the safe operation of self-service retail sale of gasoline ~as been adopted by %he National Fire SOUTHOLD, L. I., N.Y. Telephone ~s-~6o APPF.~L BOARD MEMBERS Robert W. Gilllspi¢, Jr., Chairman Robert Bcrgcn Ch,,rles '~risonis, Jr. Scrse Doyen, .Jr. Fred Hulse, .Jr. MINUTES Southold Town Board of Appeals May 12, 1977 A regular meeting of the Southold Town Board of Appeals was held at 7:30 P.M. (E.D.S.T.), Thursday, May 12, 1977, at the Town Office, Main Road, Southold, New York. There were present: Messrs: Robert W. Gillispie, Jr., Chairman; Robert Bergen; Fred Hulse, Jr.; Charles Grigonis, Jr.; Serge Doyen, Jr. Also present: Steve Katz, Long Island Traveler-Mattituck Watchman. 7:30 P.M. (E.D.S.T.) Decision on Appeal No. 2254, ~iqhola~~ .W..~Ippolito, 39 Gehring Street, Commack, New York for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-30; Article V, Section 100-50, and Bulk Schedule for per- mission to divide property with existing buildings. Location of property: South side North Road (CR27), Southold, New York, bounded on the north by CR27; east by Hass and Carole Road (Pvt. Rd.); south by Mill Creek; west by now or formerly Dover ~ Navigation Corp. THE CHAIRMAN: This appeal of Nicholas W. Ippolito for a variance to divide property with existing buildings, south side CR27 in Southold, was postponed until tonight. At' fige o'clock this afternoon, the attorney for Mr. Ippolito asked.that the application be withdrawn. The application is withdrawn without prejudice to further applications. I'm stating this for the record. On motion by Mr. Gillispie, seconded by Mr. Bergen, it was RESOLVED that the Southold Town Board of Appeals approve minutes dated April 21, 1977. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Gillispie, Grigonis, Doyen. Bergen, Hulse, Sou~hold Town Board of Appeals -5- March 31, 1977 You're going to have to move your sign, I understand. This is all going to come under another application sometime later. (The Board and Mr..Levin discussed the l~cation, of the sign.) THE CHAIRMAN: You can't get into the Greenport sewage system? JACK J. LEVIN: I went through it with the ~engineers, it's too costly. THE CHAIRMAN: Did you talk this parking over with Howard? GORDON K. AHLERS: Yes. ~ THE CHAIR/~AN: Are there any objections to this? Anyone wish to speak against it? (There was no response.) After investigation and inspection the Board finds that the applicant requests permission to make an accessory business use of Residential-Agricultural land for parking and sewage disposal, south side CR27, Greenport, New York. The findings of the Board are that the Board is in agreement wi~h the reasoning of the applicant. The Board .finds that strict~application--of .the~Ordinance .... would produce practical difficultie~ o~ unnecessary hardship; the hardship created is unique and would not be shared by all properties alike in the immediate vicinity of this property and in the same use district; and the variance will not change the character of the neighborhood, and will observe the spirit Of the Ordinance. ~ On motion by Mr. Gillispie, seconded by Mr. Grigonis, it was RESOLVED, Jack J. Levin, North Road, Greenport, New York be GRANTED permission to make an accessory business use of Residential-Agricultural land for~parking and sewage disposal, south side CR27, Greenport, New York, as applied for. Vote of the Board: Ayes: - Messrs: Gillispie, Grigonis, Doyen. PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2254 - 8:00 P.M. (E.S.T.) upon application of Nicholas W. Ippolito~, 39 Gehring Street, Commack, New York (Gary Olsen, Esq.) for a variance in accord- ance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-30; Article V, Section 100-50, and Bulk Schedule for permission to divide property with existing buildings. Location of property: Southold Town Board of Appeals -6- March 31, 1977 South side North Road (CR27), Southold, New York, bounded on the north by CR27, east by Hass and Carole Road (Pvt. Rd.); south by Mill Creek; west by now or formerly Dover Navigation Corp. The Chairman opened the hearing by reading the application for a variance, legal notice-of hearing, affidavits attesting to its publication in the official newspapers, and notice to the applicant. The Chairman also read statement from the Town Clerk that notification by certified mail had been made to: Nassau Steamship Agency, Inc.; Helmut Haas. Fee paid $15.00. THE CHAIRMAN: The application is accompanied by a survey dated August 18, 1976 by Van Tuyl indicating that the property under discussion has approximately 24,000 sq. ft. in Parcel #1 on CR27. The adjoining piece, Parcel #2, has 11,0~0 sq. ft.. To the south is a 16,000 sq. ft. triangular piece which runs down to Arshamomaque Pond and runs along a 20' private road. Is there anyone present who wishes to speak for this application? GARY OLSEN, ESQ.: I'm the attorney for the applicant, Nicholas W. Ippolito. Mr. Ippolito presently owns the entire premises involved which totals approximately 51,000 sq. ft. It's located on the south side of County Road 27, otherwise known as the North Road. What prompted this application was, he appar- ently has someone that's interested in purchasing the 12-unit motel immediately to the south of the North Road but they don't want to purchase the other units. What he would like to do is to divide the subject premises into three parcels. The first parcel, which would.be__facing_on.the. North Road,-would have frontagei~n~the North Road of 258', approximately, and would have 24,000 sq. ft. That's a 12-~nit motel which would have parking to the east of Carole Road. The second parcel ... THE CHAIRMAN: The parking goes with the first parcel? GARY OLSEN, ESQ.: Right. It'll be part of the 24,000 sq. ft. The second parcel is to the south of the first and that would have frontage on a private road known as Carole Road containing-approxi- mately 11,000 sq. ft. ~That .contains an existing four-unit motel. To the south of that is proposed P~rcel #3 which would contain 16,000 sq. ft. There's a two-unit dwelling there and that would have frontage of 199.80' on Carole Road. These are all existing buildings, the granting of the variance'would not increase the density. There is an economic hardship for Mr. Ippolito in that it would be more economically viable for him to sell these units in separate parcels rather than as one total piece..That's the purpose of the variance. THE CHAIRMAN: How many units did you say there were? GARY OLSEN, ESQ.: 12 in the first parcel, four in the second, and two in the third. The property to the east of Carole Road ~ Southold Town Board of Appeals -7- March 31, 1977 contains residential units, parcels that would be of similar size, probably smaller, than the parcels that would be created. This was, the property in question was originally zoned, as I understand it, Light Business. It was used for motel purposes and now has been rezoned to Agricultural-Residential. These would be a non- conforming use on that basis. THE CHAIRMAN: The property to the west, wasn't that zoned for motel use? GARY OLSEN, ESQ.: I don't know. as I understand it. It's vacant property now THE CHAIRMAN: Anybody else wish to.speak for this? (There was no response.) Anyone wish to speak against it? FRED BRUCH: I myself and several other people here ~epresent prOperty onwers to the east. THE CHAIRMAN: On Carole Road? Which one are you in? FRED BRUCH: #5,. Carole Road. This is directly opposite the third unit, the triangular piece. THE CHAIRMAN: And your point is? FRED BRUCH: According to my understanding previously, I can't'understand how this will not increase the density because at the moment, the three units are used all as motel units and are restricted to certain numbers of people per unit. Now they will become'family dwellings which can have a number of more people per unit. THE CHAIRMAN: I don't think FRED BRUCH: This ~is what Mr. he said that. Ippolito said to me. THE CHAIRMAN: unit'on the 11,000 16,0007 He's going to Sell this as a four-unit family sq. ft. parcel and a two-unit dwelling on the FRED BRUCH: Yes. THE CHAIRMAN: Anyone else? FRED HRIBOK: I'm in Building #3. THE CHAIR~N: What are the plans for these units? Southold Town Board of Appeals ,8- March 31, 1977 GARY OLSEN, ESQ.: We don't want to lose the non-conforming use by the granting of this variance. We don't want to lose ~he non-conforming motel use that we have now. THE CHAIRMAN: Would you have any objection to a prohibition against using these for a family use? GARY advantage Parcel #2 On Parcel OLSEN, ESQ.: I should think it would be to their if we ever lose the:non-conforming use. Now, say on , we can have, there are four units for motel purposes. #3, there are two units. THE CHAIRMAN: So you would have no objection to prohibiting these for family use? GARY OLSEN, ESQ.: Again, as I understand it, this is presently zoned Residential. We have, in effect, an increased use of the units on Parcels #2 and 3 for motel purposes which we would not want to lose by the granting of the variance. THE CHAIRMAN: In other words, your position is that when they changed it from Business use to Residential, you think you acquired ... GARY OLSEN, ESQ.: We had a motel use at that point. I · think now we are using the property on a non-conforming basis since it's now zoned Residential and not Light Business. 'We would not want to lose, by .the granting_of the_variance,_ our motel use on all of the parcels. THE CHAIRMAN: Then you would have no objection to a clause prohibiting this for family, year-round use. It's too many for this area. GARY OLSEN, ESQ.: I think I would. THE CHAIRMAN: As far as the division of the property is concerned, I don't think the Board has any objection becaQse it won't increase the density, but that phrase wouldn't apply if the four unit became four family unit~ on 11,000 sq. ft. GARY OLSEN, ESQ.: But I would not want to lose the right to use it as four motel units. THE CHAIRMAN: I don't think you would. FRED BRUCH: Can I ask a que'stion? Do I understand that they'l~ have the right to either use it as residential or motel? THE CHAIRY~N: That's what we're talking about. I think that the Board should prohibit for year-round family dwelling units, there just isn't enough space there. $outhold Town Board of Appeals -9- March 31,~ 1977 FRED BRUCH: There's another point that disturbs me. Carole Road, the private road that provides access to people lower down, is owned by the individual property owners and not Mr. Ippolito. Right now, the road is a mess because of it being used by the motel. Prior to this, I really didn't know what rights I had as far as having a defined access. THE CHAIRMAN: That would be a civil matter for you to take up with the owner of the motel. That has nothing to do with this Board. GARY OLSEN, ESQ.: I don't think it has anything to do with the application. I did not represent Mr. Ippolito when he bought this property, but this is a situation that's existed for a long time. The granting of the variance is not going to change, basically the use or the density. THE CHAIRMAN: It isn't going to affect that one way or the other, either a plus or a minus. It may be that while Mr. Ippolito didn't take care of the road, maybe the new owner will. FRED BRUCH: I'm not talking about the condition of the road, I'm talking about whether they should have access. Prior to this, the motel property being one piece, they had access by foot. Now if you subdivide, they have access over our private road which really is not part of the motel property. THE CHAIRMAN: How do you answer that? GARY OLSEN, ESQ.: As I say, I did not represent him when he purchased the property but I would assume he has access over Carole Road. THE CHAIRMAN: Are these occupied during the summer, most of them? FRED BRUCH: Yes. GARY OLSEN, ESQ.:~ This is a title question, I don't think it's a variance question. THE CHAIRMAN: And they come down Carole Road and drive in and you think they don't have a right to do that? FRED BRUCH: The way their property is divided ... THE CHAIRMAN: Don't you all have the right to use the road? FRED BRUCH: Yes, but we all own the total piece of the road on the east side. The defining line was the edge of the road on the motel side. Actually, the motel had no road. Now, they want Southold Town Board of Appeals -10- March 31, 1977 to use this as access and subdivide it into separate residential and/or maybe motel property. The previous owner used to keep all the cars up in the parking lot and there was no traffic other than the people who lived at the lower end. · THE CHAIRMAN: Well, maybe that's the way they'll have to continue it, I don"t know. That's something we wouldn't be able to iron out here. FRED BRUCH: Well, will we have the privilege to look into this further before you close it? GARY OLSEN, ESQ.: I have a copy of his deed. Again, I did not represent him so I don't know the title questions but I have a copy of the deed which states, "the right to pass and repass over Carole Road and Old Cove Boulevard, 20' rights-of-way, where the same are adjacent to the above described premises." THE CHAIRMAN: Wasn't that deed from Ha'ss? GARY OLSEN, ESQ.: This was a deed from Thomas McHale. Was he the former owner? FRED BRUCH: Yes, before that it was Hass. GARY OLSEN, ESQ.: It was subject %o rights of others to pass and repass over said rights-of-ways. FRED BRUCH:-- It's all right for property owners but as a motel I would think this would be a different situation. GARY OLSEN~ ESQ.: Apparently he has a deeded right. Again, this is a title question and not a variance question. FRED HRIBOK: What rights would they have in relationship the pond, water rights? THE CHAIRMAN: That's not one of our problems, I don't know. FRED BRUCH: enough to ... You're just ruling on whether it is large THE CHAIRMAN: We're just ruling on the division of the property. FRED BRUCH: This is allowable then as far as dividing an existing piece of property which doesn't fall under the present requirements as far as square footage? THE CHAIRMAN: It's a non-conforming use and everything in Hass' development here is non-conforming, everything is too small here according to modern standards. It was too small when we $outhold Town Board of Appeals -11- March 31, 1977 put the Ordinance in, we had some terrible arguments with Hass at the beginning. FRED BRUCH: That's why you're disapproving it at the present? THE CHAIRMAN: No, anyone who wants to do something which doesn't meet %he standards of the now Zoning ordinance has to come in here and make an appeal. Of course, we're ruled by precedent, custom and so forth of the courts and it would be regarded as an appropriation of the Constitutional rights of property if we denied the man the right to divide his property. Two, it's not going to change the density and it's not going to affect the safety, health and Welfare of the To~n of Southold. FRED BRUCH: Can I ask a question on the density? THE CHAIRMAN: Well, this is all too dense, your place is too dense. FRED BRUCH: Mr. Ippolito came and asked if I would give approval ... it was my understanding that this front section which is considered as 12 units, although they are very s~all, was to become some sort of a condominium-type operation where families would own each unit. THE CHAIRMAN: I don't think there's time enough, it takes a couple.of_years to run one of those off, a condominium under New York State law. -Mr. Olsen can tell you. ~ARY OLSEN, ESQ.: We want to keep the motel usage. FRED BRUCH: It will be rented out, it will not be purchased. GARY OLSEN, ESQ.: That's my understanding. Again, he has a purchaser for it and I would assume it would be under the non- conforming motel usage. Anything else that he wanted to do he would have to get approval of the Town and we're not asking for that, we're just asking for the division. (The Chairman discussed a similar situation in East Marion.) THE CHAIRMAN: Anyone else have any questions? If not, I'll offer a resolution granting this application as applied for and agreeing with the reasoning of the applicant. The findings of the Board are that this will not change the character of the area, this division will not change the character of the area, and subject to a condition that the three buildings on these three pieces of prop- erty may not be used for year-round family dwelling units. In fact, the use of these properties shall remain the same as has bee~.in the past for the a~commodation of transients. There's nobody there in the winter, right? Southold Town Board of Appeals -12- March 31, 1977 THE CHAIRMAN: the density factor. acreage here? GARY OLSEN, ESQ.: No. THE CHAIRMAN: One of the things we try to avoid in a situation llke this is somebody making year-round use of it. GARY OLSEN, ESQ.: What about making year-round use of either.the motel ... I would assume that the only thing that prohibits the year-round use is the fact that they're not winterized, I don't know, but I would assume they're not winterized. You would have no objection to the motel units being used on a year-round basis provided that they're properly heated and winterized for that use. It would not increase the use at all. I think we'd want to prohibit i~ because of You take 18 families on ... what's the GARY OLSEN, ESQ.: Total acreage is roughly 51,000 sq. ft. What's the difference if you're letting them use it March through November if the units were winterized, I don't think the granting of this variance should prohibit a new owner or even the present owner from winterizing these units and saying, "OK, I want to have a year-round operation." That would be like what the Soundview Motel does. It's not increasing the density at all. THE CHAIRMAN: Yes, it is. The requirements as to sewage and wa%er would triple. FRED BRUCH: The cesspools are pretty antiquated. THE CHAIRMAN: YOu have cesspools there? BARBARA BRUCH: Yes, definitely. THE CHAIi~/~N: You FRED BRUCH: No. THE CHAIRMAN: I don't have sewage %here? think that c'lause should stay in here. FRED BRUCH: In fact, I think there is a problem in the motel. We've had the Environmental people down. THE CHAIRMAN: In-other words, we'll permit the division of the property but no change in its use. GARY OLSEN, ESQ.: How about using Parcels ~2 and 3 for single family residential use? THE CHAI~*~N: Yes, I think if there was one family on Parcel #2 and one family on Parcel #3 it would probably be an improvement. Southold Town Board of Appeals -13- March 31, 1977 FRED BRucH: It would be more people there because where you have two people in a unit you'll have families and visitors. THE CHAIRMAN: one family use. BARBARA BRUCH: THE CHAIRMAN: guess. No, he's talking about converting them to Where would they park? They'd have to park in the parking lot, GARY OLSEN, ESQ.: On Parcel ~3, there's plenty of parking. BARBARA BRUCH: No there isn't, because we own the road. There's room for two cars in front of it. GARY OLSEN, ESQ.: From what I can see looking at the survey, there's plenty of room of Parcel #3. BARBARA BRUCH: No there's not, it's adjacent to us. FRED BRUCH: We will resist any parking or traffic, we'll take. you to court. THE CHAIRMAN: They have a right-of-way over the road, too. BARBARA BRUCH: No, I don't think so. THE CHAIRMAN: ~ Well, this is not our.problem.-- 'BARBARA BRUCH: Is it possible to ask for a postponement on the decision? We were never notified. THE CHAIRMAN: I don't think you're neighbors. FRED BRUCH: We are adjacent on two sides to Mr. Ippolito and these other people ar'e too. We thought this was just the first hearing and it's been going on since August. THE CHAIRMAN: This is the first time I've seen it. FRED BRUCH: If I'd known he'd had counsel, I would have brought counsel myself. BARBARA BRUCH: Mr. Ippolito came to us in October with a marvelous, marvelous petition that he wanted all of us to sign. THE CHAIrmAN: A petition? BARBARA BRUCH: Yes. And he told us all about the people he has planned to put in his 13 units in the front, or 12. He told us about the people, his clientele. We really would like to ask ~ Southold Town Board of Appeals -14- March 31, 1977 for a postponement until we can look into it, seriously. We're very concerned, we've been there 12 years. FRED HRIBOK: I've been there 20 years. The place has been going downhill ever since Mr. Ippolito's been there. THE CHAIRMAN: On what grounds do you want this postponed? So you can determine the right-of-way? FRED BRUCH: Yes, %he access. You say the density won't be increased. They're very small motel units. This is a joke about 12 units up front, you could put three of them in this room. His plan is to have a family in each one of them and they'll have visitors and you'll have 150 people there instead of 32. THE CHAIRMAN: Which is all the more reason why it should be confined to seasonal use. But I don't think you can prohibit him from selling it. BARBARA BRUCH: No, he has been trying to sell it as a motel unit. THE CHAIRMAN: Your objection is, basically, you think you have rights to the road that he doesn't for Parcels #2 and 3. BARBARA BRUCH: The third parcel which is adjacent to us Which he plans to retain, at the~ moment, in his own name gives access to Arshamomaque Pond, it%s the only water_ access.. But that does not prevent the first unit, eventually, from buying that'%hird unit and then they have'complete access to Arshamomaque Pond. THE CHAIRP~AN: That's the way it is now. FRED BRUCH: But it's a motel and they don't have boats and so forth and now you'll have 16 people with boats. THE CHAIRMAN: What you're saying then is that these people are going to come down there for 'six months at a shot or three months or something like that, is'that your understanding? FRED BRUCH: My Understanding was that, like I said, a condominium-type operation where somebody was going to take it over in the name of a group of people.who would each have a unit, and we're concerned about the access. Right now, we don't think that the facilities will sustain any additional people, but that's neither here nor there because that would have to be corrected. Then each one of these families would have access, to the pond and so forth and you would have many more people then you have there now with it as a motel. I can't understand how you can say it can be separated as a motel and still be residential, I should think it would have to be one or the other. Southold Town Board of Appeals -15- March 31, 1977 CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR.: That's why he says it's continuing a non-conforming use now. If you leave it that "A". zone, then it opens it up to him more. FRED BRUCH: Because we would be willing to negotiate with him if he's offering it for residential but he said he wants to keep it residential but still business. You can't have your cake and eat it too. BARBARA BRUCH: We're willing to make some type of compromise. FRED BRUCH: We would like that triangular piece of property to increase our 6wn property and privacy there and he has never given us the opportunity to approach him because we don't really know what his plan is. BARBARA BRUCH: The Conservation man has been down. You see, I stay there all summer long, we live in Hampto~ Bays, and if you've got a couple that is more environmentally aware of what can happen in an area, the Conservation man is down there every day and he's checked things. THE CHAIRMAN: Well, I think the Board is perfectly willing to postpone the decision, but I think it's only fair to warn you that, as far as the division of the property is concerned, we'll be willing to go ahead. But we can postpone the decision. On motion~by. Mr. Gillispie, seconded by Mr...Doyen,--it was .-- 'RESOLVED'that the Southold Town Board of Appe&ls POSTPONE DECISION upon application of Nicholas W. Ippolito~ Appeal #2254, until April 21, 1977, at 7:30 P.M. (E.S.T.). Vote of the Board: Ayes: - Messrs: Gillispie, Grigonis, Doyen. PUBLIC HEARING:. Appeal No. 2255 - 8:35 P.M. (E.S.T.) upon application of Leander B. Glover,.Jr., Cox Lane, Cutchogue, New York (Richard Lark Esq.) for a variance in accordance with the Zoning ordinance, Article III, Section 100-30 and Bulk Schedule for permission to divide property with insufficient width. Location of property: east side Cox Lane, Cutchogue, New York, bounded on the north by now or formerly Pirrone; east by other land of applicant; south by other land of applican~t~ west by Cox Lane. The Chairman opened the hearing by reading the application for a variance, legal notice of hearing, affidavits attesting to its publication in the official newspapers, and notice to the applicant. The Chairman also read statement from the Town Clerk that notification by certified mail had been made to:~ Vincent A. Pirrone; Noble Funn; James Homan; Karl Lanzer; Southold Town Board of Appeals -17- August ~4, 1977 Vote of the Board: Ayes: - Messrs: Gillispie, Bergen, Hulse, Grigonis, Doyen. PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2317 8:46 P.M. (E.D.S.T.) upon application of VIP Inn, Ltd., 39 Gehring Street, Commack, New York (Gary Olsen, Esq.) for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-30 and Bulk Schedule for permission to set off existing buildings on under- sized lot. Location of property: South side CR27, Southold, New York, bounded on the north by CR27 (North Road); east by H. Hass, A. Stachtiari$, N. Ippolito, F. Bruch, J. Smulcheski, M.. Furner,. E. Stewart; south by Mill Creek; west by now-or formerly Nassau Steamship Agency. The Chairman opened the hearing by reading the application for a variance, legal notice of hearing, affidavits attesting to its publication in the'official newspapers, notice to the appli- cant, and disapproval from the Building Inspector. The Chairman also read statement from the Town Clerk that notification by certified mail had been made to: Mr. and Mrs. Achilles Stachtiaris; Mr. and Mrs. Joseph Smulcheski; Mr. and Mrs. Frederick Bruch; Mr. and Mrs. Manfred Kurner; Mr. and Mrs. Edwin Stewart; Helmut Hass; Nassau Steamship Agency, Inc. THE CHAIRMAN: There was another meeting on this, and I believe that the applicant withdrew. -- G~RY OLSEN, ESQ.: Yes, We did withdraw. THE CHAIRMAN: I have the minutes of the previous meeting of March 31, 1977. The application was made under the name of Nicholas W. Ippolito. GARY OLSEN, ESQ.: I didn't realize at that time that the property was in a corporate name owned by Mr. Ippolito but it's the same application. THE CHAIRMAN: So this is a fresh application. (The Chairman finished reading the application.) The application is accompanied by a sketch which indicates that the property owned by the applicant is on the south side of North Road opposite Town Beach in Southold. The first plot on which the main part of the motel stands is on about 24,000 sq. ft. The next plot on which the four-unit section stands is on 9,400 sq. ft., plus or minus. The two-unit portion of this motel is on Parcel #3 toward the pond south from the Main Road. This is a situation which existed prior to zoning and which is about as severe an example as could be found and predated zoning in this Town. We Southold Town Board of Appeals -18- August 4, 1977 have a brief which I will read when the time comes from Mr. Tedeschi who further points out what poor zoning it is, a point with which we hardily agree. In other words, we agree entirely with the fact that this is poor zoning. Is there anyone present who wishes to speak for this application? GARY OLSEN, ESQ.: This may be an example of poor zoning but the fact is that it does exist. THE CHAIRMAN: Lest anybody think that there isn't poor zoning elsewhere, I was in Hauppauge yesterday where a fellow's got before the Planning Commission 12 building sites on 2.9 acres. There's so little room there's no place to park the cars, they have to be parked on the street. We're not the only ones with poor zoning. Go ahead. ~ GARY OLSEN, ESQ.: This is an. existing situation. On Parcel #1, proposed Parcel #1, the~e is presently a 12-unit motel and that parcel would have 24,000 sq. ft. with frontage on Middle Road of about 258'. Parcel #2 presently has a 4-unit building on it and if the variance is approved, it wo'uld have an area of 5,400 sq. ft. Parcel ~3 has a 2-unit building and, if the vari- ance were granted, would have an area of approximately 17,000 sq. ft. THE CHAIRMAN: I think Parcel #2 is 9,400 sq. ft., isn't it? GARY OLSEN, ESQ.: Yes, 9,400. Mr. Ippolito, who is the owner of the corporation who is the applicant here, has a party'interested in purchasing the motel unit but they're not interested in purchasing the 4Junit building or the 2-unit building. THE CHAIRMAN: Could you tell us why? NICHOLAS IPPOLITO: I really can't answer that, I guess the -- price is out of their reach for the three parcels. GARY OLSEN, ESQ.: The granting of the variance will not increase the density or chg.nge the situation. THE CHAIRMAN: I think Mr. Ted~schi's coming along with a brief after you've finished ... GARY OLSEN, ESQ.: I wish I had seen a copy of the brief. THE CHAIRMAN: I didn't see it myself until 12:00 GARY OLSEN, ESQ.: As I say, the granting of the variance would not increase the density, it would simply set off each of the units as separate parcels. THE CHAIRMAN: Would Mr. Ippolito continue to operate the 2-unit and the 4~unit portions of the motel on Parcels 2 and 3? Southold Town Board of Appeals -19- August~4, 1977 NICHOLAS IPPOLITO: That would be desirable. Upon selling I would be willing to have it dropped or up it to residential zoning. THE CHAIRMAN: One of the buildings would have to be enlarged to 850 sq. ft. NICHOLAS IPPOLITO: Which means that the only direction it can go is up. THE CHAIRMAN: this application? Is there anyone else who wishes to speak for (There was no response.) I~ there anyone who wishes to speak against this application? I know Mr. Tedeschi's going to speak, do you want to read the brief or shall I? FREDERICK TEDESCHt, ESQ.: You're up higher. (The Chairman read the August 2, 1977, "Memorandum in Opposition" submitted by Frederick Tedeschi, Esq., on behalf of his clients, Mr. and Mrs. Stachtiaris; Mr. and Mrs. Bruch; Mr. and Mrs. Smulcheski; Mr. and Mrs. Hribok; Mr. and Mrs. Kuerner; Mr. and Mrs. Stewart; and the Nassau Steamship Agency, Inc.) THE CHAIRMAN: Mr. Tedeschi? Is there anything you'd like to add to that, FREDERICK TEDESCHI, ESQ.: Yes, as a correlary I would like to add that the seven clients that I represent are all here. They have indicated to me and, to digress a-minute, we all agree it's bad zoning. Perhaps we could do something to upgrade it. THE CHAIRMAN: I'd like to point out that this was before zoning FREDERICK TEDESCHI, ESQ.: I know that. We're not casting stones, but in an effort to get along with neighbors and perhaps to upgrade the situation, my clients have indicated to me that if a reasonable compromise could be re~ched whereby the two southerly portions, Parcels 2 and 3, were converted into residential one- family, they would certainly upgrade the area in that respect. My seven people, five of them have a one-family dwelling on 4,500 sq. ft. of property. If he creates ... THE CHAIRMAN: Each of them has 4,500 sq. ft.? FREDERICK TEDESCHI, ESQ.: Give or take a few feet. If we could create the same thing across the road ... THE CHAIRMAN: They use them mostly in the summer don't they, none of them are year-round residences? Southold Town Board of Appeals -20- August 4, 1977 FREDERICK TEDESCHI, ESQ.: (Talking to his clients) Is Mr. Stachtiaris a year-round resident? No? Then they're all summer residencesl Our thought is if we could create two one-family units across the road we would certainly be upgrading the area which would be an asset to the entire community. I know you, Mr. Gillispie, have been there with another member of the Board but for those who have not been there, this is what they propose to have for four dwelling units. (Mr. Tedeschi showed the Board a picture of the building.) THE CHAIRMAN: It's an existing four-dwelling unit, not what they propose. FREDERICK TEDESCHI, ESQ.: That's what they propose. And this picture, is the requested motel, which you're all familiar with. This is the two-unit building. We submit that we could, if we could reach such a compromise to make these two parcels one family, it certainly would be in keeping with the rest of the community as it is presently constituted. But to put four units on 9,400 sq. ft. we may be compounding the error in zoning. I know this Board is not that type. THE CHAIRMAN: Then, as I understand it, you would be in agreement with a suggestion which would involve permitting the sale of the 12-unit part'of 24,000 sq. ft. and dividing the other two parcels, 2 and 3, into two separate residential units, each of which would have to have 850 sq. ft. in the residence. I think the 4-unit may have that 850 sq. ft. FREDERICK TEDESCHI, ESQ.:. That's what I was saying, Mr. Gillispie, we're saying ... THE CHAIRMAN: For single family use. FREDERICK TEDE$CHI, ESQ.: Right, exactly. Now I understand. THE CHAIRMAN: And the present use would be continued through this year because it's the middle of the season, and it would be required that these be converted, if used, to single family use anytime after next year. FREDERICK TEDESCHI, ESQ.: We would be in agreement with that, they could operate their 12-unit motel as presently constituted. THE CHAIRMAN: And I think that would improve the area. I'm not sure there would be very much difference. Those motel units are used probably four months out of the year. If you multiply six times four you get 24 months. If you put two families in those two places times twelve months you get 24 months use as far as sewage and water and so forth. FREDERICK TEDESCHI, ESQ.: You don't have as many people for parking, sanitation, I have some pictures here of garbage, cars parked all over the place ... Southold Town Board of Appeals -21- August 4, 1977 THE CHAIRMAN: It would be one small step toward upgrading the area. Mr. Ippolito and Mr. Olsen, you've heard the discussion, are you in agreement with what we've been talking? NICHOLAS IPPOLITO: I'm in partial agreement. What I'm trying to do is sell each parcel off. If I sell the front parcel, I have buyers that claim they're interested. We have gotten down to finalities on it. If they agree to buy, then I agree that the two back buildings should be turned to residential as they are sold. Now assuming that they do not decide to buy, then I would still want to have the motel zoning for the three units. In other words, I wouldn't want to change that at the end of the year. T~E CHAIRMAN: Well, if there's no sale you would continue the way you are, basically. GARY OLSEN, ESQ.: That's not the way I understood your con- versation with Mr. Tedesehi. You said that for the interim of this year he oould continue ... THE CHAIRMAN: for $500,000 ... If Mr. Ippolito sells the 12-unit motel tomorrow GARY OLSEN, ESQ.: It's only upon conveyance of title to the 12-unit that the Parcels 2 and 3 would come into the picture. NICHOLAS IPPOLITO: Actually, what I desired was that assuming that we sold the front parcel, I would have two parcels left. As each parcel is sold it would have to be sold as a residential but while-I still possess it, it would be operating as it operates now as a motel. ROBERT BERGEN: For this year only. THE CHAIRMAN: For this year only on the two parcels. If you' sell Parcel #1, Parcel #2 and %3 which is a four-unit and a two- unit motel, which are very small units, would still be operated by you for the rest of the season. After this season ... GARY OLSEN, ESQ.: Assuming we.sell Parcel %1 this season. THE CHAIRMAN: Assuming you sell it. cation that you have a buyer. I assume from the appli- NICHOLAS IPPOLITO: I have a buyer but it's not, I don't have the money. THE CHAIRMAN: That's our position. We want to do something to elevate the area. NICHOLAS IPPOLITO: I'm in full agreement with that. The only direction I want to. go is toward higher zoning. Southold TOwn Board of Appeals -21-~ August 4, 1977 THE CHAIRMAN: It looks like we're walking backwards, doesn't We won't be causing you any financial inconvenience, you will be permitted to continue this operation the way it is until or if you sell all or nothing. NICHOLAS IPPOLITO: The other thing that I was hoping to receive from the Board was the right to rent the back rooms until they're sold. Let's take Parcel 2. THE CHAIRMAN: No, you can't have everything. We'll let you finish this year because you could have contracts or anything else. NICHOLAS IPPOLITO: Then 'what you're saying, see if I understand it cor=ectly. If I sell the front building, the back two buildings automatically become residential. THE CHAIRMAN: Single family residential. NICHOLAS IPPOLIT0: If I do not sell the front building, am I still able to sell the three parcels as a motel unit? THE CHAIRMAN: That we can't prevent. That's an existing situation. We can't prevent that, can we Mr. Tedeschi? FREDERICK TEDESCHI, ESQ.: No sir. NICHOLAS IPPOLITO: What I was hoping for was that if I did sell the front unit that I would still be able to rent the back units next year as four units and two units. FREDERICK TEDESCHI, ESQ.: That's what we're objecting to. NICHOLAS IPPOLITO: Ail right, I'll accept it. I have the option to sell either individually ... THE CHAIRMAN: I don't think that we would want you to sell #2 or #3 for a motel use at all, period. NICHOLAS IPPOLITO: If ~1 is sold. FREDERICK TEDESCHI, ESQ.: Mr. Gillispie, just a technicality. In as much as the property is owned by a corporation, there's a possibility that stock could be sold and the title wouldn't be transferred so I would like for your consideration in the event that stock of the corporation and/or the title is sold that this would come about. I can envision a situation where title would not be transferred, just the stock sold. I think we're all looking for the' same thing so just as a technicality or precaution I would ask that that be considered. GARY OLSEN, ESQ.: selling of stock. I don't understand that, quite frankly, the Southold Town Board of Appeals -22- August 4, 1977 THE CHAIRMAN: Who owns it now, Mr. Ippol~to or the corporation? NICHOLAS IPPOLITO: The corporation. THE CHAIRMAN: And you own the corporation. Entirely, 100%? NICHOLAS IPPOLITO: Yes. THE CHAIRMAN: You own all the common stock. preferred stock, no bonds. There's no NICHOLAS IPPOLITO: Right. THE CHAIRMAN: In effect he owns it then. What were you going to say?. GARY OLSEN, ESQ.: As long as Mr. Tedeschi, his net comment is if the Parcel 91 is conveyed whether it be through the transfer of stock ... I don't know'how you could do it. You couldn't just convey part of it by selling the corporation, by selling the stock of the corporation. FREDERICK TEDESCHI, ESQ.: Sure you could. THE CHAIRMAN: If it's entirely in Mr. Ippolito's hands you could extinguish the corporation, that would probably be the simplest way. GARY OLSEN, ESQ.: All right, as long we understand What the intent' is. THE CHAIRMAN: That conceivably would be possible, what you're talking about. GARY OLSEN, ESQ.: Mr. Ippolito, I think, understands that if Parcel 91, which would have approximately 24,000 sq. ft. and contains the 12-unit building, if that is sold as shown on the survey, then Parcels 2 and 3 would then have to revert to single family residential use, regardless of how he sells Parcel 91. THE CHAIRMAN: Mr. Tedeschi has suggested the possibility of selling stock in the corporation. GARY OLSEN, ESQ.: As I say, regardless of how h~ sells it whether it's through selling stock of the corporation ... FREDERICK TEDESCHI, ESQ.: Ownership and control. THE CHAIRMAN: Sold involving ownership and control. Added to that action, that should be the first condition. Added to that action would be that if Parcel 91 is sold or conveyed or changes hands by whatever means, then Parcels 92 and 3 may continue as motel units under the direction of Mr. Ippolito for the balance of 1977. Starting January 1, 1978, if the structures on either Southold Town Board of Appeals -23- August~ 4, 1977 Parcel ~ or 3 are used, they must be used for single family resi- dential use and the structures on Parcel 3 and Parcel 2 must conform particularly to the 850 sq. ft. minimum requirement of floor area in the Southold Building Zone Ordinance. NICHOLAS IPPOLITO: I don't think they have that footage right now. THE CHAIRMAN: One of them doesn't. It's about 20' by 20', maybe a little bigger. I think your other one may. If you sell it as is, whoever bought it would have to fix it. You don't have to do it. NICHOLAS IPPOLITO: I may do it but I don't want to be forced into it. THE CHAIRMAN: Ar~y other conditions should be in there? CHARLES GRIGONIS; JR.: I think you've covered them all. After investigation and inspection, the Board finds that the applicant requests permission to set off existing buildings on undersized lot, south side CR27, Southold, New York. The findings of the Board are that this is the first opportunity the Board has had in 20 years to attempt to upgrade the Hass development on the North Road in Southold. The Board finds that strict application of the Ordinance would produce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship; the hardship created is unique and would not be shared by all properties alike in the immediate vicinity of this property and in the same use district; and the variance will not change the character of the neighborhood, and will observe the spirit of the Ordinance. On motion by Mr. Gillispie, seconded by Mr. Bergen, it was RESOLVED, VIP Inn, Ltd., 39 Gehring Street, Commack, New York be GRANTED permission tO set off existing buildings on undersized lots, south side CR27, Southold, New York, as applied for, subject to the following conditions: 1. If the 12-unit motel on Parcel #1 is sold or the ownership and control of this parcel is transferred in any way, Parcels 2 and 3 may continue as motel units under the direction of Mr. Ippolito for the balance of 1977. 2. Starting January 1, 1978, the structures on Parcels.#2 and 3 can be used only for single family residential use. They must conform to the Southold Town Building Code with respect to minimum floor area. Southold Town Board of Appeals -24- August 4, 1977 Vote of the Board: Grigonis, Doyen. Ayes: - Messrs: Gillispie, Bergen, Hulse, PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2318 - 9:15 P.M. (E.D.S.T.) upon application of Lee and Barbara Siros, 3 Lee Lane, Wilbraham, Massachuttes (Gary Olsen, Esq.$.ofor a varianoe in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-30 and Bulk Schedule for permission to set off lot with insufficient width and area. Location of property: East side Deer Path, Mattituck, New York, bounded on the north by Miller Right-of-way; east by D. Trimmer; south by right-of-way, Dickerson and Beier; west by Deer Path (Pvt. Rd.). The Chairman opened the hearing by reading the application for a variance, legal notice of hearing, affidavits attesting to its publication in thH official newspapers, notice to the appli- cant, and disapproval from the Building Inspector. The Chairman also read statement from the Town Clerk that notification by certified mail had been made to: Daniel Trimmer; Charlotte T. Dickerson; Pamela Steadman; Anna M. Smith. Fee paid - $15.00. THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone present who wishes to speak for this application? GARY OLSEN, ESQ.: My clients live in Massachuttes and they are presently involved in a purchase of the subject premises from the present owners, Klaus and Marga Beier. The parcels to be created ... THE CHAIRMAN: Do you know what lot number this is on the County map? GARY OLSEN, ESQ.: It's at the intersection of Miller's rightL of-way and Deer Path Road. THE CHAIRMAN: This indicates 2.8 acres. GARY OLSEN, ESQ.: Mr. and Mrs~ Beier also own a house which is contiguous to the subject premises located on Mattituck creek. It appears to be separated from the property in question by a right-of-way. I don't know whether the right-of-way is owned by ... ROBERT BERGEN: It says Deer Path Road right-of-way. GARY OLSEN, ESQ.: If I may show you this overall survey of the property, this is the property in question. It's a vacant piece located on the corner of Miller's right-of-way, the'southerly side of Miller's right-of-way and the easterly side of Deer Path Road. O O BOARD OF APPEALS, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD In the Matter of the Petition of VIP Inn Ltd. to the Board of Appeals of the Town of SoUthold TO:Mr. and .Mrs. AchiLles Stachtiaris Mr. and Mrs. Joseph Shmulchesld Mr, and Mrs. Fred Bruch Mr. and Mrs. Frederick Hribok Mr. and Mrs. Manfred Kurner YOU ARE HEREBY GIVEN NOTICE: NOTICE Mr. and Mrs. Edwin Stewart, Helmet Haas Nassau Steamship Agency, Inc. 1. That it is the intention of the undersigned to petition the Board of Appeals of the Town of Southold to request a (Variance) ~ ' - / - - - ~e~mfi.. (the following relief: To divide subject p~rn~o~ intn th~ parcels. ). 2. That the property which is the subject of the Petition is located adjacent to your property and is des- cribed as follows: ~orth h~v Nort~h Road: East by Carrol Road and H. Haas; South by .A_r_~h=rn~nn?,o Pond Road_.' West by Nassau Stearn~hip Agency, Inc. 3. That the property which is the subject of such Petition is located in the following zoning district: 4. That by such Petition, the undersigned will request the following relief: To divide subject $. That the provisions of the Southold Town Zoning Code applicable to the relief sought by the under- signed are: _a_r+~,-1,~ IT_ll ~or*t~on IDD-R(]:' A~t~ele V ~qan~on 100-50 and Bulk Schedules in both instances. 6. That within five days from the date hereof, a written Petition requesting the relief specified above will be filed in the Southold Town Clerk's Office at Main Road, Southold, New York and you may then and there examine the same during regular office hours. 7. That before the relief sought may be granted, a public hearing must be,~q-d,qn the matter by the Board of Appeals; that a notice of such hearing must be published at least five ~l~ys pri~ to the date of such hearing in the Suffolk Times and in the Long Island Traveler-Mattituck Watch~fian, new{lpapers published in the Town of Southold and designated for the publication of such notices; that y~ru or your/~epresentative have the right to appear and be heard at such hearing. / / VIP Inn Ltdl Dated: July20. 1977 . By: Petit ib~l//G~/~l ee r~ls en, Post Office A~ress Main l~oad. P.O. Box 38 Mattituck, New York 11952 Phone (516)298-4844 © PROOF OF MAILING OF NOTICE NAME Mr. and Mrs. Acl~lles Stachtiaris Mr. and Mrs. Joseph Smulcheski Mr. and Mrs. Frederick Bruch Mr. and M~S. Frederick Hribok Mr. and Mrs. Manfred Kurner Nit. and Mrs. Edwin Stewart Helmet Haas Nassau Steamship Agency, Inc. ADDRESS 159 New Hyde Park Road, Garden City, N.Y. 11530 12 Harvard Lane, Commack, New York 11725 37 Neptune Avenue, Hampton Bays, N.Y. 11946 i Arnold Lane, Cormmack, N.Y. 11725 71-39 72nd Place, Glendale, N.Y. 11227 8403 Parish Lane, Indianapolis, Indiana Box 1115, Peconic, N.Y. 11958 100 Franklin Avenue, Garden City, N.Y. 11530 STATE OF NEW YORK ) COUNTY OF SUFFOLK ) SS.: Cherie Lynn I~.,,~11 , residing at IVl'att~u~lc , being duly sworn, deposes and says that on the gOth day of Ju.l.y ,1977 , deponent mailed a true copy of the Notice set forth on the re- verse side hereof, directed to each of~the above-named persons at the addresses set opposite their respective names; that the addresses set opposite the names of said persons are the addresses of said persons as shown on the current assessment roll of the Town of Southold; that said Notices were mailed at the United States Post Of- fice at · 1V~attituck .; that said Notices were mailed to each of said persons by (certified) b:~er.e~mail. Sworn to before me this day of .Ttdse''~ ,19 77