Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-08/18/1992 SPECAPPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Serge Doyen, Jr. James Dinizio, Jr. Robert A. Villa Telephone (516) 765-1809 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING TUESDAY, AUGUST 18, 1992 SCO~FL. HARRIS Supervisor Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1800 A Special Meeting was held by the Southold Town Board of Appeals on TUESDAY, August 18, 1992 at the Southold Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York 11971. Present were: Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Serge Doyen, Jr., Member James Dinizio, Jr., Member Robert A. Villa, Member Linda Kowalski, Secretary/Board Clerk The Chairman opened the meeting at 7:00 p.m. A moment of silence and prayers were offered in memory of ZONING BOARD MEMBER, CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR.: WHEREAS, this Board has learned with deep sorrow of the death of CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR., a very active and highly valued Member of the Southold Town Board of Appeals; and WHEREAS, the Town of Southold is grateful to the Family of CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR. for sharing him with the Town for the many years he gave of his time, talents, caring, energy and expertise; and WHEREAS, CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR.'s record of outstanding service, diligence to duty and dedication to the Town of Southold and its people deserves the sincere gratitude of those with whom and for whom he served; and WHEREAS, the BOARD OF APPEALS of the Town of Southold will be deprived of his professional knowledge, expertise, and logical judgments, as well as his sensitive personality, and hereby wishes to give formal expression of its loss of CHARLES August 18, 1992 2 Southold Town Board of Appeals J. GRIGONIS, JR., a man esteemed by his associates and respected by all; NOW, THEREFORE, on motion by Chairman Goehringer, Member Doyen, Member Dinizio, Member Villa, seconded by all; it was RESOLVED, that the Board of Appeals of the Town of Southold and Appeals Board Staff hereby express our great loss in the passing of CHARLES J. GRIGONIS, JR., and that when the Board of Appeals adjourns this date, it does so out of respect to the memory of CHARLES J. GRIGONIS, JR.; and it was FURTHER RESOLVED, that a copy of this resolution be spread upon the minutes of this meeting and a copy be transmitted to the Family of CHARLES J. GRIGONIS, JR., that we may extend to them our sincere sympathy. VOTE OF THE BOARD: Ayes: Messrs. Doyen, Goehringer, Dinizio and Villa. This resolution was duly adopted. DELIBERATIONS/DECISIONS: (Continued on next page) August 18, 1992 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Serge Doyen, Jr. James Dinizio, Jr. Robert A. Villa Telephone (516) 765-1809 -3- Southold Town Board of Appeals SCOTI' I~. HARRIS Supervisor Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1800 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ACTION OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS Appl. No. 41!6-V. Application of LINDA TAGGART. This is an Appeal Of the March 13, 1992 Notice of Disapproval issued by the Building Inspector under Article XIV, Section 100-142 and Article XXIII, Section 100-239.4B for approval or recognition of lot with a substandard size of 15,285 sq. ft., lot width (frontage) along the Main Road 76.46 feet, and lot depth 125.0 feet. At the time of transfer of title, the property was located in the B-Light Business Zone. The property is currently located in the Light Industrial (LI) Zone District. Location of Property: 68320 Main Road, Greenport; Map of Peconic Bay Estates Lot Nos. 185 and 186; County Tax Map Parcel ID No. 1000-53-2-2, WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on July 29, 1992, and all those who desired to be heard were heard, pro, con and otherwise, and their testimony was made a part of the record; and WHEREAS, the Board has carefully considered all testimony and documentation submitted concerning this application; and WHEREAS, the Board members have personally viewed and are familiar with the premises in question, its present zoning, and the surrounding areas; and WHEREAS, the Board made the following findings of fact: 1. This is an application appealing the March 13, 1992 Notice of Disapproval from the Building Inspector which has disapproved an application for a building permit to construct at premises referred to as 68320 Main Road, Greenport, New York, on the following grounds: "...Article XIV, Section 100-141 Site Plan required by the Planning Board. Article XIV, Section 100~142 Bulk Area and Parking - Action required by the Zoning Board of Appeals for insufficient total area and rear yard area. Action required by Town Trustees for insufficient setback (less than 75' from wetlands... " Page 4 - Appl. No. 4116-V Matter of LINDA TAGGART Decision Rendered August 18, 1992 2. The premises in question is an unimproved (vacant) parcel of land situated in Greenport, Town of Southold. The total lot area is 15,285 sq. ft., with 89.45 feet frontage along the south side of the Main Road (New York State Route 25) and depth of 125.0 feet. 3. The subject premises is known and referred to as Lots No. 185 and No. 186 on a certain map entitled, "Amended Map 'A,' Peconic Bay Estates" filed in the Office of the Suffolk identified on the Suffolk County Clerk on June 1, 1984 in Liber 9574 page 38. This parcel is further identified on the County Tax Maps as District 1000, Section 053, Block 02, Lot 002 and is located in the Light Industrial (LI) Zone District. 4. In a Light Industrial Zone (as enacted January 10, 1989 by the Southold Town Board), the Bulk Schedul~ provides: a) a minimum lot size of 40,000 sq. ft. b) a minimum lot width of 100 feet c) a minimum lot depth of 150 feet d) a minimum front yard setback at 50 feet, or the established within 300 feet on the same side e) a minimum rear yard setback at 70 feet. 5. Article XXIV, Section 100-244, subsection A, of the zoning code provides automatic relief for "...lots made nonconforming or continued in a state of nonconformance by the adoption of this Article and that were singly and separately owned as of the effective date of this Article... " The date of the adoption of this provision is January 10, 1989. 6. Subsection B thereof provides further: "...A nonconforming lot separately owned and not adjoining any lot or land in the same ownership at the effective date of this Article and not adjoining any lot or land in the same ownership at any time subsequent to such date may be used, or a building or structure may be erected on such lot for use, in accordance with all the other applicable provisions of this chapter, provided that proof of such separate ownership is submitted in the form of an abstract of title showing the changes of title to said lot, which abstract shall be in the usual form shall be certified by an attorney ... regularly doing such work in Suffolk County Such lot shall be granted relief for front,'~ide and rear yard dimensions as follows: Page § - Appl. No. 4116-V Matter of LINDA TAGGART Decision Rendered August 18, 1992 Lots having less than 20,000 sq. ft.: Width 80 Depth 100 Front 35 Both Sides 10 & 15, total 25 Rear 35... " 7. There is no question that on January 10, 1989, this parcel was held in single and separate ownership. This was evidenced from the title documentation and testimony received from the applicants' attorney as Well as assessment records and t6wn tax bills showing separate taxable status since prior to 1957. There are no legal covenants, restrictions or other documentation existing to show that the parcel was to be stripped of uses, or that it was prohibited from use a separate parcel or otherwise. In fact, county and town tax and real property records support this conclusion. The period of time which is acknowledged by the property owner to be in joint ownership with her previous husband, Joseph Schoenstein, is approximately 23 months (May 1984 through April 1986). Section 100-244 of the current zoning code was not a part of the previous zoning code, and prior to 1989 single-and-separate searches were not required. It would arbitrary for this Board to apply the 1989 zoning code to the 1986 time period, particularly when the lot, being on a map filed with the County Clerk since 1933, was not merged with another parcel for more than three years. 8. The following information is also noted for the record: (a) there has been no literal change in the dimensions and layout of the property since immediately prior to January 1989 or thereafter which might affect the circumstances of the revised master plan; (b) county records show the existence of this parcel as Lot #2 since prior to 1978; (c) the master plan revisions adopted on January 10, 1989 zoned the subject premises from Business to Light Industrial; (d) The site plan kubmitted for consideration and approval shows a proposed one-story frame structure of 932 sq. ft. to be located with the following setbacks: (a) 50 feet from the front property line to the north; (b) 47 feet to the rear property line to the south; (c) 32+- feet to the westerly Page 6 - Appl. No. 4116-V Matter of LINDA TAGGART Decision Rendered August 18, 1992 side property line; (d) 40 feet to the easterly side property line, at its closest points. The first floor elevation is shown to be proposed at eight (8') feet above mean sea level. The percentage of lot area to be covered by the proposed building is 6%. 9. In considering this application, the Board also finds and determines: (a) the circumstances are uniquely related to the property and are not personal in nature to the landowner; (b) the relief requested is minimal and is not unreasonable in light of the circumstances; .(c) to pursue; there is no other method feasible for appellants (d) the difficulties claimed are sufficient to warrant a grant of the application; (e) the difficulties were not self-created; (f) in view of the manner in which the difficulty arose and in considering all the above factors, the interests of justice will be served by granting the relief. NOW, THEREFORE, on motion by Mr. Dinizio, seconded by Mr. Doyen, it was RESOLVED, to GRANT the relief requested under Appl. No. 4116, as applied, and be it further RESOLVED, that the size of this lot BE AND HEREBY IS RECOGNIZED AND ACCEPTED under the bulk area regulations of the zoning code, as it exists with an area of 15,285 sq. ft., frontage of 89.46 feet, depth of 125.0 feet as more particularly shown on the April 2, 1992 survey map prepared by Roderick VanTuyl, P.C. and rear yard setback at 47 feet, as requested. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Dinizio. Nay: Member Villa. (3-1). Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen and This resolution was duly adopted lk /'/GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, C~RMAN 'August 18, 1992 -7- Southold Town Board of Appeals APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Serge Doyen, Jr. James Dinizio, Jr. Robert A. Villa Telephone (516) 765-1809 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SCOTt L. HARRIS Supervisor Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1800 ACTION OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS Appl. NO. 4117SE. Application of LINDA TAGGART by Peconic Associates, Inc. for a Special Exception to the Zoning Ordinance as authorized by Article XIV, Section 100-141B, for permission to establish retail gift shop in this Light Industrial (LI) Zone District. Location of Property: 68320 Main Road, Greenport; Map of Peconic Bay Estates Lot Nos. 185 and 186; County Tax Map Parcel ID No. 1000-53-2-2. WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on July 29, 1992, and all those who desired to be heard were heard, pro, con and otherwise, and their testimony was made a part of the record; and WHEREAS, the Board has carefully considered all testimony and documentation submitted concerning this application; and WHEREAS, the Board members have personally viewed and are familiar with the premises in question, its present zoning, and the surrounding areas; and WHEREAS, the Board made the following findings of fact: 1. By this application, applicants request a Special Exception for the establishment and location of an antique shop, pursuant to Article XIII, Section 100-131B, Article XIV, Section 100-141B of the Zoning Code. 2. The premises in question is located along the southerly side of the Main Road (New York State Route 25) Greenport, Town of Southold, contains a total lot area of 15,285+- sq. ft. and is presently vacant land. in 3. The subject premises is identified on the Suffolk County Tax Maps as District 1000, Section 053, Block 02, Lot 002 and is located in the Light Industrial (LI) Zone District (which extends a depth of 675+- feet from State Route 25 south to the Page 8- Appl. No. 4117SE Matter of LINDA TAGGART Decision Rendered August 18, 1992 Long Island Railroad, and a total distance of 2-1/2 or more blocks in an east-west direction {along the south side of State Route 25 (Main Road)}. 4. The site plan submitted for consideration and approval shows a proposed one-story frame structure of 932 sq. ft. to be located with the following setbacks: (a) 50 feet from the front property line to the north; (b) 47 feet to the rear property line to the south; (c) 32+- feet to the westerly side property line; (d) 40 feet to the easterly side property line, at its closest points. The first floor elevation is shown to be proposed at eight (8') feet above mean sea level. The percentage of lot area covered by a building is 6%~ as proposed. 5. This property is and has been shown on assessment records as a separate taxable lot since prior to 1957. There are no legal covenants, restrictions or other documentation existing to show that the parcel was to be stripped of uses (other than welding uses), or that it was prohibited from use a separate parcel or otherwise. In fact, county and town tax and real property records support the owner's intent to keep this parcel as a separate taxable building lot. Also, see Appeal No. 4116 for the August 18, 1992 determination by this Board recognizing and re-confirming its continued, permitted existence with a nonconforming lot area of 15,285 sq. ft. in this Light Industrial Zone District. 6. In the Light Industrial Zone District, the following use categories are permitted by Special Exception: a) Wholesale businesses, warehouses and building material storage and sale, but excluding storage of coal, coke, fuel oil or junk; b) Building, electrical and plumbing contractors' businesses or yards; c) Cold storage plants, baking and other food processing and packaging plants that are not offensive, obnoxious or detrimental to neighboring uses by reason of dust, smoke, vibration, noise, odor or effluent; d) Research design or development laboratories ...(special exception); e) Laundry or dry-cleaning plants ... (special exception); f) Drinking establishments; g) Office buildings ...; h) Light industrial uses involving the fabrication, reshaping, reworking, assembly, or combining of products from Page 9 - Appl. No. 4117SE Matter of LINDA TAGGART Decision Rendered August 18, 1992 previously prepared materials ...uses may include industrial operations such as electronic, machine parts and small component assembly...; i) J) k) 1) facilities, m) Conference facilities; Public utility structures and uses; Printing or publishing plants; Truck or bus terminals {garages, parking loading docks, etc.} Food processing and packaging plants, not including fish processing plants; n) marine items; o) facilities; P) q) r) required); s) t) u) v) Wholesale and retail sales and repair of boats and Boat building, boat servicing and boat storage Restaurants; Sauerkraut manufacturing plants; Basic Utility Stage II airport (100 acres Bed and Breakfast; Wineries; Agricultural and commercial agricultural operation; accessory and such other uses as proscribed. 7. There is sufficient land available for the required parking spaces. The parking area, egress and ingress, screening and other site plan elements will be reviewed and designated as required by Article XXV of the zoning code. 8. For the record, it is also noted that: (a) this property is a conforming lot resulting from review and action by this Board which did recognize and grant under Appl. No. 4116 area variances pertinent to the size of the land and setbacks for the building proposed herein; (b) the master plan revisions adopted on January 10, 1989 zoned the subject premises from Business to Light Industrial; (c) there has been no literal change in the dimensions and layout of the property since immediately prior to January 1989 or thereafter which might affect the circumstances of the Page l0 - Appl. No. 4117SE Matter of LINDA TAGGART Decision Rendered August 18, 1992 revised master plan. 9. In considering this application, and determines: the Board also finds (a) the proposed use is not dissimilar from the uses currently permitted and existing in the Light Industrial zone provisions,.in fact, the merchandise to be sold is on a much smaller scale, smaller size, and lesser intensity than those normally authorized for retail sales and storage in this Light Industrial Zone District {such as boats, trailers, gasoline, engines and engine parts, etc.}; (b) the proposed use will not prevent the orderly and reasonable use of adjacent properties or of properties in adjacent use districts; (c) this use proposed will not adversely affect the safety, welfare, comfort, convenience, or order of the town or the community; (d) the use is in harmony with and will promote the general purposes of zoning and the intentions of zone regulations; (e) adjacent to this property on the west is a Light Industrial Zone which is industrially used (welding services, vehicle and equipment storage and repairs, sales related to the welding business, etc.); adjacent on the east side is a Light Industrial Zoned parcel which contains a nonconforming dwelling use; to the north is the State Highway (Route 25); along the northerly side of Route 25 are properties re-zoned to Limited Business and which range from restaurant, miniature golf, motel, light industrial, golf range, and preexisting residential use(s); also in the vicinity of this block are a pizza restaurant, lumberyard, retail sales, equipment repair with outside storage, and wholesaling. Page 11- Appl. No. 4117SE Matter of LINDA TAGGART Decision Rendered August 18, 1992 (f) the Board has also considered subsections (A) through (F) of Article XXVI, Section 100-263, and (A) through (P) of Section 100-264 of the Zoning Code. NOW, THEREFORE, on motion by Mr. Dinizio, seconded by Mr. Doyen, it was RESOLVED, that a Special Exception BE AND HEREBY IS GRANTED permitting the use proposed of a 932 sq. ft. building for retail sales, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1) The area for retail use be limited to the size of the building (932 sq. ft.), unless further applications are filed and approvals obtained. 2) . Waiver or permit shall be obtained from the Southold Town Trustees concerning ~the setbacks from wetland areas on and/or near the property; - ~ 3) Screening of the property shall be such that there will not be obstruction of view along the front of the property. 4) Ground lighting is recommended (instead of pole lighting); 5) Adequate screening is recommended for approval by the Planning Board which will be sufficient to screen the residence adjoining the property to the east. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Dinizio. Nay: Member Villa. (3-1). Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen and This resolution was duly adopted lk August 18, 1992 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Serge Doyen, Jr. James Dinizio, Jr. Robert A. Villa Telephone (516) 765-1809 -12- :'3 BOARD 'OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Southold Town Board of Appeals SCOTI' L. HARRIS Supervisor Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1800 ACTION OF THE BOARD Appl. No. 3975: Appeal Application of ARTHUR G. CARLSON for an Interpretation resulting from the October 11, 1991 Notice of .Disapproval from the Building Inspector, as amended, under Article III, Section 100-31A(2) for approval of a wholesale shellfish distribution business and declaring that the aquacultural use falls within the purview of the agricultural use. The subject parcel is located in the Agricultural- Conservation (A-C) Zone District and contains a total area of 40,000 sq. ft. Location of Property: 1575 Lower Road, Southold, NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-69-5-13.2; also known as Lot ~3 of the Minor Subdivision of Judith T. Terry approved by the Southold Town Planning Board 10/1/79. WHEREAS, public hearings were held on this Appeal of the October 11, 1991 Notice of Disapproval from the Building Inspector, on the following dates: (a) March 25, 1992, June 4, 1992 and June 30, 1992; WHEREAS, all comments were heard and both written and oral testimony having been recorded and made a part of this file; and WHEREAS, the Board has carefully considered all testimony and documentation, pro, con and other, submitted concerning this application; and WHEREAS, the Board Members have personally viewed and are familiar with the premises in question, the present use, previous and current zone districts, all surrounding areas -- including residential uses, agricultural uses and commercial uses in the vicinity of this property; and WHEREAS, the Board made the following findings of fact: 1. This is an application for an Interpretation as authorized by Section 100-271(D){1} of the zoning code appealing the October 11, 1991 Notice of Disapproval issued by the Page 13 - Appl. No. 3975 Application of ARTHUR G. CARLSON Decision Rendered August 18 , 1992 Building Inspector which states as follows:. ...PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that your application dated August 23, 1991 for permit to process seafood mariculture at 1575 Lower Road, Southold, County Tax Map No. 1000, Section 069, Block 05, Lot 13, is returned herewith and disapproved on the following grounds: Article III, Section 100-31A(2) Residential and Agricultural Zone. An interpretation is needed by Zoning Board of Appeals on mariculture; its meaning; and what the permitted uses are in an agricultural zone .... " 2. The specific provision for which an Interpretation is being requested applies to the Agricultural-Conservation (A/C) Zone District, and this Article III, Section 100-31A(2) reads as follows: 100-31. Use requlations... A. Permitted uses... (2) (Amended 5-23-89 by LL No. 8-1989). Th~ following agricultural operations and accessory uses thereto, including irrigation, provided that there shall be no storage of manure, fertilizer or other odor- or dust- producing substance or use, except spraying and dusting to protect vegetation, within one-hundred fifty (150) feet of any lot line: (a) The raising of field and garden crops, vineyard and orchard farming, the maintenance of nurseries and the seasonal sale of products grown on the premises, subject to the following special requirements... {emphasis added} (1) All buildings for display and retail sales of agricultural and nursery products grown on the premises shall not exceed one thousand (1,000) square feet in floor area or one (1) story in height. Display of produce at a roadside farm stand shall be nog less than ten (10) feet from all street and lot lines. Any roadside farm stand in excess of fifty (50) square feet in floor area shall be set back twenty (20) feet from the street line. Any stand in existence ...must...comply with all the provisions hereof. (2) All signs shall conform... (3) Off-street parking shall be provided and shall be approved by the Planning Board... Page 14- Appl. No. 3975 Application of ARTHUR G. Decision Rendered August CARLSON 18 , 1992 (b) The keeping, breeding, raising and training of horses, domestic animals and fowl · (except ducks) on lots of ten (10) acres or more. (c) Barns, storage buildings, greenhouses (including plastic covered) and other related structures, provided that such buildings shall conform to the yard requirements for principal buildings... 4. The definition of fish processing is specifically provided in the zoning code and reads as follows: "...The readying of fish and shellfish for shipping to market, including icing, cleaning, filleting, shucking and the cooking of crabs or lobster, but not including other cooking, canning, freezing, smoking or other fish factory operations...." 5. The definition of agriculture is defined as "...The production, keeping or maintenance, for sale, lease or personal use, of plants and animals useful to man, including but not limited to forages and sod crops; grains and seed crops; dairy animals and dairy products; poultry and poultry products; livestock, including beef, cattle, sheep, swine, horses, ponies, mules or goats or any mutation or hybridgs thereof, including the breeding and grazing of any or all Of such animals; bees and apiary products, fur animals; fruits of all kinds including grapes, nuts and berries, vegetables, floral, ornamental and greenhouse products; or lands devoted to a soil conservation or forestry management program... " 6. The applicant's attorney has offered testimony to show comparisons of the following activities being conducted at the subject premises (in the large accessory barn a~d the garage) with agricultural and winery operations: (a) delivery of shellfish in their natural state, and shucking of the owner-resident's catch of scallops and steaming of conches; (b) purchase of shellfish and delivery to this site of scallops, conches and other crustaceans caught by persons other than the owner-resident of this property; Page 15- Appl. No. 3975 Application of ARTHUR G. CARLSON Decision Rendered August 18, 1992 (c) shucking or steaming of crustaceans at this site for distribution and sales for marketing off-premises and off-premises consumption; (d) packaging of scallops and steamed conches into containers for off-site distribution and off-site sales and marketing; (e) refrigeration-storage of shellfish overnight for distribution off premises. 7. Although methods of commercial agricultural farming is comparable in many respects to fishing or harvesting of shellfish activities and although there are similar processes (such as cleaning, cutting, packing, bagging) that the farmer performs before shipping the vegetables or fruit to market, the application before this Board in effect is requesting an amendment to the legislation. It is the position of the Board that its authority in interpretations is limited only to the context of the provisions of the code and, of course, its meaning. Allowable agricultural operations are related to farming of the land and raising thereon of stock and animals. Maricultural operations, which are provided for the Marine I and II Zone Districts of the zoning code, involve the cultivation, breeding, growing and related development of aquatic or marine crops. It is the opinion of this Board that the activities conducted by the applicant do not constitute an agricultural operation under the provisions of the A/C Zone District, and this Board is not authorized to re-define, change, alter, add to, or otherwise modify the code definitions or use'provisions of the code by way of interpretation. 8. It is noted, however, under subsection C(2) of this Agricultural-Conservation Zone District, the home occupation provision does authorize "baymen" having their primary residence at a site to conduct certain activities as an accessory to this residence. (Please also see definition of home occupation in Section 100-13). Such activities must be clearly secondary to the residential use and must be "...carried on by the residents which are connected with produce of the seas, b~ys or harbors .... " Other activities, such as the purchase of shellfish or other seafood, which is acquired from other areas and other baymen who do not reside at the premises, for the purpose of shipping, food-processing, packaging, wholesaling, etc. does not fall under this definition of an accessory Home Occupation use, or any other principal or accessory use provision in this Agricultural-Conservation (A/C) Zone District. NOW, THEREFORE, on motion by Mr. Villa, seconded by Mr. Dinizio, Page 16- Appl. No. 3975 Applicaticn of ARTHUR G. CARLSON Decision Aendered August 18 , 1992 IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED and declared that the activities described by the applicant and connected to the purchase, packaging and processing of shellfish caught by persons other than the owner or resident, do not fall under Section 100-31 of the provisions of the Agricultural-Conservation Zone District. VOTE OF THE BOARD: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen, Dinizio and Villa, consisting of all members of the Board. This resolution was duly adopted. ,.-.. GERARD P. GOEHRINGER,~HAIRMAN ~ A(gust ~t8, A992 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Gerard ?. Goehringer, Chairman Serge Doyen, .Ir. James DinizJo, .Ir. Robert A. Villa Telephone (516) 765-1809 -17- · Southold Town Board of Appeals (- SCOTT L. HARRIS Supervisor Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1800 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ACTION OF THE BOARD Appl. No. 4022SE. CELLULAR TELEPHONE COMPANY d/b/a METRO ONE. Request for Special Exception approval under Article VIII, Section 100-81B(1), and Article III, Section 100-31B(6) for an unmanned telecommunications building in an existing concrete block building and construction of a monopole radio tower with antenna for transmitting and receiving radio signals to provide cellular telephone services. Location of Property: 415 Westerly side of Elijah's Lane, Mattituck, NY; also shown on Planning Board Map of May 15, 1990, Map 8937; Parcel #1000-108-4-11.1 (part of 11). WHEREAS, action was taken, after proper notice and public hearing, by the Board of Appeals on July 25, 1991 denying the applicant's request for a Special Exception under'the "public right-of-way" provision of the residential zone district, and due to impropriety of the selection of the zone district as it relates to residential uses; WHEREAS, an Article 78 proceeding was commenced seeking to reverse and annul the Board's denial of the Special Exception; and on May 28, 1992, a true copy of the court judgment decided by Justice Robert W. Doyle reversing the Board's decision was delivered; and WHEREAS, the time for the Town to appeal this Court decision, as requested, has passed; and WHEREAS, the public utility installations are essential for providing services to the public interest devoting its property and its right-of-way to such public use and service and stands ready to serve all the public; WHEREAS, the public utility company has guaranteed the Town and the unrestricted public of its telecommunications services to the public, NOW, THEREFORE, on motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Doyen, it was RESOLVED, that a Special Exception for telecommunication use for utility services directly for public use, as applied under Appl. No. 4022, and re-confirmed at the Board's July 29, 1992 meeting, be andhereby is GRANTED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: Page 18- Appl. No./' ~22 Cellular Telephone h Metro' One ) - August 18, 1992 1. The height of the proposed accessory monopole radio tower shall not exceed 100 feet, as requested; I 2. The fall-down radius of the tower shall be as submitted, with the following setback distances: a) 95 feet from the proposed tower to the northerly property line; b) 70 feet+- from the proposed tower to the southerly property line; c) 69 feet from the rear wall of the accessory one-story block building. 3. Any future expansion for the storage of the telecommunications equipment to areas outside of the existing one-story block building located in the rear yard will require further application for Special Exception consideration; and 4. In the event this transmission tower becomes obsolete or its use is discontinued for the telecommunications purposes requested in this application, the tower shall be removed within .~hree months of its obsolescence, and it shall be ithe responsibility of the owner, subsequent owners, successors, assigns, and/or the applicant herein to comply with this condition, at their own expense; and 5. No other structures, buildings, or uses shall occupy or be located on the premises unless further application is made to this Board under this Special Exception, as well as the Planning Board under the site plan regulations, in order to re-consider all zoning standards, including safety, health, and welfare standards and concerns; and 6. Lighting shall be placed near the top of the tower for aircraft safety purposes; and 7. Appropriate screening and site plan approval from the Southold Town Planning Board for this Limited Business (LB) Zone District; · 8. Written covenants and restrictions shall be submitted in recordable form; and after acceptance by the Town, the original shall be recorded by the applicant in the Office of the Suffolk County Clerk and a copy of same furnished with the Office of the Board of Appeals. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen and Page 19 _~ Appl. No. 4022 - CeLlular Telephone Decision Rendered August 18, 1992 (Metro One) villa. (Member Dinizio abstained.) This resolution was duly adopted with a. quorum vote of the Board. ~ lk AUgust 18, 1992 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Serge Doyen, Jr. James Dinizio, Jr. Robert A. Villa Telephone (516) 765-1809 -20- Southold Town Board of Appeals SCOT1~ L. HARRIS Supervisor Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1800 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ACTION OF THE BOARD Appl. NO. 4023. CELLULAR TELEPHONE CO. d/b/a METRO ONE. This is an Appeal of the March 14, 1991 Notice of Disapproval issued by the Building Inspector for an Interpretation under Article XXIII, Section 100-230 concerning a proposed 104 ft. height of a monopole structure for radio transmission, and in the alternative, appellant requests a variance from the height restriction. Location of Property: (#415) Westerly side of Elijah's Lane and the Northerly Side of the Main Road (NYS Route 25), Mattituck, NY; also shown on Planning Board subdivision-approved map of May 15, 1990; property now or formerly of William J. Baxter and Others; County Tax Map Parcel ID No. 1000-108-4-part of 11. WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on July 29, 1992, at which time all those who desired to be heard were heard and their testimony recorded; WHEREAS, the Board has carefully considered all testimony and documentation submitted concerning this application; WHEREAS, Board Members have personally viewed and are familiar with the premises in question, its present zoning, the surrounding areas; and and WHEREAS, the Board made the following findings of fact: 1. This is an application for an Interpretation as authorized by Section 100-271(d){1} of the zoning code appealing the March 14, 1991 Notice of Disapproval issued by the Building Inspector which states as follows: "...PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that your application dated March 14, 1991 for permit to construct radio tower and structure ... is returned herewith and disapproved on the following grounds: Article VII, Section 100-81B site plan approval required by Planning Board & Special Exception required by Zoning Board of Appeals, Page 21- Appl. No. 4023 Decision Rendered August i8, Matter of CELLULg.R TELEPHONE 1992 (METRO ONE) Section 100-230 on height exceptions may require interpretation by Zoning Board Of Appeals... " 2. Proposed in this project is the placement of an accessory telecommunications (radio transmission) tower in the rear yard area at premises known as 415 Elijah's Lane, Mattituck, identified on the Suffolk County Tax Maps as District 1000, Section 108, Block 4, Lot #11.3 consisting of 1.85 acres. 3. The subject premises is owned by William Baxter, Jr. and others, and the applicant is the tenant, Cellular Telephone Company, a New York General Partnership (d/b/a Metro One). 4. The use of the proposed accessory tower and the rear concrete building for public telecommunications purposes has also been conditionally approved by Special Exception Appl. No. 4022, and the following information is noted for the record: (a) Cellular One is a public utility under the Laws of the State of New York and holds a franchise from the Federal Communications Commission to serve the public within the Town of Southold; (b) Cellular One's FCC Franchise requires that Cellular One provide cellular telephone service within the geographic boundaries of the Town of Southold, providing a quality service consistent with the requirements of the Public Service Commission; (c) Cellular Telephone Co. will conduct mobile communications by radio consisting of mobile units either mounted in vehicles or hand-carried sending to and receiving signals from fixed base sites. Different frequencies are set between cells, and good overlap between cells will permit a better grade of service. Movement to outside of the range of the cell, would cause weaker coverage, and when a cell is missing, coverage is not uniform and service can drop. (See the sworn affidavit of Scott Fox, Director of Engineering for the applicant/company dated July 29, 1992 in which the steps in determining the necessary height of the antenna for a cell site are provided in detail); 5. The structure which is the subject of this application is a 100 ft. high pole-type structure (96 ft. pole plus attached four-ft, high, 12-ft. wide antenna at the top) as shown on the construction diagram prepared by Juengert/Grutzmacher Architects, submitted July 27, 1992. This structure is free-standing (separate and .detached from.any other bui]din§s). Page 22- Appl. No. 4023 Decision Rendered August 18, Matter of CELLULAR TELEPHONE 1992 (METRO ONE) 6. Section 100-33 of the Zoning Code specifically provides a height limitation at 18 feet for accessory structures. This restriction is applicable to the Limited Business and Agricultural-Conservation Zone Districts. 7. Height restrictions have always been less than 35 feet for principal structures, and 18 feet or less for accessory structures since the inception of zoning in April 1957. 8. During January 1989, a subsection was added for certain height exceptions under Section 100-230D, for: (1) Spires, belfries, cupolas and domes not for human occupancy; and monuments, transmission towers, chimneys, derricks, conveyors, flagpoles, radio towers, television towers and television aerials, provided that any television or radio aerial shall not be located nearer than a distance equal to its height above the roof or other permanent structure to which it is attached to any overhead electric transmission line carrying more than two hundred, twenty (220) volts. (2) Bulkheads, observation towers, monitors, fire towers, hose towers, cooling towers, water towers, grain elevators or other structures where a manufacturing process requires greater height, provided that any such structures that are located on any roof and that exceed in height the limits in the particular district shall not in the aggregate occupy more than twenty percent (20%). 9. It is, and has been the opinion of this Board, since the inception of zoning in 1957, that a structure which is free-standing and is not attached to the top of a building such as those excepted in Section 100-230D are clearly governed by the 18 ft.~height provision of Section 100-33. See the Limited Business Zone District, Article VIII, Section 100-81(C1), which reads as follows: (Amended 5-9-89 by L.L. No. 6-1989). Accessory Uses. The following uses are permitted as accessory uses and, except for the residential accessory uses and signs, which are governed by Article XX, are subject to site plan review: Page 23 - Appl. No. 4023 Decision Rendered August 18, Matter of CELLULAR TELEPHONE 1992 (METRO ONE) (1) Any accessory use as set forth in and regulated by Section 100-31C(1) through (8) ..., and subject to the conditions set forth in Section 100-33 thereof..." ; Section 100-11 does provide that where a provision or requirement which is more restrictive or which establishes the higher standard shall govern. 10. It is also the opinion of this Board that this structure .does not fall under Section 100-230D which applies to television or radio towers or aerials attached to a permanent structure (such as CB, ham radio, TV antennas, and the like) accessory to the principal building and principal use of the property. It is this Board's position that the subject pole tower is not a roof-type antenna and is deemed a separate, .accessory structure. Accessory structures are governed by Section 100-33 in the Limited Business Zone District; and WHEREAS, public utilities have always been recognized by the Town to provide essential, unrestricted telecommunications services to and for the public, over, on and through its rights-of-way and its land; NOW, THEREFORE, on motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Doyen, it was RESOLVED, that it is the Interpretation of this Board that the height restriction under Section 100-81C(1) and Section 100-33 of the zoning code is applicable for all types of accessory structures, including those intended for telecommunications and other permitted accessory uses; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a variance for a total height as requested of 100 feet for an accessory monopole telecommunications tower to provide utility services directly to and for public use, as applied under Appl. No. 4023, be and hereby is GRANTED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. The height of the proposed accessory monopole tower shall not exceed 100 feet, as requested, and shall not exceed the structural dimensions shown on the plan prepared by .Juengert/Grutzmacher Architects dated 1-26-91, Job N%u~ber 9037-174 (unless necessary and approved for safety purposes); 2. The fall-down radius of the toWer shall be "as submitted" with the following setback distances: Page 24_ Appl. No. 4023 Decision Rendered August 18, 1992 Matter of CELLULAR TELEPHONE (METRO ONE.) a) 95 to 103 feet to the northerly property line; b) 69 to 62 feet from the proposed tower to the southerly property line and radius clearance of approximately 40 feet past the southerly property line over onto adjoining property to the south, also owned by William J. Baxter; c) 62+- feet to 69 feet from the rear wall of the accessory one-story block building. 3. Any future expansion for the storage of the telecommunications equipment to areas outside of the existing one-story block building located in the rear yard will require further application for Special Exception consideration; and the tower and equipment building must be continuously maintained in good condition at all times; 4. In the event this transmission tower becomes obsolete .or its use is discontinued for the telecommunications purposes requested in this application, the tower shall be removed within three months of its obsolescence, and it shall be the responsibility of the owner, subsequent owners, successors, assigns, and/or the applicant herein to comply with this condition, at their own expense; and 5. No other structures, buildings, or uses shall occupy o~ be located on the premises unless further application is made to this Board under this Special Exception, as well as to the Planning Board under the site plan regulations, in order to re-consider this Special Exception and all other zoning standards, including safety, health, and welfare standards and concerns; and 6. Lighting shall be placed near the top of the tower for aircraft safety purposes; and 7. No excessive (disturbing) noise levels; 8. Monitoring shall be as per FCC mandates; 9. Appropriate screening and site plan approval from the Southold Town Planning Board for this Limited Business (LB) Zone District; 10. Written covenants and restrictions shall be submitted .in recordable form; and after acceptance by the Town, the original shall be recorded by the applicant in the Office of the Suffolk County Clerk and a copy of same furnished with the Office of the Board of Appeals. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen and Page 25- Appl. No. 4023 Decision Rendered August i8, 1992 Matter of CELLULAR TELEPHONE (METRO ONE) Villa. (Member Dinizio abstained.) This resolution was duly adopted with a quorum vote of the Board. lk GERARD P. GOE~RINGER, C~ August 18, 1992 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Serge Doyen, Jr. James Dinizio, Jr. Robert A. Villa Telephone (516) 765-1809 -26- Southold Town Board of Appeals SCOTT L. HARRIS Supervisor Town Hall; 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1800 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ACTION OF THE BOARD Appl. No. 4118.' UpQn application of GLADYS L. MILNE. A Variance is requested under Article XXIII, Section 100-239.4B and Section 100-244B for permission to build a wooden patio deck with an insufficient sideyard setback, insufficient setback from existing bulkhead, and with lot coverage at more than 20% of the code limitation. Location of Property: 240 Knoll Circle, East Marion; County Tax Map District 1000, Section 37, Block 5, Lot 15; Gardiners Bay Estates Lot No. 31. WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on July 29, 1992, at which time all those who desired to be heard were heard and their testimony recorded; WHEREAS, the Board has carefully considered all testimony and documentation submitted concerning this application; WHEREAS, Board Members have personally viewed and are familiar with the premises in question, its present (R-40) zoning, and the surrounding areas; and WHEREAS, the Board made the following findings of fact: 1. By this application, appellant seeks a variance under Article XXIII, Section 100-239.4B for approval of a new wooden deck over the existing patio area and extending in a northerly direction, along the westerly side of the dwelling. The setback requested is approximately one foot from the westerly property line and 36+- feet approximately from the outer edge of the existing southerly bulkhead. The lot coverage variance requested would be 821 sq. ft. over the allowable 20% (or 29.4%). 2. The premises in question is identified on the Suffolk County Tax Maps as District 1000, Section 37, Block 5, Lot 15 and contains a total lot area of 19,550+- sq. ft. 3. The dwelling as exists presently has the following nonconformities: (a) sideyards at 11+ ft. at the easterly side, and total sideyards at 23+- feet;- (b) setback between the existing stone/concrete wall and the lower bulkhead approximately 30 feet; (c) setback from the southerly {rear} Page 27- Appl. No. 4118 Matter of GLADYS J. MILNE Decision Rendered August 18, 1992 end of the dwelling is shown to be 50+- feet to the outer edge of the bulkhead along Spring Pond. The patio area which exists and will be replaced by a wooden deck is located at the southwesterly side of the dwelling, is landward of the timber retaining walls, and has a side yard setback of approximately one foot. 4. Article XXIII, Section 100-239.4B of the Zoning Code requires all buildings and structures located on lots upon which a bulkhead, concrete wall, rip-rap or similar structure exists and which is adjacent to tidal water bodies other than the Long Island Sound to be set back not less than seventy-five (75) feet from the bulkhead. The land area which is the subject of this requirement is lanedward of the timber retaining walls and extending northerly, within the westerly side yard area, a distance of 54 feet. 5. Article XXIV, Section 100-244B, and Buik Area-Setback Schedule provides for 20% lot coverage for all buildings. The total for the dwelling as exists is approximately 1700 sq. ft. The area of the proposed wooden deck is approximately 925 sq. ft. 6. In considering this application, Board Members find that the relief as requested is substantial and finds an alternative, with a three foot minimum setback from the side property line to be the minimum necessary under the circumstances, and finds: (a) the relief requested is not substantial in relation to the existing nonconforming setback from the bulkhead along Spring Pond and setback from the side property line for the patio, to be replaced by this wooden deck; (b) the construction is for an open deck addition without a foundation or basement and without a screened or permanent-type enclosure - this type of construction is not major and will aid the stability of the variable land contours; (c) the relief, as alternatively granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood - the topography of parcels in the immediate area have differences in topography, shape and Character in relation to the creek shorelines; (d) the practical difficulties are uniquely related to the property and are not personal to the landowner; (e) the grant of alternative relief, as noted below, will not in turn be adverse to the safety, health, welfare, comfort, convenience or order of the town, or be adverse to the neighboring properties; Page 28- Appl. No. 4118 Matter of GLADYS J. MILNE Decision Rendered August 18, 1992 (f) in view of all the above, the interests of justice will be served by granting alternative relief, as conditionally noted below. Accordingly, on motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Dinizio, it was RESOLVED, to DENY the relief as requested with a setback at one foot from the side property line; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, to GRANT alternative relief with a yard setback from the westerly property line not closer than three feet, and SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. The setback from the bulkhead shall not be less than 36+- feet - as exists for the patio and must be landward of the timber retaining walls, as requested; 2. The open deck construction shall remain open and unroofed, and shall not be permitted to be enclosed in any manner; 3. The setback from the westerly side yard shall be not less than three feet; 4. The patio area may be replaced only with wood construction and with no other structural changes - the deck shall be stepped out of wood with no disruption of existing grade; 5. Copy of final construction diagram shall be submitted for review and acceptance by the Z.BoA. Chairman to show set- backs, lot coverage, etc. before issuance of building permit. 6. Lighting must be shielded to the property and shall not create glare to other areas. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen, Dinizio, and Villa. This resolution was duly adopted. lk GERARD P. GOE~INGE~HAIPd~AN August 18, 1992 -29- Southold Town Board of Appeals (Agenda Item #II): RESOLUTION was adopted concerning a request for Refund for Special Exception (No. 4123) filed by Robert Ketcham (sign designer). In lieu of this new formal application, it was RESOLVED, on motion by Mr. Dinizio, seconded by Mr. Doyen, to permit the property owner to change the name of a directional sign from "Chappy's Restaurant" to Porto Bello Ristorante," subject to the conditions under prior Special Exception No. 1320 issued April 2, 1970. (Copies of letter requesting the change of name from Robert Ketchara and prior application file documentation were distributed for Board Member reviews.) VOTE OF THE BOARD: Ayes: Ail. This resolution was duly adopted. (Agenda Item #III): RESOLUTION: Motion was made by Chairman Goehringer, seconded by Member Villa, and duly carried, to authorize advertisement of the following tentative calendar of applications and hearings to be held at the Town Hall on Thursday, September 10, 1992: A. Appl. No. 4122 - ROBERT AND KATHRYN DEXTER. Deck within 75 feet of bulkhead. 8380 Peconic Bay Blvd., Mattituck. B. Appl. No. 4121 - FLOYD KING. Accessory building in front yard area at 3365 Main Road, Greenport. C. Appl. No. 4114 - GEORGE AND SUSAN TSAVARIS. Existing deck near bluff at The Strand, East Marion. (Previously recessed by applicants.) D. Appl. No. 4119 - Special Exception application of WILLIAM GOODALE AND MATTITUCK AUTO SALES, INC. (by Richard Goodale). (To be reconvened). Site location: N/s Main Road, Mattitucko E. - H. Others which may be pending or newly filed, as authorized by Chairman: Appl. No. Appl. No. Appl. No. Appl. No. 4124 - DR. AND MRS. CARL A. SORANNO 4125 - GREGORY POULOS 4126 - DONALD AND JEAN KURZ 4127 - NORTH FORK BANK & TRUST CO. August 18, 1992 ~0 - Southold Town Board of Appeals VOTE OF THE BOARD: Ayes: Ail. This resolution was duly adopted. UPDATE: Appl. No. 4098 - TONY AND MARIA KOSTOULAS. Deck addition and fence within 100 ft. of sound bluff at 1035 Aquaview Avenue, East Marion. (Previously recessed and tables.) It was agreed that this matter be held over until October in order to obtain copies of the Town Trustees action resulting from their September 17, 1992 public hearing under the Coastal Zone Management Law. (Agenda Item #IV.) Environmental Declarations (SEQRA): The following Notices were made a part of the Minutes for record purposes: A. Unlisted Action (none): B. Type II Actions: 1. Appl. No. 4122 2. Appl. No. 4121 3. Appl. No. 4114 - Robert and Kathryn Dexter. Floyd King George and Sue Tsavaris. UPDATE: Goodale Appl. No. 4119 and 4120 - Chairman Goehringer reported that he has received a brochure (transmitted by the Town Attorney from J. Kevin McLaughlin, Esq., attorney for the Goodales) and will distribute copies to the Board Members within a day or so. UPDATE: GOODALE Appl. No. 4092 - The Secretary reported that since the last meeting of the Board, we have received two letters from Mr. McLaughlin, one dated August 5, 1992 concerning a request for an extension of time under Appl. No. 4092 (Variance for lot size and number of uses), and the second dated August 12, 1992 transmitting Covenants and Restrictions. A request was thereafter sent to the Town Attorney's Office requesting review of the draft covenants, and documentation pertaining to the two pending files under review at this time (Appl. No. 4119 and 4120). August 18, 1992 -31- Southold Town Board of Appeals NEW APPLICATION: Appl. No. 4121 - FLOYD KING and ISLAND'S END GOLF CLUB. Member Dinizio requested a better map showing a scale, the northerly building, fence, etc. It was suggested that a letter also be sent to the applicant requesting reasons supporting the location requested for an accessory storage building in this application, as filed. There being no other business properly coming before the Board at this time, the Chairman declared the meeting adjourned. The meeting adjourned at approximately 8:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Linda F. Kowalski, Secretary Clerk of the ZBA /~:,~pprovea - Septem]ger 1~/1992 RECEIVED AND FILED BY THE SOUTHOLD TO'~VN CL~RK DATE~/~3 HOUR Town Clerk, Town of